Who's Gay, Who's Not, and Who Cares?

WHAT'S WRONG WITH BEING GAY ANYWAY?

Imagine this; a fairly common situation. You're sitting around with some friends, maybe all gay, maybe mixed gay and straight, and somebody wonders -- in a perfectly nice way -- if somebody you all know might possibly be gay. Mind you, this is not a straight bigot nastily suggesting that someone is a "fag," but a gay or gay-friendly person wondering if someone they know might be gay.

Now imagine -- and this happens far too often for my comfort -- that somebody in this group, especially a gay person, objects and says in a sharp tongue. "So and so is not gay!" They are very vehement about it, even outright angry. It's as if by suggesting that, or wondering if, the person in question might be gay you're slandering them, saying something absolutely terrible about them, and this other person is distressed if not outraged by such a thought.

The thing is -- if you really think it's okay to be gay, then what the hell is so awful about suggesting that, or wondering if, somebody might be gay? Okay, maybe you're wrong. Big deal. You're not printing it in the paper or shouting from the rooftops. I'ts a private conversation with people merely expressing opinions. People will think what they think whether you put it in words or not anyway.

I expect to get homophobic attitudes from bigoted straights and self-hating closet cases like Larry Craig but I'm always a bit amazed -- if never surprised, sadly -- when I get them from straight people who are supposed to be gay-friendly, and especially from people who are themselves gay. Sometimes these people will claim that it's not that you're suggesting this person might be gay, but that you're somehow "slandering" them as a closet queen. Why do I never quite buy this? Because it always comes off that the "slander" has to do with suggesting that someone is homosexual, not that they may be in the closet. Besides, while it's not great to be closeted or repressed, it doesn't make someone a terrible person anymore than being gay does. There's always the chance that the closeted individual will come out and live a perfectly happy gay life. So what's the big deal?

Let me make it clear. I don't think one should outright lie about anyone, say someone is absolutely gay when you aren't at all sure about it, (but there's no reason why you can't have an educated opinion). A person who is genuinely straight shouldn't have to deal with the assorted issues that we gays have to deal with, although it certainly might increase his or her understanding of those issues. I don't believe in "outing" someone (unless they're homophobic hypocrites) even if they're gay if I know they're just not ready to take that all-important step on their own; it's an important rite of passage for a gay person.

Some people say somebody is gay to make them more interesting or news-worthy when it really hasn't been proven that they are. [Still, it's not as if you're saying something really terrible about them. Unless deep down you think it really is terrible to be gay.] Then we have people, including gays, who protest vigorously when some biographer says that a favorite actor was gay, even if the information is substantiated by the person's long-time companion and other impregnable sources.

But that isn't what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about simply wondering if or thinking that someone is gay and sharing this with gay friends or acquaintances -- hell, sometimes you wonder if someone is gay because you're attracted to them, so what? -- one or more of whom may act as if you're saying the worst possible thing you can say about anyone. There are, sadly, still some gay people who are not happy and who foolishly blame their orientation for their unhappiness. When you say someone is gay they really do think you're saying something terrible about them. Some of them will even think less of a person they formerly thought of as straight once they find out he or she is gay. Yes, this is that old internalized homophobia rearing its ugly head, and while I think and hope that it affects fewer and fewer people each decade, I know it hasn't been completely eliminated and may never be.

Perhaps it is this -- or just simply naivete -- that leads some gay people to automatically think someone is straight just because that's how they identify or because they're married with children. I recall a ridiculous conversation I had in a bar a few years ago. Someone asked me if I thought a certain individual was gay. Before I could answer, a man I didn't know said "he's straight; I've met his girlfriend." This was right after the Jim McGreevey scandal hit the headlines, and I wondered how any gay man could be so stupid as to assume a man with a girlfriend absolutely, positively must be totally straight when the papers and TV were full of a story about a married man with children who had just come out as a gay man. I mean, so this guy we were talking about supposedly had a girlfriend. So did lots of gay guys in their youth, just as many homosexual men have wives and children well into middle age. It's laughable.

[I think some gay people lead very sheltered lives. They really haven't been around too much. Or else they're just kind of dumb. The young ones at least have the excuse of relatively little experience, but the ones who are middle-aged or older?]

But I got the feeling with this strange man in the bar that he didn't like the notion that this man we were wondering about might be gay, that he would think less of him if he were. Hence he was definitely straight -- the girlfriend "proved" that.

Then there are those, gay and straight,who say with a certain air of self-righteousness: "Oh I don't care who's gay or who isn't. That's so unimportant" -- pretending that they're just so liberal and above it all but what they're really saying as far as I'm concerned is "it's vulgar to wonder if someone is gay or not because I don't think it's really so great to be gay."

And isn't that just pathetic?

LOGO Goes Loco?

WHAT'S SO GAY ABOUT THIS?

Hot on the heels of MTV's moronic A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila, LOGO -- the gay (or at least LGBT) network -- offers us a transgendered version of The Bachelor/Bachelorette which they call Transamerican Love Story. The premise has transgendered female Calpernia Addams (are there any transwomen -- or drag queens for that matter -- called, say, Karen or Sarah?) dating eight guys to try and find love --yeah, sure! -- with one of them. The show will proceed like all the others and at the end of each new episode, one of the rivals for the heroine's affection will be asked to leave until a real live love match is supposedly made. Since I doubt if anyone of any orientation has ever stayed together after "winning" on one of these shows, I have to say "Good luck to that!"

Okay, on the gay LOGO network we have a show about a woman (and Calpernia is a woman regardless of her biological origins) dating eight men. In other words, she's heterosexual and most of the men on the program say they are too. So this is to all intents and purposes a heterosexual dating show (if with a twist). How liberal of LOGO. Calpernia will ask questions, go on dates, have little competitions, and act all kittenish just like any other gal on The Bachelorette and the guys will fight to woo and win her, make nasty comments about each other, and ty to act all macho, just like the contestants. Big fuckin' deal.

In spite of that there are a couple of gay things about this program. First, the host is that adorable little "nelly" comic Alec Mapa. (Mapa is a likable guy but he seems a bit out of place with this crew. I think the fact that he is very stereotypically gay -- not that there's anything wrong with that -- had a lot to do with his being hired.) As for the second, we'll get to that momentarily.

Now I wonder. If LOGO wanted to do a gay version of The Bachelor couldn't they have had a guy guy dating eight gay men, or a lesbian dating eight gay women? Couldn't they at least have had a show with a gay transsexual -- they do exist. (That way they could have had their cake and eaten it, too.) I know everything seems to be GLBT these days, but it's almost as if plain old gay is getting lost.

Despite the trendy twists, the program is the usual junk reality dating show with a somewhat interesting "love" object and a bunch of dating rivals who typically run the gamut from pleasant pawns to obnoxious egomaniacs. Calpernia is an attractive and feminine woman who could probably "pass" if she wanted to.

Not that I'm in any way recommending it, but there are some interesting aspects to the program. One of the contestants, a man named Jim, is also transgender. He tells Calpneria, but none of his rivals. Calpernia is surprised (Jim can also "pass") but her reaction is even more surprising -- or is it? She actually says "I would never have known -- he's so handsome." What -- does this transgendered female think that all transgendered men are ugly? Is there some internalized transphobia going on here? Later Calpernia wonders if she'll turn out to be a hypocrite, that she may find it uncomfortable dating a transsexual male. I admired her for her honesty.

An interesting complication is that, like many Female-to-Male transsexuals, Jim has not completely transitioned; he still has a vagina. But apparently Calpernia hasn't fully transitioned either; she still has a penis. So if these two get together -- pardon my crudity and not to make fun of anyone -- we'll have a woman with a dick sticking it into a man with a pussy. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but somehow doesn't it seem as if this sort of makes the whole point of getting a sex-change operation kind of pointless?

One of the guys, Peter I believe his name is, dates both men and women and is, of course, the "gayest" of the bunch after Alec Mapa. His dancing with the guys during a silly harem session leads another of the men, Mark, to make clearly disapproving insinuations about his sexuality.

Mark is so afraid of even being accidentally touched by another man that it leads Blaine to label him homophobic, which is ironic (more on why in a moment).

As for Mark, he's essentially a creepy little overcompensating professional wrestler who is horrified that anyone will think he's gay. He goes out of his way to point out that one shouldn't label someone just because they date transgendered women. I might point out that if you're afraid someone will think you're gay because you're dating someone who used to be a biological male, then you probably shouldn't date transgendered women -- you just can't handle it. Mark has such a pathetic need to be seen as ruggedly heterosexual that he even has the tattoo of a lipstick kiss on his upper arm as if he's the big stud that all the women want! What a dork!

Blaine is pathetic is his own way, as well. He only dates transgendered females. He says he's not straight (and yes he gets points for that) but -- get this -- he also says he's definitely not gay (funny, he doesn't say definitely in that certain way when he talks about not being straight). He doesn't like labels, but bi is probably the one that might fit our boy the best. He says that transgendered females are "the best of both worlds" and that he especially prefers "pre-op" trannies. Yes, that means he prefers transsexual women with dicks. Gee, he's not just a little bit gay? He calls Mark homophobic, but could there be some internalized homophobia going on with Blaine?

There have always been men who like "chicks with dicks." Usually these were drag queens, and sometimes they were hookers. More recently we have pre-op trannies struttin' their stuff in the red light zones (not to suggest that most, or even many, transsexuals are prostitutes). If a guy felt more secure having a homosexual experience -- dicks and all -- with a man dressed as a woman so he could pretend she was female, imagine how secure he feels having sex with someone who's not only dressed as a woman but is one (although the dick might present a problem to certain straight men.)

Come to think of it, how will some of the guys on this show deal with Calpernia's penis?

Straight guys. I don't think so.

Maybe this show is gayer than I thought. But not in the Out and Proud way that would make me feel a lot more comfortable with its existence.

UPDATE: Okay, when I make a mistake, I make a mistake. Calpernia is actually post-op, and her friend Andrea is a lesbian transsexual. I regret these errors. Please see the comments for more information.

Gay-Bashed at the Stonewall Inn

I've gone to the new "gay-owned" Stonewall Inn almost every week on one night or another since it opened in early 2007. I was very excited when it opened and made sure to be there on the very first day (I wanted to be the first customer but got there too late).

I've had some good times there, but my main reason for going is to support the bar, since the Stonewall Inn -- frankly and ironically -- is not nearly as much fun as the straight-owned Stonewall Bar that occupied the same place up until about five years ago. That Stonewall was always packed wall to wall with men of all ages (mostly younger, however), had fun entertainers and party nights, a disco upstairs if you felt like dancing, and early in the evenings on some weeknights one of the great bartenders, Danny, would be behind the bar upstairs where there was a chummy, more intimate feeling. The place should have been a goldmine, but somehow the owner completely screwed up and the Stonewall Bar closed down. The new Stonewall was going to play up the fact that it's "Where Pride Began" (its slogan) and I was all in favor of it. So I went, even if I didn't always enjoy it. (By the way, keep in mind as you read this that the slogan "Where Pride Began" doesn't have the word "gay" in it. You'll understand why later.)

Yes, I was overjoyed to hear that it was going to reopen, this time with a gay owner. [I believe there are actually three owners. The first two are the same men (Bill Morgan, Tony DeCicco)who own the Duplex down the street -- I have no idea of their sexual orientation. The third owner, Kurt Kelly, -- and the manager of the Stonewall Inn, apparently worked as a bartender and manager in the Duplex for many years and is gay. So I guess it's safe to say that the Inn is at least partly "gay-owned." The Duplex is considered gay-friendly -- especially the upper level -- but as far as I'm concerned it's always been basically a straight or mixed bar.]

I had a feeling right from the first, however, that the new Stonewall Inn might have a problem surviving, even if the old place was thriving practically until the day it had to close its doors (and not for lack of customers.) The idea was to have a place where all factions of the gay community (and presumably the LGBT community) could mingle -- gay men and lesbians, drag queens, leather kings, bears, and so on. There are both gay men and lesbians in the Inn, but I've never seen a drag queen or leather man, and the only bear (otter) I've ever noticed in there is me. Of course, although I've been going for months I'm not there every night. I could easily have missed a lot. Still, what works for the LGBT center wouldn't necessarily work for a bar.

I knew the new Stonewall would not be a hot, cruisy, mostly all-male establishment like the straight-owned version, but I applauded the decision to bring different factions of the community together. But I thought to myself -- will this mixed bar idea really work? Bears and lesbians and leather men and drag queens already have their own hang-outs to go to -- why will they need the Stonewall? I had a feeling that "mixed" was eventually going to mean gay and straight, which is pretty much what's happened.

Because many of the gay customers have gone to new bars in Chelsea, many of the gay places in the West Village -- where the Stonewall is located -- now have a kind of "open door" policy. Cool straight people were always welcome in gay bars before, but a doorman would check them out and make sure they knew what kind of establishment they were entering. The straight people who went into gay bars twenty years ago are often different from many of the straight people who go in today (and often there are no doormen). Back then, they almost always went in with gay friends, but nowadays they often come in on their own, wanting to have a hip gay experience or just too drunk to care with whom they're getting loaded. Often they don't even realize they're in a gay bar. To say that this can be a recipe for disaster -- and lawsuits -- is an understatement.

Before I go off on a tangent, let's look at this in the context of the Stonewall Inn. A gay man manages and co-owns a gay bar to which he hopes many different kinds of gay people (but drinkers all!) will come. Unfortunately, not enough gay people come. Straight people come in, buy drinks -- he doesn't care, he's just grateful for the business -- he has bills to pay. (And I'm sure the straight and gay owners of many other gay bars feel the same.) Some gay bar owners get bitter, angry that the community isn't "supporting" them. Let the straight people come -- and who cares if they don't really like "fags" deep down and have no idea that the Stonewall Inn was the site of the Birth of the Modern-Day Gay Rights Movement (all this has pretty much been down-played in the Stonewall despite the grandiose plans). I can sympathize to a point with bar owners who are afraid of losing their shirts and managers and bartenders who are afraid of losing their jobs. But still ...

The trouble is that the gay customers who do keep coming and are loyal to the bar are sort of forgotten. I have no problem with a few friendly straight people in most gay bars, but as the months went by I noticed that the Stonewall got straighter and straighter. All right, it was never exactly the greatest gay bar and some of the straight customers were perfectly okay, it just wasn't exactly the gayest of experiences. I wasn't surprised that many of the straights were coming directly from the Duplex, even though there are two straight bars in between the Duplex and the Stonewall. Gee, I wonder how that happened?

Curiously, some bars in the West Village have managed to remain predominently gay (The Monster and Ty's), probably because they give their customers what they want. Ty's (my favorite bar) is for masculine, mostly middle-aged gay guys who want to cruise and converse, and The Monster is a fun place where you can cruise, sing at the piano, or dance downstairs -- there are more options than in the Stonewall. Marie's Crisis is more straight than gay on most nights, and the less said for now about the former Boots and Saddle the better. (Let's just say that what was once one of the best gay bars in the city, a village institution, is now one of the worst, except for certain times and evenings, and despite some friendly staffers and customers.)

The co-owner/manager of the Stonewall Inn is probably a perfectly nice guy; I've only seen him at the Stonewall two or three times and he's never been what I would call warm and welcoming, hale and hearty, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that the compromises he's had to make to keep the bar open have him so harried, maybe even frightened, that a man who must have had a nice personality when he worked all those years at the Duplex has become just a bit taciturn. I have to assume that he does give a friendly greeting to the regulars he's known for years. (Then again, he could be a complete stiff who's in the wrong business and is his own worst enemy -- who knows?)

So I continued to go the bar, although sometimes it was dead, sometimes "overrun" with straight drunken tourists (but I thank them for helping New York City's economy and some of them can be nice and fun, of course, if not exactly what I'm looking for), and sometimes I didn't bother to stay. There was the very nice gay bartender who they moved down from upstairs at the Duplex. And a nice conversation one evening with the brilliant performer Everett Quinton. I made out with more than one attractive male. It wasn't all bad and sometimes it was pretty gay. I very much wanted the bar to succeed. Some friends commented that you never knew exactly what you'd find when you walked into the bar, which made it kind of interesting but probably has also kept it from building a big, devoted following like, say, Ty's.

Okay there were a few odd things along the way. There was that weird "straight" bartender who "fooled around with men." And the somewhat bizarre ad they had during Gay Pride week. But nothing compares to what happened to me on the Thursday night of January 31st, 2008 around 11 or 12. I was by myself, and wanted to start a conversation. While waiting to catch a bartender's attention -- the place was fairly busy -- I gave a friendly greeting to what I thought was a gay male couple standing nearby. I asked them how long they'd been together. I mean, this is a gay bar -- what's wrong with that?

Well, I guess they weren't gay. Almost before the words were out of my mouth, one ugly little wretched creature -- who I realized was not just drunk but shit-faced -- raised his fist in outrage and began punching my chest repeatedly. Apparently he didn't like my suggestion that he was gay. Flabbergasted, I stepped back, held up my arms, and told him to calm down. Frankly, another gay man might have socked this idiot in the face, but I did my best to defuse the situation. I am not a violent man -- I have nothing to prove -- but I'm not a doormat, either.

Suddenly out of the blue an attractive, poised young Asian-American woman (I only mention her ethnicity so readers can "watch out" for her, assuming anyone would actually want to go here), approached us and asked one of us to leave.

Was it the shit-faced homophobe who was physically assaulting a friendly gay man in the gay bar "Where Pride Began?"

Nope.

It was me.

That's right, me. I was so shocked that for once in my life I was speechless. I could tell she wasn't interested in hearing my side of it (although surely she had seen who was hitting whom?) "Are gay men no longer welcome in this bar?" I asked her. She only smirked in reply. (I was so completely outraged that I didn't argue or say anything more. I just left, determined never to darken this gin joint's door ever again.)

So let's see. The gay man was asked to leave and the gay basher was allowed to stay. And this in the Birthplace of the Modern-Day Gay Rights Movement, no less.

I've only been gay-bashed twice in my life and both times it was in a gay bar that allowed in inappropriate, overly inebriated straights (or self-hating homos). The first time was much more violent that the Stonewall incident, but luckily I was not seriously injured either time. You can bet I would have had the perpertrator arrested and filed a law suit against the bar if I had been.

Y'know, maybe I've lost a little sympathy for the owner and his bills and everything else. I go to a bar to support a gay business and businessman, to have a good time in a relatively gay-safe environment, and I wind up being smacked by a drunken asshole who is apparently preferred as a customer over me -- who has never hit anyone in a gay bar or anywhere else.

Frankly, I'm a little sick that it's come to this. I had such high hopes for the Stonewall Inn. Where Pride Began, eh? Bullshit. As usual, it's just about dollars and cents. I'm never setting foot in the place again -- it's just not worth it, and who knows what will happen next? -- and I'm getting the word out via blogs, message boards and word-of-mouth to avoid the place at all costs. A bar should not cater to violent homophobic assholes at the expense of its gay customers and expect its gay customers to come back, no matter who the fucking owner is. The fact that it's a gay guy makes it even worse. (I've no doubt he'll just see me as some "trouble maker" or "asshole" or "one of those horrible gay activists" or some such shit. Which is pitiful.)

The Stonewall Inn of today has nothing to do with "Gay Pride" and it shouldn't pretend that it does. It's obscene that it's going to continue to use "pride" as it's selling point when this kind of shit is going on.

I hope it changes its name to The Duplex II, because that's what it's become, as I feared. And that a year from now it'll be just another Bagel Joint.

Whatever you want to call it, it is not "The Stonewall Inn" and apparently never will be. In trying to be all things to all people -- and keep the cash register ringing -- it's managed to become nothing, just another bland "cocktail lounge" with no real character of its own.

And to think ... I wanted to be their first customer ........

What a joke.

Here's One to the Ladies!

Okay, in my last post I covered straight guys in gay bars -- now it's the ladies turn.

There have always been women -- sometimes gay, often straight -- in most gay bars. I have to say right off the bat that I hate the term "hag fag," as I find it demeaning to both gay men and women. Not every woman who goes into a gay bar is a stereotypical "hag fag" in any case. In most cases she's simply a woman who has gay friends. The stereotypical "hag fag" is a woman of low self-esteem who hangs around gay men because she supposedly figures no straight man will ever want her. The gay guys may not shun her, except when they're heavily cruising, but hag fags aren't always without some homophobic attitudes. Just as unpopular kids who band together in junior high can wind up resenting each other, some hag fags can wind up resenting the gay men who provide their only social outlet. (Am I the only one who saw a little of this attitude expressed in that silly show Will and Grace?) They really would rather be with what they think of as "men" (i.e. straight guys). And I've no doubt some of the old-fashioned hag fags were deeply repressed lesbians.

Hopefully that kind of pre-Stonewall era is behind us, but I thought a lot of pre-Stonewall notions were behind us and I've been mistaken.

Anyway, I thought of straight women in gay bars recently when I came across a review on a web site of one of my favorite hang outs in New York. On this same site I gave it a rave four-star review. A young straight-identified woman gave it one star and said all the customers were in "la la land" -- whatever the hell that means. She gave four stars to a bar down the street that also caters to a middle-aged crowd of gay guys. What's the difference?

Well, a lot may have depended on her level of intoxication. I think at the second bar she loved so much she happened to run into a few drunk older gay guys (or maybe she accompanied some gay friends) who weren't cruising and were perfectly happy to talk to her. At my bar of choice she may have ventured in by herself, or maybe her friends abandoned her, or maybe the guys in the bar understandably preferred to talk to their fellow hunky gay guys than to a young woman they didn't even know, especially if they were on cruise alert. Naturally, she hates the bar because no one paid attention to her. More on this later.

A quick story: In this same bar I've had a couple of conversations with a middle-aged, possibly senior female who identifies variously as lesbian or bisexual. She's a perfectly nice gal, if not exactly what I'm looking for when I go into this bar. Now one night she came in on a busy, crowded Saturday when I was on a date. It should have been apparent to all that I and my date were very into each other. Nevertheless, when she greeted me I was friendly, and to my date's credit, he was friendly with her, too, even though he hadn't met her before. We talked awhile and she disappeared into the crowd.

She came back a while later and said the men in the bar were sexist. Why? Because no one would talk to her.

"They're not sexist," I told her. "They're horny. It's Saturday night and they want to get laid." Besides, as I've often said, gay men go to gay bars primarily to meet and hang out with other gay men. Especially in a place like this ultra-male cruise bar (it is not some quaint piano bar with a relaxed, "open door" policy, although straights are admitted if they seem cool). She seemed to understand where I was coming from, but who knows?

She really annoyed me with this "sexist" crap, however, since I and my date -- who had other things on our minds, believe me -- went out of our way to be nice to her.

Now back to the straight gal who hated the bar because no one paid attention to her. Have you ever been in a gay bar and heard a shrill, braying voice in the distance, and seen a woman carrying on and being as loud as possible, just begging to be looked at? This phenomenon occurs when a straight woman feels no one is paying her enough attention; she's gonna make the gay guys sit up and pay attention to her no matter what. She's in a room full of men -- regardless of what kind -- and she isn't about to be ignored. Perhaps she thinks in her inebriation that she's so god damn hot that even gay guys will be panting with lust for her. (I'm sure she wouldn't like it if her gay male friends followed her into a straight singles bar and expected her to drop everything and ignore the cute straight guy whose number she was hoping to secure.) Another problem with women like this is that they're the type who think of gay men as "accessories."

It's great that there are straight women who like gay guys (but don't assume even today that this means they can't be homophobic on some level). But there's a big difference between intelligent, sophisticated women who simply happen to have gay friends that they socialize with at parties or at each other's homes, and "wild and crazy" gals who want to party down with the gay boys and be the life of the party -- hell, she'll put the gay boys to shame -- even if she is a woman. There are gals like this who insist that all gay men love them when in truth most of us just wish one of their gay pals would buy her another drink so she'd pass out already and stop being so damn loud and obnoxious.

Then we have the gals who go into gay bars to ogle supposedly straight go go boys. These gals rarely accompany gay friends and are often no more gay-friendly than their homophobic boyfriends. When they start littering up a gay bar, it's time to move on. And a relatively new wrinkle are the clueless ladies who for some reason date men who work in gay bars. Is there anything worse than straight women who come into a gay bar to flirt with the bartender -- and vice versa. [For the record I think heterosexuals (and the bi-identified) who flirt with and/or pick up members of the opposite sex in gay bars are total dorks.] Of course, some women in gay bars don't even want to talk to gay men. Often they're women in relationships who are there to have a girl's night out and are in a gay bar just so that no "boorish het guys" will bother them.)

I've met some great straight women and had some wonderful conversations with them in some gay bars. I like women, and have always supported women's rights. I have both straight and gay female friends and relatives that I love and always have fun with (although generally not in gay bars -- and I can't say I've ever been into straight women who were supposedly "gay icons," whatever the hell that means). But, as I've said before, some women in certain gay bars can be too much of a distraction and detract from the all-male, homoerotic atmosphere. Some women appreciate this and fully understand where I'm coming from.

Others just don't get it at all.

In my last post I explained why some gay men, myself included, can do without straight bartenders in gay bars. I think some gay men would rather have a straight bartender than a female one, even a lesbian. (I think I would prefer a lesbian bartender over a straight guy -- at least they're gay.) This isn't necessarily due to misogyny, but to that all-male atmosphere I referred to above. At least a straight guy is a guy, and he can be ogled even if he bristles at the mere suggestion that he might be interested in ogling back or more.

Anyway, gay, straight, whozit, whatzit, let's just party and not worry about it.

It's enough to drive you to drink, eh?

To Straight Men Who Want to Work in Gay Bars

I try, but it's usually impossible for me to write a short post. Of course, I always meant this blog to be a collection of "think pieces," longer articles that take some time to read and which will, hopefully, provoke some thought and comment.

I received an interesting comment on my post on Gay-Friendly Closet Cases, from a heterosexual guy who wants to work in a gay bar and his reasons why. You can read the original post, his comment, and my reasonably short reply here. I was going on at such length, however, that I decided to continue my reply -- and make some other general comments on the subject -- with this new post. I've danced around the subject of straight and straight-identified bartenders in gay bars often enough; now I'll hit it head on.

Okay. I heard from a man who was treated miserably by his straight bosses at a fine (non-gay) dining establishment, but was treated nicely by gay male customers (or at least men he perceived as being gay) who tipped so well that he now wants to find employment in a gay bar. He's annoyed that I -- and many other gay men -- wonder about the true sexuality of straight bartenders in gay bars, although my original post gave plenty of reasons for it. Now I'll continue my reply (although I also intend it to serve as an "open message" to any straight guy who wants to work in a gay bar):

"Working in a non-gay bar with a few friendly gay customers doesn’t mean you’ll enjoy working in an all or mostly gay bar, or that the customers will be as friendly to you – or vice versa -- after you’ve worked there for awhile. (Some gay men are simply irritated by straight bartenders – they just can’t relate to them; I’ll explain why in a moment). And there are as many different types of gay bars as there are gay men; some would really not appeal to a genuine straight guy.

And let me address, hopefully for the final time, this whole business of tipping. I remember the owner of a gay bar that employed a couple of straight-identified bartenders saying that it had to be about more than the tips, because a good bartender can make good money in any popular bar. They don’t have to work in a gay one. Some of your gay customers were nice to you and tipped well, but surely some of your straight customers were nice and tipped well also, no? In my experience (which is, frankly, greater than yours) – I’ve had gay and straight friends for years and go to gay and straight bars – gay men don’t tip any better than anyone else.

I can tell you that my friends and I base our tips on the following: How much the drink costs, how friendly the bartender is (never how "hot"), how many drinks I plan to have and – most importantly – how much money I have in my pocket. I don’t tip gay bartenders better than straight ones, or vice versa, no matter where I am. This whole business about gays tipping better is, in my opinion, nonsense. Often how people tip has nothing to do with their sexual orientation or whether a place is gay or straight, but what kind of establishment it is. And may I reiterate that having a few (I assume obviously or stereotypically) gay customers in a non-gay bar is not the same as working in an all-gay or mostly gay environment where many gay men will be more "macho" and not so "funny and fabulous" like the Queer Eye guys -- assuming that's what you enjoyed about these customers; the "camping," that is.

Some people theorize that straight men work in gay bars for narcissistic reasons – gay men can be more demonstrative in their approval and flirting than some women. But these guys, straight or closeted, have to ask themselves: what is it about them that makes them crave the attention of gay men? (For the record there is nothing worse, in or out of a gay bar, then a cocky straight guy who thinks he’s God’s gift to gay men and expects us all to either genuflect or go all goo-goo eyed when we look at him. Yuck! It’s now considered very old-fashioned behavior for gay guys to moon over a straight guy when there are all kinds of gay guys of every type imaginable in the world to hit on, including very masculine guys if that's what you're after.)

You also need to understand that many gay men – not all – are just not comfortable with straight bartenders in gay bars (this doesn’t mean they’re "intolerant" of straights). It sounds as if you have the right attitude – very different from some (see my post on The Malevolent Munchkin of Christopher Street to read about a really obnoxious straight-i.d.’d bartender as well as other thoughts) and I appreciate your attitude and gay-friendliness, as well as your understanding that most customers will assume you’re gay. Just remember that gay men generally go to gay bars to meet, cruise and hang out with other gay men – we may have straight male friends but we can see them on other occasions.

Gay bars have much more meaning to the gay community than, say, singles bars do to straights. We may in some ways seem the same as straight guys, but never forget that we are also different. We are emotionally, romantically, sexually attracted to OTHER MEN, and there isn’t a gay man alive who wants to get a crush on some straight bartender who can’t even give you an affectionate good-night kiss on the lips, even if nothing else may ever happen, and who doesn’t really relate to, or understand, what it’s like to be gay. Who needs a a straight bartender, especially a somehow attractive or appealing one, in a gay bar when there are so many appealing gay bartenders? Also, straight guys take jobs away from gay men who might feel completely uncomfortable working in a straight environment. (There may be homosexual men working in straight singles bars, but if so, they are deeply closeted. Gay men , of course, are often employed by restaurants, but many of these places are not really gay or straight.)

Another problem with straight bartenders is that their girlfriends come in to the bar, then bring other girlfriends (so that they’re not the only straight woman in the bar, for instance) who then bring their straight boyfriends. Suddenly the bar isn’t so gay anymore, the straight people who come in aren’t always so gay-friendly, and we’ve lost another gay social center. I’ve seen this happen more than once. Most gay men have straight friends, but again, we don’t go to GAY bars to meet straight people, whom we’re surrounded by every day of the week. We want a gay, even a homoerotic, experience. And I know that many gay-friendly straight men are perfectly okay with gay guys as long as those gay guys are not being sexual (I don’t mean hitting on them but hitting on, necking with, each other) or political, talking heatedly about gay rights and homophobic persecution. They just have no interest or even somehow find it offensive. They don’t want to hear about how we’re "oppressed" because some of us make more money or have more career-success than they do, and they’re unsympathetic. They also feel that we can't really be "oppressed" since there are gay-friendly straight people in the world (There are. But certainly not enough of them.)

There are gay men who couldn’t care less about straight bartenders in gay bars – their attitude is "who cares? – they’re just here to serve you drinks and if they’re in the closet that’s their problem" and sometimes I wish I could feel that way but I swear that I and other gay men just get a kind of chill – for lack of a better word – when the bartender reveals that he’s got a wife or girlfriend or only (or primarily) likes women. Maybe it doesn’t matter in a busy, packed bar where there’s no chance to interact with the bartender or get to know him personally, but in a more relaxed, conversational venue I can’t help but think "this guy will just not get me [especially if he’s much younger], I can’t talk about gay rights or hot men with him and I’ll have to put up with his straight friends who may not be so gay-friendly" and so on.

Some of the gay guys who are more or less okay with straight bartenders don’t cruise, may not have an active sex life, are part of an "old married couple," and are definitely not Out and Proud militants like me -- and could even be dealing with a self-hatred that has them deifying straight men (a dying pre-Stonewall attitude but one that persists in some gay men) -- or all of the above. Sometimes they just want to be nice even if a straight presence makes them uncomfortable. And some gay men are so grateful when a straight guy isn’t prejudiced (or at least appears not to be) that they practically fall all over him -- in the figurative sense. Me, I never "thank" straight people for being gay-friendly, any more than an African-American should "thank" white people for not being racist. People shouldn’t be homophobic or racist in this day and age and they don't get points because they're not.

If you’re determined to work in a gay bar be honest with the manager about your orientation – the Stonewall Inn bartender I mention in my original post told the manager he was gay but tells everyone else he’s "straight;" the manager would have been well within his rights if he fired him for lying (or was he?) during the original interview. And don’t cry foul or screech "discrimination" if the manager decides not to hire you; that’s his prerogative as far as I’m concerned. Gay bars are for gay people and there are plenty of straight bars -- or other gay bars -- you can work in.

A straight person doesn’t have to work in or go into a gay bar to hang out with gay friends. Invite a gay couple or single man to your home, or out to dinner. Some, like me, will be perfectly willing to go to a straight bar. And there are lounges which cater to both gays and straights (a better employment bet for you, frankly) where everyone can hang out comfortably. But an all-gay bar, especially a hot cruise bar, is a different matter. At least pick out some gay piano bar or disco into which some or many straight people go – this is often workable. Avoid the hot cruise bars, leather bars, etc. (which you’re really not going to feel comfortable in, believe me, if you’re not at least bi) where the homoerotic atmosphere is extremely important. Nobody will want to see you smooching your girlfriend, assuming she’d even want to go in, when they're trying to get all hot and bothered in a homoerotic fashion. Women are not really welcome in these places by most customers not because they’re sexist, but because they distract/detract from the all-male masculine, homoerotic ambiance. If you were ever in a place like this you’d know what I mean.

Most gay men can get along and have fun with straight men in non-gay environments, as I certainly can (and occasionally even gay environments), but just don’t like straight bartenders in gay bars and that’s that. That doesn’t make us mean or "heterophobic" – we want an all-gay ambiance and frankly we’re entitled to it after all the shit we’ve put up with from most straight men. Even gay-friendly straight guys can have opinions and attitudes that don’t sit well with us. Who needs it? I don’t go to gay bars to educate straight people about gay life. And I confess I resent it if some people – gay or straight – claim that this is "reverse prejudice." Gay people are entitled to their spaces. And this business that "gay men of all people" must always be accepting of everyone – or at least accepting of what they say their sexuality is – seems a little ridiculous to me. Why should we be? Because some people supposedly accept us when most people don't? Sorry, that doesn’t get any points from me, either. Does the fact that we're discriminated against mean we always have to be tolerant of everybody else no matter what they do or say or we're at risk of being labeled hypocrites? Nuts to that!

So you can try to find work in a gay bar, but ultimately you may piss off some of the customers and not enjoy it as much as you think. A lot of it depends on your attitude and behavior as much as the gay guys’. Sadly, some gay men will put up with a lot of crap. I’m sure you would never behave like the "malevolent munchkin," although his problem was more that he was an immature asshole than that he was either straight or conflicted, although that certainly was a contributing factor. It’s hard for any straight guy to be entirely sensitive to or understanding of what’s going through the minds of gay guys (who are a very diverse bunch), especially in a world where it is still perfectly acceptable behavior among most people to tell "fag jokes."

Don’t get me wrong – it’s great that many straight people are comfortable enough with gays to want to go into or work in gay bars, and I get that you’re possibly just a perfectly nice, open-minded straight guy, who thinks "I’ve got nothing against gay guys, why can’t we all get along?" Sadly the world just doesn’t run that smoothly, and most straight men (and some gays) have no idea of the level of homophobia that still exists – rarely do they know that you can still get fired just for being gay in 31 states in the U.S., or that there’s a virulent "ex-gay" movement throughout the country that claims gays are sick and which has garnered a massive amount of financial support, and so on. Perhaps I'd be more comfortable with straight guys in gay bars if gay people and straight people were considered equals in this world, and if I hadn't met too many "gay-friendly" straight people, who deep down (like white people who think they have no racist feelings) have homophobic thoughts that come out at unexpected moments. Let me also make it clear that while I may go into straight bars on occasion, I go with straight friends and never while on a date with another man. On some occasions I will tell other people in the bar that I'm gay if a.) I feel it's warranted and the person can deal with it, b.) it will shatter a few stereotypes, and c.) if I feel I can "take" any homophobes in the vicinity. While I often see straight couples necking in gay bars, gay men can not hold hands or make out in most straight bars without inviting abuse. [And let me also say that if a straight man feels "persecuted" because customers in the gay bar where he works think he's gay, it in no way compares to the persecution faced by gay men -- and if he thinks it does he should definitely quit!)

This is hopefully not the case with you, but I’ve discovered that most straight men get angry if you suggest they’re gay not because you’re saying they’re in the closet, but because you’re saying they’re gay. There may well be legitimate 100% – or maybe 85% – straight guys working in gay environments, but I’ve encountered enough gay/bi closet cases drunkenly cruising/making out with guys in other gay bars on their nights off to know that gay-friendly closet cases do exist. Some men simply can’t get past the shame and stigma of being attracted to other men, even if a gay environment is stimulating to them. No, I’m not saying this is the case with you. But the more straight-i.d.’d bartenders in gay bars, the less likely it is that these poor conflicted souls will ever come out of the closet.

Remember, having someone think you’re gay or hitting on you once in a while is one thing – having it happen on a much more regular basis is something else again, and that’s generally when the buried homophobic attitudes that even gay-friendly straight bartenders can have come rising to the surface, and it’s never pleasant for the gay guy who just wants to get away from it all and be in a safe environment where he can totally relax and be himself. So maybe he hopes that the bartender is gay like him. What's wrong with that? So he asks him about it now and then in a nice way. Deal with it. If you can't ask whether or not somebody's gay in a gay bar, then where the hell can you?

And let's remember that the thing you should worry about the most if you work in a gay bar isn't that most of the gay customers will think or hope that you're gay -- but that the gay-bashers who hang around outside some gay bars on occasion hoping to beat up "fags" will think you're gay! It's straight people like that you have to worry about -- not gay men.

Does this sound like I’m trying to discourage you? It’s more that I’m being brutally realistic. It takes a very special straight man to be entirely comfortable and cool in a gay bar and, while you may or may not be one of them, I think they’re a very rare breed.

Self-Loathing on the Downlow

I just saw a short 2007 documentary called On the Downlow on LOGO. It is not to be confused with a 2004 film of the same title (about two male gang members in love) nor a TV series that looked into the same subject. NOTE: I've illustrated this post with a photo of author J. L. King, who wrote a book on the DL, being interviewed by Oprah Winfrey. King had nothing to do with this documentary to my knowledge, and I haven't read his tome as yet, although I have seen some revealing quotes from it.

I thought at first that the documentary wasn't doing much to illuminate the "downlow" lifestyle -- if that's what you want to call it -- but later on I realized that in its low-key (downlow?) way it did illustrate the attitudes that lead many men (of all races) to live on the downlow.

Producer/director Abigail Child interviewed four African-American men from Cleveland, Ohio. Most of them identified as bisexual, but of course they all just came off as gay men, some more stereotypical than others. I was surprised that these particular individuals were chosen to talk about the DL, because I'd always thought that guys on the downlow persisted in their insistence that they were "straight." None of these guys said they were straight. However, since the DL is supposed to be a "secret" lifestyle, I can imagine that guys who are actually on the DL would never participate in a film like this. Still, you did obtain some insights, unsurprising as they may have been.

It's no secret that men on the downlow -- as well as many "straight" and "bisexual" men -- do not want to be labeled gay. Some African-American men on the downlow claim that white culture is more accepting of gays than black culture. (Of course, the whole point of Gay Lib and Gay Pride is for you to accept yourself no matter how others in your particular community feel about you). Most of the men on the downlow seem to have extremely stereotypical notions about gay men. "I don't present myself as a soft guy," says one man, "as a real gay guy." Another man says that he has to deal with enough discrimination as a black man, why would he want to come out as a gay man -- pardon me -- bisexual. (Although there are many, many openly and happily gay African-American men.) A third man claims that he prefers to sleep with women because they're "cleaner than gay men" and less likely to give him AIDS. Apparently he's completely unaware that AIDS is not a "gay disease" and that heteros get it all the time.

In other words, men on the downlow are mostly homosexual men who can't deal with their internalized homophobia. The term "downlow" may be new -- but the situation certainly isn't (there are plenty of homosexuals with wives and girlfriends) -- and it certainly isn't limited to the African-American community. They can't see other men as anything other than sex objects because the thought of living an openly gay life with another man is anathema to them, not because they're basically straight or even necessarily bisexual.

Two of the four men seemed to have girlfriends -- the documentary bounces around a lot and can be confusing. One man says that for him to be with a woman she has to be, more or less, drop dead gorgeous (implying that male lovers don't necessarily have to be "tens," which pretty much indicates that he's much more attracted to men than to women -- there have been gay men who are only "attracted" (somewhat) to uncommonly beautiful women, although the women they wind up with may not be so magnificent. This guy was a 7 or 8 while his actual girlfriend or gal pal or desperately-hoping-he's-basically-hetero lady friend was about a 2 or 3. But this seems to happen a lot when gay men have wives or girlfriends.)

Filmmaker Child offers no commentary or point of view; she just lets the men -- and some of their friends and relatives -- talk. On one hand this device works well enough to help us understand them, but as a couple of them seem somewhat inarticulate and not that intelligent (and none are exactly advocates for gay life), you have to read between the lines. Some narration or opposing points of view -- maybe some comments from Out and Proud Black Men who think the "downlow" is bullshit, of which there are quite a few -- might have provided more balance and given the film more perspective -- and sent a more positive message to those who are not in the know.

But there are positive signs in the film which indicate that these four men are not typical DLers. One man comes out to his military father with some trepidation. "I mean I am his only son," he keeps saying, which becomes irritating -- he's only telling him he's attracted to men, not that he's going to throw himself out of a window. He comes out as "bisexual," but as sometimes happens, the father doesn't react much differently than if he said he was gay, and his reaction is essentially positive, if guarded. "I love you." [However, it should be noted that many people tell they're parents they're bi -- whether they really are or not -- to soften the blow, giving parents the hope that they'll opt for hetero marriage and babies and the whole conventional nine yards. No it's not "pc" to say this and I don't give a shit.]

On an even higher note, the film ends with one of the four men talking about his boyfriend, describing how he's the first person he was ever in love with and how he wants to stay with him forever and grow old together "We're gonna be rockin' on that porch," he says.

Now this guy -- no matter where he was before -- is not on the "downlow" any longer. He's gay, and you find yourself hoping that he and his lover do wind up on that porch many, many happy, proud years from now. He's quite a contrast to the pathetic "macho" guy who thinks gay men are all "unclean," has knocked up his girlfriend, and will probably be confused, conflicted, and self-hating for his entire life.

Child could not have given her film a more perfect ending.

Now This is No Surprise

Just as it was no surprise that the bi-identified Tila Tequila ultimately chose a man at the end of the idiotic reality series A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila -- you can read more about it here -- it's also no surprise that she and her chosen one, 25-year-old film student Bobby Banhart, have broken up. Even if anyone had seriously expected that Tequila and Banhart would stay together, the fact that MTV quickly announced a second season of the show should have made it clear that our Tila had not found love -- especially not with a guy.

Tequila and Banhart tell opposing stories. She says that he couldn't put up with her exhausting "work" schedule and dumped her, breaking her heart. He says "she never called me after the last show and no one would give me her number." Somehow I get the feeling that Banhart is telling the truth, but if he decided he didn't want to make a life with a wannabee lesbian who could blame him?

A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila was one of MTV's most popular shows. Straight men and lesbians (none of whom were informed ahead of time of the show's "bisexual" premise) competed for the heart of Tequila. Make no mistake -- the program had nothing to do with Gay Pride or even Bi Pride.

As H L. Mencken once put it (more or less), "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste and intelligence of the American public."

You Can Be "Straight" But You Can't Be "Old"

GOTHAM KNIGHTS

My buddy Jack came over the other day and told me he was thinking of joining the Gotham Knights.

"The what?" I said. It rang a small bell but I didn't know what it was.

"It's a gay rugby team," Jack told me. "Well, predominantly gay."

"'Predominantly'?" I asked. "What does that mean?"

"They supposedly have some straight players."

I chuckled, then said. "Why do you want to join a gay rugby team -- or any other rugby team?"

"Something different."

"Oh, really?" I said. I went to my computer, turned it on, typed "Gotham Knights" in the search box, and sure enough up came their web site. I read on the site that you could join the group whether you were attracted to "men, women, both, or neither."

Very pc, I thought -- they not only include bisexual men and straight men, but asexual men as well -- and told Jack, who came over to look. Although I wondered why there wasn't one single woman on the team. I figured it had to do with "male bonding" but actually there are men's and women's divisions in rugby as there are in most sports.

Now, I may be a bear, but the only kind of sports I really enjoy are bedroom sports. My father used to take me to Mets games and I would read a Justice League of America comic book just to have something to do. My father and mother also went to the theater, the opera, concerts -- both were also voracious readers, which may be why I became a writer -- and I grew up with a love of art and culture over athletics. That doesn't mean I don't have my own brand of mindless pleasure: comics, monster movies, James Bond. In truth I probably have more low-brow tastes than high-brow, so I'm not putting anybody down, but watching a bunch of guys knock a ball around pretty much is guaranteed to put me to sleep, unless the guys are really hunky and maybe even then.

As Jack and I looked over the individual profiles of the members of Gotham Knights, I had to admit many were pretty hunky. Unfortunately, most also appeared to be in their thirties or younger. Now I've dated men in their twenties (no, not just when I was in my twenties but recently) but generally the guys who like me are around my own age, and vice versa. Jack is older than me -- don't kill me, Jack, baby -- in his mid-fifties (but I hasten to add that he looks a lot younger than that).

Looking at the photos I said, "so this is why you want to join Gotham Knights."

Jack laughed. "No, no -- I mean, that's a bonus, but I thought it might be something different ..." His voice trailed off.

"Come on," I said. Jack is also a masculine bear but he's watched only one football game in his life, and that was only because his boyfriend at the time was a football fan and Jack was in bed with him while they watched. They had a lot of fun at half time.

He continued to peruse the profiles. I don't know how many straight members they have --maybe they're mostly coaches or staff members -- but you really couldn't tell who was gay or straight. Clicking on name after name, I kept waiting for someone to declare himself Out and Proud, but it was a long time before I saw the "gay" word. Finally someone identified as "queer" and another man wrote about his "husband." Under "most embarrassing moment," one guy wrote that during a game he "screamed like a big queen."

"I sure hope a straight guy didn't write that,"I said, about to bristle with indignation.

"I think it was a gay guy," Jack replied.

"Is he putting down queens?" I may be a bear and I may roll my eyes at Carson Kressley and the like but I really don't like it when my femme brothers are put down (not that we can't kid each other). Or any gay man.

"No, I think he's just being self-effacing."

I concurred. "You're probably right. Gay and self-effacing." And not bad. We both laughed.

I didn't go over every profile. One man said he was an operatic baritone. Neat. I recall seeing some Asian-Americans and Latinos, but I can't recall seeing any African-Americans, but to be fair I didn't click on all the names and there were a lot of them. There is at least one black man in the photo of the team above. Good; I hope the team is ethnically diverse.

The Gotham Knights seems like a very interesting sports team. And not because of its predominantly gay designation. Apparently you can join (I think you have to get through a one day "boot camp" first) even if you're out of shape, nonathletic, and haven't been to a ball game since your father dragged you when you were ten. On their profiles the team members are very enthusiastic and talk about how they've met a "great bunch of guys," "the butchest gay men in New York" and the great camaraderie that the group fosters and encourages in its members (although many of them seemed to concentrate on the drinking and partying that goes on after the games more than on the games themselves -- but what the hell -- everyone likes to carouse). In any case, it's very persuasive. If you go to their web site you can learn the origins of the team, and its relationship to Mark Bingham, the young gay man and rugby star who bravely and tragically died on United Flight 93 on 9/11.

"By the way," I said. "Rugby is described here as 'tactile, interactive violence.' I mean, it's basically football with some differences. You're not in bad shape but you could still bust a nose or an arm. Are you enough of a masochist? Is your health insurance paid up?"

Preoccupied, Jack didn't answer but instead asked: "Why do you think a straight guy would want to join a gay rugby team?"

"Maybe because there are no straight rugby teams in New York City?" I wondered. "Maybe because the straight guy thinks he stinks at sports but he's bound to look good if the other players are all 'fags.' Y'know, gay men can't catch a football crap. A kind of gay-friendly homophobia or condescension. Or maybe the straight guys aren't so straight. Or they're completely straight and completely cool and just love playing sports with whoever. Who knows? Maybe they think if they play with gay guys and they fuck up on the field at least no one will call them a "fairy'."

Jack and I both recalled how we got called homophobic slurs like that a lot as children because we weren't that interested in sports and therefore weren't very good at them. "What do gay athletes call a guy who fucks up on the field?" Jack wondered. " A 'breeder?'"

"Hopefully they're too advanced to call anybody anything. This group sounds serious, but it also sounds like they want everybody to have fun. Shouting at somebody that they 'stink' and calling them names is counter-productive."

Jack wondered if opponents snidely -- if privately --made reference to the straight team members if the Knights won a game against a straight rugby team, as in "Oh yes, they won, but it was their straight team members who saved the day." Let's hope not. Or maybe they just play other mostly-gay teams. I wondered if some dumb people (gay and straight alike) would simply assume -- wrongly -- that they let heteros play because the straight guys could actually play the game while the gay guys just minced about -- stereotyping of the worst sort. There are plenty of strong, skillful gay athletes, although an exclusively gay team would, of course, immediately put paid to this theory, as well as the idea that "it's the straight guys who are carrying the load."

Many gay men -- and I've no doubt many straight men as well -- grow up with a hatred of sports because of the way sports are deified -- almost to the exclusion of all else -- in our society. It's understandable why quite a few gay men don't even want to acknowledge that there are many gay athletes and sports fans. [Even at Gym, the gay sports bar, I've had to tell some customers that, yes, there are gay sports fans!] In some cases, it's not hatred, it's simple disinterest. I've met men, both gay and straight, who played and watched sports in their youth and simply lost interest as they grew older, "growing out of it," as one referred to it. There are just other things that interest them more. (I occasionally go to Gym bar because I like the atmosphere, and even if I don't like sports I can like the guys who like them.)

"So you want to join?" I asked Jack.

He shrugged. "How about you?" he asked.

"Well, I can only think of seven reasons why anyone would want to join this group.

"First, you're a serious sports fan, a former professional athlete or Sunday amateur, you love competitive sports, and want to play with guys who won't put you down for being gay.

"Second, you want to meet some hot, mostly butch guys. Or at least make some new friends."

"Three, you're into 'male bonding.'"

"Four, you're out of shape and this will definitely take a few pounds off."

"Five, you want to prove something to yourself or somebody else -- and I've no doubt this applies to some straight guys as well as gay ones -- that you can take the rough stuff, survive a mini-boot camp, take the punishment, play competitive sports without getting killed, whatever..."

"Six -- you want a new challenge. Or a new experience.

"Seven -- lots of drinking and carousing."

"So? Jack said. "What do you think?"

"Jack," I said, "why do you keep asking me -- you were the one who wanted to join!"

"Yes, but what do you think. Does this appeal to you?"

I sighed and said, "Well, like I said, guys knockin' a ball around -- or knockin' each other around -- don't really stimulate me (I'd rather make love than war); I'm not an athlete or sports fan, so reason number one is out. (I love getting all hot and sweaty with guys but not on a rugby field.) I don't have to join the Gotham Knights to meet hot guys -- most of whom look like they're out of my league in any case (and with my luck I'd probably develop a crush on one of the "straight" or "bi" ones, and that is a pain I never fuckin' want to go through again) --or make new friends, so there goes reason number two. I'm not especially into male bonding, unless it's in the bedroom -- in fact, I think of "male bonding" as something done by straight guys who are trying to get in touch with their feelings or their sensitive side -- so there goes reason number three.

"I don't need to lose a few pounds, thank you very much -- I've never been in better shape --"

"I thought you wanted to build up your upper chest and arms a bit more," Jack reminded me.

"A bit more and I don't have to play rugby to do that, so there goes reason number four. I don't have to prove anything to myself or anyone else. I'm a man, I know I'm a man, and I always will be a man, whether I play rugby or not -- so much for reason number five."

"I don't think the Gotham Knights would argue with that," said Jack with a sly grin.

I laughed. "The butcher ones might. Then there's the partying and drunken carrying-on, which I do once or twice a week anyway, so there goes reason number -- where was I?"

"That was number seven I think. You skipped six."

"Ah, yes, six -- a new experience, a new challenge. Hmmm. This will be a little tougher..." I said.

Jack's eyes brightened. I don't think he wanted to take on this particular challenge alone.

Finally I said: "I love new challenges and experiences, but they have to be things that really interest me, and if that's the case, I can give it as much time as I need -- within reason. It sounds like once you commit to this, you're in for the long haul, it will take a lot of hours, and it won't just be about parties."

"No?" said Jack. Did I detect a quiver in his voice?

"But rugby?" I said. "I mean, that's not even on the list of Things I Want to Do Before I Die. I mean, rugby?" For once I was at a loss for words. "Jack, what do you think?"

Jack didn't actually say anything just then but he looked a little relieved. I think he was mentally reviewing my seven item check list and coming to the same conclusion I had.

"Look,"I said. "If you want to do it, do it. If you're honestly interested, think it would be fun -- and I've no doubt to a large extent it is fun -- then go do it. But it is going to be time-consuming, and we all have a right to spend our precious time on the things that interest us the most. I mean, I'm not going to tell a sports fan -- rugby or anything else -- that he has to attend the opera, read An American Tragedy, or collect every classic issue of Justice League of America he can find on ebay or he won't be a well-rounded individual." [I do like some physical outdoor activities such as swimming, walking and bun-perusing, and I work out on a regular basis.)

Jack said, "or watch Attack of the 50 Foot Woman or Beast from 20,000 Fathoms thirty times."

"Yes! I mean, I genuinely think it's terrific that there's a gay -- pardon me -- gay, straight, bi and asexual rugby team, it just isn't my cup of java. It's not that I can't take it, I just don't want to."

But to tell you the truth I'm glad there's a (mostly) gay rugby team called Gotham Knights, even if I thrill more to the voice of tenor Mario del Monaco or the sight of Ray Harryhausen's prehistoric rhedosaur rising from the Hudson than I do to guys in Jerseys bouncing around on a football field. They probably are a great bunch of guys and I wish them all the best. Allow me a little Gay Pride (and no offense to their hetero members), but I hope the Gotham Knights -- my gay brothers -- kick straight ass every time!

HOWEVER, Jack wondered if there was any age limit to playing with the Knights. I looked at the contact page on their web site and sent an email asking about age requirements. Three days later I still hadn't got an answer so I emailed somebody else, then just used the info link and hoped for at least an anonymous reply. Still no answer the next day. I emailed yet another person and finally heard back from a board member named Alex Fallis. Fallis' response was butch and terse: "You have to be at least 19 years old," he said.

I laughed. What -- were they afraid of age discrimination lawsuits? I emailed him back: "No, come on, LOL, I meant is there an age after which you are no longer allowed to play? Since this is not a 'traditional' team I assume age restrictions are lifted somewhat? Let me know."

Fallis came back with a more informative reply: "There aren't any limits imposed by USA Rugby. The coaches will play people if they feel it is safe for them to play. We do have men start playing in their early 40's, but they are usually people who were athletes previously. Men older than that typically have a difficult time trying to learn due to the high impact nature of the game. It's different for experienced players, and it's different for 40+ rugby, but we play adult men's rugby."

The handwriting was on the wall. It was unlikely they'd let Jack-in-his-mid-fifties play. I gave Jack the bad news. He honestly seemed quite disappointed. I think he had been completely taken in by the "gosh, everyone can play, even if you've never played sports and previously preferred singing show tunes (not that Jack does)" and was honestly thinking about signing up.

"You can always join the armory," I told him.

"What's that -- the cheer-leading squad, the camp followers?"

"Fans of rugby who serve in other capacities but don't play the game.That's one way to sort of be part of it all. "

"That sucks. From their web site you get the idea that anyone can play. I mean, that's what they deliberately make it sound like. I'm probably in better shape than some paunchy guys in their thirties who join their team to lose weight." (He is.)

"But they must know what's what," I reminded him. There might be some exceptions, but they probably were guys who'd been playing rugby for years. Still -- just as some men do have this attitude that all gays are big sissies, even gay men can think older guys are weak and decrepit. Stereotypes die hard. "In any case," I told Jack, "this Fallis guy wasn't exactly mean but he didn't sound especially welcoming, either. Let's face it -- no matter what they say on their web site, they really don't want the paunchy, the old, the opera queens, the effeminate -- they want the typical sports types and it's foolish to expect anything else. I'm sure to them it's just common sense."

I pondered the thought that guys in "macho" groupings, be they athletes or astronauts, always think they have the "right stuff" that no other guys possess. To most straight guys, having the "right stuff" basically means they aren't "fags." To gay guys with the right stuff -- who knows? They aren't "fags" while other gay guys are. Who knows?

"So how old is this guy you heard from?" Jack said as he looked up the man's photo on the website. Checking it out he frowned and said: "I'll tell you, he ain't a youngster."

"Hey, Jack. He was only reporting the situation. He doesn't even know you. And he's probably been playing sports all his life."

Although he later accepted the bad news with his usual life-goes-on heartiness -- sort of -- Jack was too disappointed then to be anything but bitter. "After all that build-up. Anyone can play rugby with us. Sure."

"I reminded him that competitive teams -- gay or straight -- want to win, no matter how much they go on about "it's all about the game and having fun." I told him that if some of the straight team members were better players, they would undoubtedly get more action -- on the field at least -- than some of the gay guys, which is probably why the Knights made such a big deal about letting in all guys no matter what sex they slept with. Cynically, Jack wondered if they had probably always intended to go after straight guys because they might have been afraid they wouldn't -- for whatever reasons -- attract enough decent gay players; the thought was disturbing. I shrugged and said, "It's always about winning," I told him. "Or why bother?"

Jack hasn't said one word about the Gotham Knights since.

I guess if you want to play rugby with the Knights you can be gay, straight, bisexual or neuter.

You just can't be "old."

UPDATE: I heard from John Dent of Gotham Knights who said: "There is no age limit for Gotham Knights RFC, either for playing or membership in the club or the Armory. Though physical fitness does play a role in securing a playing spot on Gotham. Regards, John Dent, Gotham Knights RFC." Sounds reasonable to me. Thanks for the info, John. Talk it over with Alex.

Debut of "Dr. Bill"

Okay, maybe I'm nuts. I mean, I hardly have time to work on my various professional writing projects, meet the guys who contact me (and vice versa) on assorted gay bear and other web sites, and keep the blogs I've already got regularly updated -- and manage to get laid with consistency -- without adding yet another project.

It's like this. There seem to be a lot of gay advice columnists out there on the World Wide Web, but most of them are -- bless 'em -- "femmes" who give women advice on how to dress or wear their hair. I'm a bear and I couldn't care less about that. Even the gay advice columnists who answer serious questions about the gay community seem to be coming from a very different perspective. And some are just "sex columnists" who even answer questions for impotent straights, gals with boyfriend troubles and the like. There are plenty of straight sex therapists who can answer those kind of questions.

I wanted to give advice to and for the GAY community. By Gay, I don't necessarily mean GLBT. What I mean is, I can certainly tell someone the difference between a homosexual and a transsexual, (just as I can give at least one man's gay viewpoint on bisexuality), but I'm not an expert on transgender issues. I have been openly gay for more years than some younger gay people have been around; I was an active member of the New York's important Gay Activists Alliance for many years; and I have written about gay issues in many gay and straight periodicals. I may not be an actual "doctor" but I don't know who else is more qualified to answer questions about the gay community and gay life for my fellow gays and other interested parties.

I am always giving advice to friends (occasionally unsolicited, admittedly) and to people on message boards, in bars, and the like. Some unbelievers might think "if Bill gives advice it will be like the blind leading the blind" but most people think I'm on the money more times than not. Why not give my good advice in an online forum where it may actually do some good?

Hence the new blog, Ask Gay "Dr. Bill." It's already up and running (only a few days old as of this writing), and I'm already getting questions. Send your questions to trock4304@mypacks.net -- put DR. BILL in the subject line -- and I'll try to answer them on the blog as soon as I'm able to. I'd like serious questions, but I don't mind a funny one now and then. Comments are primarily for follow-up questions from those who contact me for advice, but you can leave a comment on a post if it's respectful and intelligent, and maybe a little funny. (All comments are subject to approval.)

Hope to hear from you!

"Dr. Bill"

Oy vey -- just what we need -- NOT!

Okay, Carson Kressley, or whatever his name is, one of the campy, bitchy "fab four" of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy -- which finally ceased production, although undoubtedly it will live forever in reruns -- has a new show out in which he will undoubtedly dish with (and swish for) the straight girls and give them fashion tips and the like. Pass me a barf bag. [That's Miss Carson dressing up as Carmen Miranda. NOTE: I could stomach only one episode of Queer Eye. I didn't even like the title. Today "queer" refers to the entire GLBT community. It shouldn't be used to refer strictly to gay men because at one time it was used in the same way as "faggot" or "fairy" and in many quarters still is.]

Okay, I'm not a meanie. I often find myself liking the more "fabulous" or colorful members of our community. It's just that I do get tired of this whole image of gay men, as one bright person on a message board put it, as "accessories" for straight women (for some reason these guys always seem to cater to straight gals, perhaps out of a disturbing anti-lesbian bias, who knows?), their sole function being to advise them on their hair, clothing, and make up. Guys like this not only don't seem like men, they don't even seem remotely sexual. It's the gay male as eunuch, the court jester. And it's so out of date and inaccurate that it isn't funny. [The very worst "court jester" is Ross the Intern on the Tonight show. He's such an absurd caricature that he hardly seems recognizably human let alone gay.]

They seem to be popping up all over, "queer" guys who will tell straight women how to maximize their assets and minimize their flaws, mix and match cosmetics, where to shop, and how to throw the best dinner party, and -- Enough! Like I said, pass me a barf bag.

Of course the "fab" gay boys have a right to do their thing and carry on in their own stereotypical style. If only they weren't considered "typical" gays. If only straights -- and even many gays -- didn't think that "being fabulous" was the only way to be "gay." If only the bear and leather communities, the butcher guys, or at least gay guys who were different (not so "fabulous" but great in their own way) from the stereotype got a little more visibility in the media. I don't think even bears realize how fuckin' huge the bear community is.

Look, I'm not a super-butch Charles Bronson and I'm more of a city boy at home with a martini or at the concert hall than a back-packing, camping type, but I think most gay men have more of a purpose in life than advising women -- or anyone -- on their hair (of course, being bald, this is really not an issue for me). If only the gay community could be seen in its full diversity now that we're in the 21st century, for crying out loud.

I'm not against "fabulous" gay guys, believe me. Ironically, just the other night I was sitting at my favorite butch gay bar feeling -- and this was really odd -- bored out of my mind. I looked around and had the oddest sensation that I was not in a gay bar in the West Village but in a straight bar out in Brooklyn. There were no willowy young queens in sight, but rather middle-aged, often paunchy [not that there's anything wrong in that!] macho guys who looked for all the world as if they had just come out for a beer to get away from the wife and kids (of course, there are a lot of men with wives and kids who are also gay, but that's another story) and were busy watching sports on the TV. I almost longed for a big campy drag queen to walk in the door and shake things up. I later realized I was only temporarily "bored" because on either side of me were guys, clearly on dates or with their lovers, who I sensed were not really open to outside conversation (I'm rarely bored in a bar because I'm friendly with everyone). Everyone in the fuckin' bar seemed to have a lover (how dare they?) What was a poor guy who wanted to cruise to do? (Luckily a whole pack of single guys came in a little while later and I was bored no longer.)

Of course, the fact that it felt like a "straight" bar for a time is just the point. The world -- and even members of the gay community itself -- should know that gay men like this exist, and while some can seem as comparatively dull (not to be "heterophobic") as some straight guys, many are a hell of a lot of fun, even if they'd no sooner don a dress or give hair advice than order a syrupy drink with a cherry in it. They're "average" guys only in the sense that they don't have an "outrageous" or campy component -- and what's wrong with that?

Butch or femme, we're all gay brothers, and all discriminated against by a homophobic society, which is why we should all get along, regardless of our personal styles.

But please -- enough with the gay man as straight woman's "accessory."

Many of these advice gurus are big on personal style. I say, if a person's style is to be a slob, leave them be. They tell everyone how to dress and wear their hair, but they sure as hell wouldn't like it if someone told them to tone down their act or put on something a little more masculine or just a bit different.

If you truly believe in personal style, why tell everyone else how to dress?

As for those of us who are not so "fabulous:" We're here, we're men, and we are definitely not eunuchs!