rob@ptsfb.UUCP (Rob Bernardo) (11/22/85)
The following is excerpted from "Idols of the tribe: rank
and cold war within the gay community" by Marshall K. Kirk
and "Erastes Pill", in "Christopher Street", issue 77.
"Amongst ourselves, we are fighting a cold war over rank and
power in the gay world, and the opposing sides are drawn in
terms of self-identification and public appearance. What is
worse, this struggle for hierarchy will continue unless we
abandon some of the dogmas of the gay establishment. ...
"The shared impressions and arguments put forth here are
tentative, our generalizations are riddled with exceptions,
and we imagine that some of our speculations will be proved
incorrect.
"First, consider two modes of self-perception. ... Many gay
men like to identify themselves either as 'straight gays'
(R-types) or not (Q-types).
R-types view themselves
"Rs like to think that they pass as straights on the street.
They value highly their acceptance in general society, and
many are careful to sustain friendships in the straight
community. Rs are proud of their manly appearance, and
typically rankle over the camp use of feminine pronouns for
gay males. They may be receptive to, or even obsessive
about, social conventions and norms based on gender
distinction; ... completely homosexual Rs may persist in
describing themselves as 'bisexual.'
"The one thread connecting the childhoods of Rs we have
interviewed is peer acceptability. By and large, Rs were
kids who, for one reason or another, could conform with
ease, and so did. ... Young Rs, it seems, were only dimly
aware of their need for the rewards of acceptability,
effortlessly achieved. So the arrival of adolescent
sexuality sent a stunning shock through well-adjusted Rs.
... Many boys ignored and disguised this discovery until
they could come to terms with it. In the meantime, teenage
Rs struggled even harder to preserve their acceptable outer
image. Even as they grew up to enjoy sex with other boys on
the sly, conformism in all other aspects of demeanor became
the self-exacted quid pro quo.
Q-types view themselves
"... these gays often are not, and feel that they do not
wish to be, 'straight-acting and appearing.' The extreme Q
is a homosexual on display. (He may not always be one
display ... [e.g.] in the presence of family and employers.)
On the street, he may assume any one of the several public
personas most familiar to the straight world: the pomaded
and permed 'fem', the titanic leather master, the clipped
clone, the GQ hyperboy, and others. ... Qs are outwardly
gayified; they have bought into strict outgroup stereotypes
which, whether screaming or ultramasculine in their details,
constitute a burlesque of gender roles. Qs think of
themselves as visible gays, and tend to make such a profile
central to their ego structure. ...
"Outer eccentricity comes at a price, however, and Qs are
perhaps more likely than Rs to be drawn toward the asylum of
gay ghettos in urban centers. ...
"Whereas Rs usually could conform [during childhood] and so
did, many Qs felt that, for whatever reasons, they could not
conform during their youth, and so did not. Those reasons
might include passivity, effeminacy, homeliness, remarkable
prettiness, lack of athletic skill, or almost any other
cause for unpopularity among male youth. At first,
evidently, many Qs were unhappy loners who salvaged their
self-esteem by making a lodestar virtue out of individualism
rather than peer acceptance. But non-conformity engenders
anti-conformism. So some Qs went further and acquired a
taste for outrageousness, actively calculating shock to
others in order to reinforce their social status as rebels
with a cause. ...
"As the years go by, and they learn that they are not alone,
Qs adopt zealously the visible uniforms and credos of their
supporting outgroups. ... Surveys have shown that, for many
Qs, camp behavior is a passing phase of overt defiance,
toned down in later years.
"When those gays who boast R-status meet those who defend
Q-status, there can be trouble. First, let's look at things
for the viewpoint of the R. For one thing, the sexual
objects of Rs are usually other Rs; Qs, for the most part
are scorned. ... It is the 'fem' [from among the variety of
Q-type personas] who bears the brunt of the invective from
Rs. ...
"[Gay] bars are often regarded by Rs as the bastions of
self-segregated Qs - branded as twinkie bars, leather bars,
etc. - and so may be viewed with distaste. ...
"We should mention at this point that those Rs who shun the
bars find it more difficult to lead satisfactory sex lives.
They have trouble meeting other Rs because, unlike visible
Qs, out in the straight world most Rs have banished any
tell-tale signals of homosexuality from their conformist
uniforms and are wary of mistaken self-exposures. ...
"To make sexual matters still more difficult for many Rs,
they face two more unique dilemmas. ... First, ... a Q may
be drawn to, and satisfied by, a relationship with an
acceptably masculine R. But what of the classic R-type -
the 'all-American boy' whose only felt shortcoming is his
sexual preference? For him, the perfect '10' - the sexual
object possessing the one feature he feels he lacks and
wishes to capture - may very well be the straight boy, who
is, by definition, unattainable. ...
"The second sexual dilemma faced by Rs involves the ritual
of sex-play itself. For at least some Rs, it seems,
masculine role performance is the most thrilling part of
sexplay, yet it is easily threatened in homosexual practices
such as passive anal sex or active fellatio. ...
"But even if the R is contentedly 'out' to family and
friends, and self-exposure is not an issue, he may still
dislike Qs for two related reasons.
"First, because the R has typically conformed with ease to
the mainstream, the exaggerated outgroup displays of Qs
simply baffle him. Why would any person choose to draw such
public ridicule and abuse, he wonders? ... 'I don't see why
they have to play-act at bikers or movie queens,' said one R
[we interviewed]. 'It obviously looks phony and fools no
one.' At best, then, many Rs come to view Qs the way that
many straights view homosexuals en bloc, as somehow foolish
and trivial, a nationality of sterile cuckoos. ...
"Second, Qs do more than baffle Rs - they also irritate Rs
terribly, to a degree that more detached straights cannot
understand. Many Rs plainly resent being identified with
the Qs, and blame them for the weird profile of homosexuals
as a whole. ...
"Like most gay males, it seems, even exotic Qs hear the
siren call of the rutting R. And so relations between Qs
and Rs grow still more tense.
"It is our impression that, for both Rs and Qs, archetypal
Rs the 'idols of the tribe.' It is the R whose natural
masculine grace tops the overall hierarchy of desirable
traits in the fierce gay competition of good looks.
Handsome Rs often sense this pecking order, and feeds their
egos while hardening their disdain for Qs, especially the
effeminate ones. ...
"Many Qs may learn from necessity to refocus their libido on
fellow Qs. ...
"For it is an awful irony that even as may Qs lust after the
R as sexual object, they may also resent and reject him as
social companion! There are several reasons for this
rejections. 'Sour grapes' is an understandable reaction from
those Qs who have themselves been spurned by Rs. And Qs who
have defensively fashioned a lifestyle out of peculiar
individualism are bound to resent (and perhaps envy just a
little) those gays who can and do successfully conform to
straight standards. ... There is more to Q/R estrangement
than just these problems.
"For one thing, if the handsome all-American straight boy is
the ultimate sexual ideal for most gays, then to Qs the R-
type homosexual must appear as a ghostly mock-up of the real
thing. ...
"Further, Rs are still more upsetting to those Qs who
believe that 'butch' behavior is just an unnatural put-on
for gays. ... Just as the anti-conformity of Qs baffles Rs,
the ease with which Rs conform to the mainstream may be hard
for Qs to understand. ... Hence, Qs may misinterpret the
Rs' ingrained disinclination to gayified behavior, and label
it homophobia. ...
"Rs themselves come to accept one or another Q-type persona
as the 'true' gay type, and hence feel like outsiders within
their own outgroup. ...
"How do these tensions between Rs and Qs affect the social
structures, political institutions, and activist success of
the gay community? ... Those who could not hide have
instead turned to make their stand against oppression, and
Qs have risen to political leadership and brotherhood in the
activist movement across America. This is to their credit.
Extreme Qs, as a group, may rate below Rs on the sociosexual
hierarchy, but they can and do rank above them on the scale
of political power in the gay world.
"In the meantime, reticent Rs, who benefit from the
sacrifices of Qs and yet carp about their flamboyant image
in the straight world, have been able to have it both ways:
they achieve personal acceptability in the right straight
world of today, while relishing the progress toward social
flexibility made on their behalf for tomorrow. But because
Rs do not choose to play the activist game in great numbers,
they lose their ability, as a group, to influence the rules
of that game.
"Although the point is hard to prove with certainty, we
suspect that it is mainly Qs who organize the gay community,
set its norms, and decide which of its collective efforts
are PC ['politically correct']. PC initiatives are those
which the gay leadership and press deem to be good for the
gay community as a whole. And the mobilization of the R-
type subgroup, it turns out, is definitely not PC - at
least, not in Boston. Let us give you an example.
"Several years ago, a handful of young men in that city
attempted to start an organization which would bring
together self-perceived Rs for social activities. They
posted two short announcements in college and local papers
with the headline, 'STRAIGHT GAYS.' The leaders rather
crudely hinted that this new club would be for those young
gays 'not entirely comfortable with the glittering bar
crowd.' One of the authors attending the organization's
first meeting. He found the room packed with excited and
grateful Rs, who immediately set about the organization of
the club activities ranging from baseball to opera-
listening. The only qualification for membership was self-
selection according to the understood character of the
organization, and its aims remained social rather than
political. ... Within weeks, the club was regularly drawing
to its meetings between one and two hundred members - making
it one of the most active gay groups in Boston. ... Its
leaders likened the group to the gay clubs designed to bring
together men with other special interests, such as the
black/white, sadomasochist, transvestite, or 'man/boy love'
societies in town.
"Boston's gay leadership did not buy the comparison,
however. There was evident suspicion and resentment (based
some part, no doubt, on envy) at the prospect of 'student-
aged' all-American Rs cloistering exclusively among
themselves for social and sexual companionship. A local gay
newspaper attacked the group openly for its supposed macho
snobbery and for the 'closet cases' it seemed to nurture.
... The organization's leaders protested that their
intentions had been misunderstood (although, in a sense,
they have been all-to-clearly understood - and found
politically incorrect). But eventually they bowed to the
pressure. Over two years they gradually phased out the
stress upon 'straight gays.' The criticism from the gay
community stopped coming. Alas, so did the group's R-type
members. Having lost its distinctive drawing card, the
entire operation fizzled. It had failed the test of PC
administered by the Q-oriented community. ...
"And there is a final twist in the Q/R cold war which may
impede the growth of gay rights from time to time. R-type
gays are the ones who actually succeed in slipping into the
circles of mainstream political power in America. So it is
a sad irony that confidential liaisons between uptight Rs in
government and Qs heading the gay activist movement can be
further strained by the R's basic alienation form
unconventional Qs in general. ...
"This analysis has found the gay world troubled and
handicapped by the mutual alienation of Qs and Rs. It is PC
to deny this split. ... First, we must abandon PC myths and
admit that the split exists. Second, we must understand
clearly the root cause of the Q/R cold war. Someone once
called it 'oppression sickness': each outgroup member is
ill-at-ease with himself, and is frustrated by his forced
companions, because the social mainstream imposes pressures
and expectations which he feels that he cannot meet, and
because his companions remind him of his own failure. So
the more progress we can make toward social acceptance in
the straight world for gays as a whole, the less tension we
will see between groups within the gay world. ...
"In the meantime, the gay community should recognize the
distinct identity and special problems of R-type homosexuals
- and could begin by expanding the aegis of PC tolerance to
include R-type organizations.
"At the same time, the community must also burn off the
chaff of its own implicit contempt for Qs of various hues."