A couple days removed from the hyperbole and the echo
chamber, I would like to express my appreciation to President Obama, with some
caveats. It pleases me greatly that he mentioned gay rights in his Inaugural
Address. It astonishes me that we live at a time where a sentiment once
considered risky and divisive, even within my own lifetime, produces a minimal
amount of vitriol.
I was, however, not entirely satisfied with the gesture. It
very nearly qualifies as a safe statement, amazingly enough. When a Chief
Executive voices an understanding of the complexity of sexual orientation, I will
feel appropriately recognized. Inaugural Addresses are likely not the place,
nor the occasion, but I’m still waiting for the fullest measure of devotion to
trickle down to everyone.
In part, I speak of my own feelings of isolation. I’ve
rarely felt a part of the collective entity usually referred to as “the gay
community.” In my experience, being a member required insider knowledge and a
willingness to conform to a particular standard. Although not directly stated,
nonetheless one learned to copy the models laid before us.
We’d never really belonged to the mainstream. If we agreed
to wear the proper uniform, conforming in a different way altogether, we’d
surely find commonality and common purpose there. I resisted easy
categorization, mostly because my own sexuality was dense and convoluted, not
easily to pigeonhole. I would even be so bold as to say that everyone’s
personal expression of sexuality is complicated, but made simple for the ease
of it. This is especially true for those who are not heterosexual.
I write today because three weeks from now, I depart for an
LGBT conference. This gathering, I am told, will be calm, sedate, and loving. The
older I get, the more I find comfort in the sanctity of my own apartment and
circle of friends, less in communal events. I never had much interest in
protest rallies. My successes have arrived in small packages, but I begrudge
them not at all.
In this case, I will voluntarily break my regular routine in
the hopes of achieving greater self-acceptance and perhaps even the promise of
good company. I’m a little nervous, but that’s because of past life experience.
Most people couldn’t distinguish me on the street from the run-of-the-mill
straight person. It is there where I am most comfortable.
My first experience among a predominately queer audience was
a matter of too much, too soon. I’d been raised in a conservative state among social
conservatives. I had only come out to myself as bisexual a short time before I
signed up to attend. Then in my early twenties, I was beginning to slowly
explore what it meant to be queer, but only on my own terms and only at my own
glacial pace.
My introduction to queer culture came in the form of a
Berkley radical, in-your-face, tattooed, pierced ethos. In my own life, I have
felt no particularly compelling need for body modification or ink. I sometimes
wear my politics on my sleeve, but four years of living in Washington, DC, has
given me a pragmatic understanding of the pace and nature of reform. I’ve
observed wave after wave of activism done wrongly and protest culture writ
large.
Strong opinions, regardless of individual conviction, often
boomerang or are self-limiting in practice. Southerners like me are still
raised to find coarseness in opinion vulgar, even for the right cause. We’re
generally diplomatic creatures until our honor is impugned, at which point wars
can result. Activism should be disciplined, not knee-jerk and reactive.
Politics aside, my personal life experiences are as much of
me as my causes. For years, the feelings I had towards other men were usually
stuffed down and denied. I’d sleep with a man, and then renounce the whole
concept for a while. Then my curiosity and desire got the best of me again. My
sexuality appeared to be a no-win proposition. If I was with a woman, I felt I
ought to renounce all interest in men. If I was intimate with a man, I believed
I needed to fully act the part.
I reluctantly, but fundamentally expressed belief in a
self-limiting dichotomy. A person could
be all one way, or all the other, but not both at the same time. Now, I know
this to be false, but it took me a very long time to accept the premise without
summarily rejecting it out of hand. I can view, at long last, the grand
spectrum of presentation and sexual identity.
I see the male within the female, the female within the
male. No longer do I cringe at the sight or at the very thought of a gender
traffic accident. Even more incredibly, I’m able to see those distinctions and
combinations within myself. This was the hardest work of all.
LGBTs have made considerable strides, but we still feel the
need to self-identify for group unity. Today, young queer men and young queer
women still signal to others who they are by subtle and not-so-subtle
flourishes. A haircut, for example, might signal to other men that I’m
interested. Even so, I’m very comfortable dressing as someone who is often considered
heterosexual at first glance.
Stonewall paved the way for me to be as open as I am. I don’t want to sound ungrateful. But now that
the first layer has been peeled back, many people will have the ability to
observe for themselves the complexity of human expression and biological
design, especially when it concerns sexual orientation. We know the surface
now, but should keep unearthing layer after layer. Those who broke so much new
ground in their own time would be disappointed in us if we did not further
everyone’s understanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment