Masculinity vs Femininity vs Sanity

I’ll admit it: I’m on a dating website; welcome to the young century. Looking for love IRL is a difficult and precarious situation, not unlike the internet. Either way, hurt runs rampant. What I’ve noticed, however, is that there is a certain plea that some of the men on this site and others specify: masculine for masculine.

It’s a push for high androgenic hair, short haircuts, and traditional men’s fashion. Even activities must not seem too “fruity.” Of course, there are those who do not subscribe to this desire. However, the need to be seen as men instead of just homosexual seems to be of the utmost importance in many aspects of life, not only amorous exploits.

The sexual dynamic of the male homosexual relationship are threefold: the passive, the active and the versatile. When either party subscribes exclusively to one position, there is an archaic submission and dominance. The top is the pollinator, the bottom the flower. However, one cannot simply focus on botany. There exists variances in this, but what I’ve found is that if you’re 100% top, you have a masculine chip on your shoulder. But it‘s like the hugest chip so no need to worry, bro.

Now, I’m not saying to be truly gay you need to be Priscilla Queen of the Desert, but in the desire of some to be as butch as possible, it makes it seem as though there is a level of disdain for the rest of the community. There are those feminine counterparts who deserve just as much respect. That said, certain behaviors of the femme type bother me. For example, prefacing a sentence, almost interjectorily with the word girl when, as evidenced by my external reproductive organs, I am not. For that same vein, there are those butch counterparts who ask me if my voice is my actual voice.

Is there no proper middle ground that can be used to mend these two extremes together? I think what is at stake here is the fact that one must secure their masculinity. No one is ever at risk of losing their femininity or at the very least it isn’t a priority.

This is a very specific observation I have made. Many homosexual couples have a good yin-and-yang thing going on, and it’s called compromise. However, there also exists the dude who is too much of a stereotypical man, who never calls you back, who lies to get into your pants and who will probably get married before you do. Life isn’t fair, but you can definitely report on it. And this reporting isn’t done exclusively on bitterness but is also done with bewilderment. There exists a scale of masculinity that the hyper masculines would hold over their femme comrades, as if to exalt superiority.

We make more sense than you do; we are men, you are silly faggots.

True, there does exist a “faggot” or two, but he isn’t what you think. He can also be that butch that exudes the most stereotypical and ridiculed of homosexual behavior: cattiness. In an effort to promote their awesome dudeness they’ve reverted back to that which they despise the most. The fact that the feminine quotient of our community claims ownership of their rude artifice seems to me, a very manly thing to do. They present themselves in all their difficult-to-deal-with honesty, and that is commendable. However, it is also very annoying and unacceptable. Don’t be a dick, either one of you.

When you enter either extreme, you’re doing all of us a disfavor. Humanity has always crumbled when entered into one extreme or the next. There needs to  be a focus not on the gender specifics of your personality but of the true nature of what those facets of what make yourself up are.

These people might be limited to the tyranny of cultural destiny. The disdain for flamboyance can be a two-way street. Yes I get it, you’re into sports and you don’t like musicals and you can’t cook and you’re a man. Well, I’m a person and as such, have acquired any number of personality points and identities that are not always derived from the traditional masculinity. I might be a bit much for some of these and those to handle, but your hyper masculinity convinces me less and less of it.

[Photo by Joseph Owen]