When I was a high school sophomore, one of my classmates had the misfortune of popping an erection in the communal shower after gym class. I doubt "Paul" was gay. Most likely, it was a typical teenage case of Mr. Happy having a mind of its own. But fellow students at our all-boys Catholic school teased him mercilessly, calling him a fag, and I joined in.
That's right: I joined in.
Please understand: at the time I was NOT GAY. Sure, I had "gay feelings," which I kept mostly to myself. I also lacked any straight feelings, and I had a decent enough grasp of logic to know that people with "gay feelings" but no "straight feelings" are gay. It was denial, pure and simple, and my teasing Paul was a way to deflect attention away from myself.
When people ask me how I can even for a split second feel sadness for hypocrites like Reverend George "I hired him to carry my luggage" Rekers, the anti-gay crusader who was recently caught hiring an escort from rentboy.com for a European vacation, I answer: Because I know what denial feels like.
True, I came clean about my sexuality at 19, whereas Rekers is still dissembling at 61. True, I participated in some schoolboy teasing-the potential damage of which ought not to be underestimated-whereas Rekers has made a career out of spreading lies about gays, writing books with titles like Growing Up Straight: What Families Should Know About Homosexuality, and offering highly paid testimony in Florida and Arkansas against gay adoption. There's a huge difference.
But part of preventing future cases like these is first to understand them, and I can understand them best by drawing on my own experience. The human capacity for keeping separate sets of "mental books" is as familiar as it is remarkable.
Why is Rekers' case important? Because it provides yet another stunning example of what it looks like when someone tries to fight his internal demons by scapegoating openly gay and lesbian people. Rekers has spent his life attacking in others what he can't control in himself, harming countless LGBT innocents in the process. This is the danger of the closet.
Rekers insists that he is not gay, and at one level, he's right. The term "gay" often refers to a mode of self-understanding and public identity, and Rekers just isn't there. On this reading, anyone can be a homosexual, but it takes courage to be gay. Sadly, like the Reverend Ted "I'm heterosexual with issues" Haggard before him, Reverend Rekers may never get there.
So let Rekers have his "I'm not gay but my rentboy is" t-shirt. I'll even believe him when he says that there was no sex, strictly speaking. According to the rentboy, "Lucien" (aka Geo, aka Jo-Vanni), in interviews with the Miami New Times and blogger Joe.My.God, their sessions consisted of daily nude massages where Lucien stroked Rekers "across his penis, thigh... and his anus over the butt cheeks," causing Rekers to become "rock hard." (At 61, Rekers doesn't have the same excuse for erections as my high school classmate.)
This is precisely what one would expect from a "Not Gay" deeply closeted homosexual who has spent his career denouncing the "unacceptable health risks of [homosexual] behavior." Rekers can maintain this charade only by drawing the boundaries of "homosexual behavior" about as narrowly as Bill Clinton drew those of "sexual relations"-which, as you'll recall, the president did not have with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. The claims are true on one level-the strained, self-serving, and possibly delusional one.
It's when I imagine these mental contortions that I feel the split second of sympathy for Rekers. As David Link writes at the Independent Gay Forum, "If the glaringly obvious conclusion is true-that Rekers is, in fact, a frustrated homosexual who won't allow himself to actually have sex with another man-then he has created for himself exactly the hell he and his colleagues believe homosexuals are headed for or deserve."
However, it's one thing to create demons for yourself, and quite another to project them onto innocent bystanders whom you then attack as "deviant" in books, articles, and courtroom testimony. Frankly, there aren't enough rentboys in Miami to carry that kind of karmic baggage.
Rekers still insists that he sought out the young man because he wanted to share the Gospel. I recommend starting with the "Truth shall set you free" part, followed by some lessons on penance.
33 Comments for “‘Not Gay’”
posted by Throbert McGee on
Here’s a novel idea: Less hand-wringing about Rekers, more hand-wringing about the fact that there’s a website — presumably operated by openly-gay men — called rentboys.com, whose sole purpose is to facilitate gay prostitution. (One can take a libertarian stance on prostitution and still disparage the Web-pimps.)
Also, IGF has now done multiple posts about Rekers, but as far as I can tell by Googling, no IGF author has ever had a bad word to say — or any word to say at all — about Paul Morris. Morris is the openly-gay man who runs Treasure Island Media, a pr0n studio whose motto is “No Condoms, Ever!”
I think a fair case can be made that Paul Morris is a much worse person, and has done more damage to gay men, than George Rekers. But it’s easier, and far less controversial, to point fingers outside the Gay Community, in the slovenly manner of Palestinians who blame “the Zionists” for all their problems while completely ignoring Palestinian corruption.
posted by Debrah on
“…….a fair case can be made that Paul Morris is a much worse person, and has done more damage to gay men, than George Rekers. But it’s easier, and far less controversial, to point fingers outside the Gay Community, in the slovenly manner of Palestinians who blame ‘the Zionists’ for all their problems while completely ignoring Palestinian corruption.”
****************************************************
A glaringly accurate point, Throbert.
You’ll rarely see them criticize the most dangerous and negative aspects if touted and practiced by “their own”.
And this overriding tendency is grand hypocrisy……..on the same level as all the Rekers characters out there.
posted by Eric on
Paul Morris and the pimps who run websites like “rentboys.com” wouldn’t be in business for long if they weren’t offering the gay community something that they weren’t already demanding. The worst that can be said of people like this is that they promote a disordered and self-destructive vision of sexuality.
George Rekers and his ilk, I would argue, represent a far more potent danger in that their rhetoric is designed to attack the very primal notions of identity and self-perception. Moreover, their message is targeted, not just at the gay community, but to society as a whole. As such, the damage done is far broader.
While I in no way mean to diminish the pain and suffering inherent to prostitution, venereal disease and promiscuity, these evils pale in comparison to the evil represented by an ethic which, as an inherent aspect of its theory, presumes to snuff out individuality in favor of cramming everyone into predetermined molds based on bygone aesthetics.
posted by Jimmy on
“Paul Morris and the pimps who run websites like “rentboys.com” wouldn’t be in business for long if they weren’t offering the gay community something that they weren’t already demanding.”
Clearly, in the case of Rekers, rentboys.com is offering something attractive to those not identified with, and hostile to, the gay community.
posted by Grant on
With all due respect, I think bringing porn sites proffering unsafe sex and sites such rentboy.com into this argument is a strawman. Those issues certainly bear discussing within the gay community, but they are beside the point here.
I think it is entirely possible, in fact likely, that youths harmed directly by George Rekers’ “therapy”, as well as gay families (and the potential adoptees thereof) by his court testimony, may never have even heard of these websites, much less availed themselves of their services.
Apples and oranges.
posted by Regan DuCasse on
I cannot and never have approved of prostitution. Certainly minority communities, already judged harshly through the lens of morality, can’t afford to engage their youth in such behavior.
But the prize of hypocrisy, goes to men like Rekers, or David Vitter or now, Mark Souder. The ALL specifically engage in anti gay ‘family values’ politics that directly affects innocent gays and lesbians seeking marriage, and adoption of children. Or maintaining custody of children.
Websites for sex are not the exclusive domain of gay people.
And certainly no heterosexual has to worry about being banned from marrying, once or again…if they engage such enterprises.
And certainly, no marriage equality advocates are calling for bans for men LIKE Rekers and Souder FROM marrying, no matter how much damage they’ve done to their marriages themselves.
posted by Pat on
Throbert, good discussion point. I believe Rekers is more dangerous. He has been promoting his hate to an audience who apparently has bought it, and he has tried to effect policy for his hateful agenda. He also has a wider audience than Morris. As Eric suggested, there are people out there who are careless and/or deliberate about becoming HIV+ and spreading it to others. Obviously, this is abominable. On the other hand, it is very simple to avoid the destruction that Morris and others are trying to inflict. We have the choice to simply not engage in this destructive behavior. In some ways, it may actually help matters. By having all people who wish to engage in such behavior network with each other, perhaps fewer people who would otherwise be duped by them, will be left alone.
I would say that if Rekers had a website with an outreach similar to Morris’s, where idiots who are not going to change their mind about homosexuality (whether or not, they are self-loathing closet cases themselves) can network, and glorify in their collective hate and stupidity (like the chronic barebackers), it would be less dangerous as well.
posted by Throbert McGee on
I know that Debrah dislikes gay/Jewish analogies, but if she would indulge me: Who actually does worse damage in the long run — overtly antisemitic non-Jews like Louis Farrakhan and whoever is currently running Hamas and Hizbollah, or Jews like Norman Finkelstein and Neturei Karta?
And…
Pat, you ignorant slut. The argument you’re making, in essence, is one I’ve heard a million times before: “The only people who watch barebacking videos are people who are already into barebacking — it’s not like anyone else is going to copy them. How preposterous to suggest that viewers are actually influenced to experiment with real-life behaviors by fantasy scenarios they see in X-rated videos — what are you, some kind of pornophobe?”
And my answer to this is that most people nowadays don’t make excuses for onscreen cigarette smoking by cool actors playing cool characters on the grounds that young moviegoers are unlikely to imitate it. And if Hollywood were to actually make a movie today in which the straight hero beats up a faggot just for laffs, would gay people say, “Oh, no worries — the chances of anyone copying that behavior in real life are infinitesimal!”?
posted by Pat on
Throbert, that’s not quite the argument I’m making. Yes, I do believe, for the most part, that almost all adults would not be influenced by someone like Morris, and not begin to engage in bareback sex, if they happen to stumble upon his website. I could see teens, and perhaps young adults possibly be influenced. And even then, effort must be made to find these websites. Also, I don’t excuse such behavior by Morris and others. Quite the opposite, in fact.
My other point is that Morris’s actions do not affect me, because even if it did encourage more people to engage in bareback sex, I always have the choice to not participate. However, Rekers goal of making more antigay persons does affect me.
posted by Pat on
I know that Debrah dislikes gay/Jewish analogies, but if she would indulge me: Who actually does worse damage in the long run — overtly antisemitic non-Jews like Louis Farrakhan and whoever is currently running Hamas and Hizbollah,
Throbert, I don’t mind analogies, but this does not accurately contrast the differences you are making between Rekers and Morris. First, I do believe Louis Farrakhan is a valid comparison to Rekers. They both want to spread their hateful venom around, and not even keep it among persons who already think like them, and to affect others as much as possible. And whereas I can easily avoid having bareback sex with someone who advocates it even if I am approached by one, I don’t have the same luxury of having my life spared if I’m approached by someone from Hamas or Hezbollah.
posted by Bobby on
Guys, let’s be clear, it’s a lot more dangerous to have bareback sex in an orgy or with one person than it is to hire a prostitute that forces you to wear a condom. Barebackers don’t care about diseases, prostitutes do. There are plenty of gays doing dangerous things for free, so saying that rentboys.com is the problem is simply insane.
“Clearly, in the case of Rekers, rentboys.com is offering something attractive to those not identified with, and hostile to, the gay community.”
—Not so, Jimmy, there are plenty of gay men their 40s and 60s that make $100k or $200k a year. They have fabulous yuppie lifestyles, yuppie homes, and when it comes to men it’s easier for them to hire a Lucien than to seduce him in a gay bar. Rentboys.com IS the gay community, they are as much part of our community as porn makers like Falcon, Bel Ami, drag queens like RuPaul, and others.
By the way, I took the time to check out the escorts in rentboys.com, almost all of them are truly beautiful, better than most of the cute guys you find at adam4adam.
posted by Claudius Vandermeer on
Dear me, Bobby. Dull as plainsong with you, isn’t it? Lalala, forever on one note, in this case namely the salubriousness of hiring oneself a catamite when the mood strikes. In any event, if RuPaul is the gay community, well, consider me in secession.
Throbert, I understand your perspective on barebacking pornâI resisted at first, but you made your case well enough that I suppose I’m in grudging agreementâbut I’m not sure it’s good for a man to think about his fellow as a kind of herd animal, led by the nose by media rather than reason. Yes, it happens, yes, probably most of the time, and yes, pretending that there’s no such issue is a sin of omission with serious repercussions. I do wonder, though, if it isn’t better to avoid paternalistic rhetoric even when paternalism is justifiedâI suppose I’m casting around for a different strategy, a different habit of mind. (Secular holiness codes are useful. I can’t honestly call it anything but an idiosyncrasy, but “this is vile” strikes me as better for the polity than “this will lead you into temptation, poor lamb.” Different species of philosopher king, I suppose, Platonicus eupater and Platonicus ecclesiastes.)
This is all slightly beside the point in the Rekers case, though, isn’t it? Imagine the self-appointed standing up after the scandal and saying “ah, yes, well, I’ve been meaning to mention the great social ill of e-pimping.” It would have looked schizophrenic at the very least, wouldn’t it? My point, and I do have one: yes, a thousand times yes, but not at this exact juncture.
posted by Bobby on
“In any event, if RuPaul is the gay community, well, consider me in secession.”
—I don’t get it, if a center-right libertarian like me can like RuPaul, why can’t you? Drag queens are some of the nicest people you’ll meet in a gay bar, they will actually talk to you if you talk to them. They bring joy, they are open minded, they make people laugh, they are entertainers. Seriously, why are you ashamed of drag queens? I’d rather be ashamed of sports fans who paint their bodies, make too much noise and riot after the game.
“Throbert, I understand your perspective on barebacking pornâ”
—You have to realize he’s completely against anal sex, even with a condom. My perspective of barebacking porn is this, it’s safer to bareback with an actor that has been tested before a film than to have protected sex with a gay slut who gets tested maybe once a year.
“Imagine the self-appointed standing up after the scandal and saying “ah, yes, well, I’ve been meaning to mention the great social ill of e-pimping.”
—There are no pimps in rentboys.com, each hooker is an independent agent, they pay to be in that website, they get paid in cash when they show up to your house. I read that “Lucien,” Rekers rentboy, he got paid $75 a day while he was in Europe, so Rekers got himself a real bargain, specially since most of the men there charge $150 to $300 an hour. Then again, I suppose Lucien wanted to see Europe, so in a way he made more than $75 a day when you consider the free hotels, food, and air tickets. I hope they travel first class or business though.
posted by Grant on
– “I hope they travel first class or business though”
No, I heard it was coach all the way, and the hotels were “Days-Inn-like” as well. Cheap bastard.
But the expenses, such as they were, were on Rekers’ tab
posted by Throbert McGee on
Well, you misunderstood my analogy. I didn’t mean to compare Morris with Hamas OR Farakkhan OR Rekers; I meant to compare Morris with anti-Israel Jews, and contrast Morris with Hamas, Farakkahn, and Rekers.
Why yes, Pat, that’s a completely valid point, IF you’re a quadruple amputee typing with a pencil in your mouth and thus consider can reasonably call it an “effort” to enter the letter string b-a-r-e-b-a-c-k into Google and hit Return. Assuming you have the “family filter” turned off in Google, about 75% of the returned hits will be all-barebacking, all-the-time porn sites. Of the rest, at least half seem to be gay-health [sic] sites purporting to offer a “balanced, non-shrill” view of barebacking — in other words, let’s not be judgemeeeeental!
posted by Throbert McGee on
Fun science fact, Claudius: it is completely impossible to transmit HIV via airborne transmission, including “paternalistic rhetoric.” (Dry, oxygenated Hot Air effectively destroys the virus in a relatively short time.)
On the other hand, nearly all of the HIV transmissions via male/male sexual contact, in the entire wretched history of this peculiarly unnecessary epidemic, can be attributed to anal barebacking.
Let me use my magic Google powers to spare you some “casting around” time — here’s a different habit of mind for you to consider:
The non-paternalistic article then lists six benefits of barebacking, followed by three “drawbacks”. (One of these “drawbacks” is that you could possibly become infected with HIV, and then die from it. Getting shit and “santorum” on your dick is, of course, not considered as a drawback, because that’s irrational coprophobia.) The author then dons his thinking cap and enumerates over two-dozen reasons why gay men bareback — but somehow it completely escapes his attention that there’s lots and lots and lots of video porn and written erotica glamorizing condomless colon-sex as an EXCITING THING TO DO. (Also not on his list of “why gay men bareback”: Supergenius gay health educators who begin their discussions of barebacking with a list of its advantages.)
posted by Throbert McGee on
I must, however, give author Rick Sadowsky one bit of credit for refreshing and non-PC honesty in his “why do some HIV- men ‘bugchase'” list:
posted by Bobby on
“No, I heard it was coach all the way, and the hotels were “Days-Inn-like” as well. Cheap bastard.”
—Wow, so it’s worse than I thought. Well, Lucien is a young escort, there’s a lot of things he needs to learn. For example, if he charges $300 a client and has sex 4 times a week, he could have made $1,200. Do that for a month and you’ll get $4,800. There are all-inclusive trips to Europe for $1,000, maybe $1,500. So, if Lucien had been smarter he would have made enough money to buy his own vacation and keep lots of money for himself. Instead, he made $75 a day which is about $3.50 an hour (he’s working 24 hours a day because he never gets to go home).
I wonder what Lucien is studying in college? If he’s majoring in business pretty soon he’ll realize he was totally ripped off.
posted by Pat on
Well, you misunderstood my analogy. I didn’t mean to compare Morris with Hamas OR Farakkhan OR Rekers; I meant to compare Morris with anti-Israel Jews, and contrast Morris with Hamas, Farakkahn, and Rekers.
Okay, Throbert. I guess your analogy wasn’t as good as I originally thought.
Why yes, Pat, that’s a completely valid point, IF you’re a quadruple amputee typing with a pencil in your mouth and thus consider can reasonably call it an “effort” to enter the letter string b-a-r-e-b-a-c-k into Google and hit Return.
So, in other words, an effort needs to be made to find such websites. And the persons who would make that effort (which, as your sarcasm suggests, is quite easy) are the ones already interested in bareback.
I guess my point is that Morris, as bad a person he is, is not getting additional people in the fold to bareback. Rekers, on the other hand, was trying to get people to buy his anti-gay bile. Maybe I’m wrong about this, but that’s the way I see it.
posted by Claudius Vandermeer on
Yes indeed, Throbert! That’s what I mean. Love it or leave it, that’s rhetorical muscularity for you. I like it a great deal better than “the smut will make the poor frivolous creatures catch their death.”
I haven’t been active on IGF for very long, so would you mind repeating for me why you object to anal sex? Is it strictly health-based, philosophical or religious principle?
Anyway, to swing back to Bobby and RuPaulâthere are a couple of cultural issues at stake here which I know you and I would never agree on and which I certainly wouldn’t presume to evangelize at you, but by way of explanation: it’s a question of dignity, more than anything. The practice of drag strikes me, personally, as degradingânot at all something I want to define me via my demographic. Exhibitionism, frivolity, a life somehow damaged and consequently misspent: there are huge bushels of impossibly broad assumptions and prejudices rolled into a generalized “ick” reaction. Understand that this is not moral condemnation or Cromwell closing the theaters but my usual handwringing about the best way for a man to live.
As for the question of embarrassment, wellâlike the website banner says, I’ve got an eye toward the mainstream. So for me, for that purpose, genderbending just isn’t kosher
Well, there’s one more thing. Can I rant like an old cretin for a moment? OK, I admit, there’s a problem of aesthetics. In Weimar your drag queen was more ladylike than the ladies, straight-up Jessica Rabbit stuff served on the rocks. Now you venture into a club just to find out what the fuss is about and you’ve got a painted Pink Flamingos-style catastrophe gyrating in a miasma of hip-hop and his own vulgarity: ugh. Now, where did I leave my dentures?
But this has strayed pretty far from the point. Yes, I disapprove of all that, but the whole notion of my having some kind of moral or societal influence is, well, frankly a little funny. The difference between your center-right libertarian and my oh-do-not-ask-what-is-it political quietism (the carbon cinder of a center-right libertarian) is, eh, largely a literary disposition taken too seriously and despair.
posted by Jimmy on
“–Not so, Jimmy, there are plenty of gay men their 40s and 60s that make $100k or $200k a year. They have fabulous yuppie lifestyles, yuppie homes, and when it comes to men it’s easier for them to hire a Lucien than to seduce him in a gay bar. Rentboys.com IS the gay community, they are as much part of our community as porn makers like Falcon, Bel Ami, drag queens like RuPaul, and others.”
I didn’t say gay men don’t hire escorts, Bobby. I merely made the observation that many of the clients of male escorts are men who are not self identified as gay. Men of all stripes like sex with other men and have it on the DL, either by paying for it (buysexual) or cruising airport men’s rooms. Those men would deny any relationship to the gay community.
posted by Jimmy on
If a monogamous couple, faithful to each other for whatever appropriate time, has sex without condoms, is that barebacking?
posted by Bobby on
“The practice of drag strikes me, personally, as degradingânot at all something I want to define me via my demographic. Exhibitionism, frivolity, a life somehow damaged and consequently misspent: there are huge bushels of impossibly broad assumptions and prejudices rolled into a generalized “ick” reaction.”
—I suppose each one of us has standards of taste, I for one abhor tattoos and body piercings. I do think that if you watched RuPaul Drag Race you might develop an appreciation for the art of drag, and I will agree with you that real talented drag queens don’t look like the people form Pink Flamingos.
Either way, our culture isn’t very tolerant to gender-benders, in Thailand however the “ladyboys” are worshiped.
“I didn’t say gay men don’t hire escorts, Bobby. I merely made the observation that many of the clients of male escorts are men who are not self identified as gay. Men of all stripes like sex with other men and have it on the DL, either by paying for it (buysexual) or cruising airport men’s rooms. Those men would deny any relationship to the gay community.”
—That’s an interesting comment, but answer me this, how come escorts also advertise in gay newspapers? I think you will find escorts working pretty much anywhere, your own neighbors might be escorts and you would not even know it.
“If a monogamous couple, faithful to each other for whatever appropriate time, has sex without condoms, is that barebacking?”
—Yup, sex without condoms is always barebacking. It’s called “bare” because there’s nothing between your penis and the ass.
posted by Jimmy on
“—Yup, sex without condoms is always barebacking. It’s called “bare” because there’s nothing between your penis and the ass.”
I said “couples”… meaning gay and straight.
“how come escorts also advertise in gay newspapers?”
Well, duh. I fully expect escorts to advertise in gay newspapers, just as titty bars advertise in the sports section of most metropolitan newspapers. There’s no disagreement here. And, I have no problem with prostitution.
posted by Bobby on
“I said “couples”… meaning gay and straight. ”
—Good point. let’s just say that any condomless copulation is barebacking, except for oral sex of course.
“Well, duh. I fully expect escorts to advertise in gay newspapers, just as titty bars advertise in the sports section of most metropolitan newspapers. There’s no disagreement here. And, I have no problem with prostitution.”
My point is that for a closeted gay man to read a gay newspaper with escort advertisements he would have to be in a gay bar or any area where there are lots of gays. Of course, escorts also advertise on free weeklies, and other places, so finding an escort isn’t hard.
People simply need to realize that prostitution is very common, it’s not even a question of being in the closet, out of the closet, old, young, ugly, pretty… All kinds of people hire hookers. For example, I know a very sexy 27 year old with an 8 inch penis (he says), and he has hired hookers. Why? Because they’re convenient and you don’t have to waste time playing 20 questions with them.
posted by Jimmy on
“My point is that for a closeted gay man to read a gay newspaper with escort advertisements he would have to be in a gay bar or any area where there are lots of gays. Of course, escorts also advertise on free weeklies, and other places, so finding an escort isn’t hard.”
They have this thing now called the internet; we are talking about rentboys.dot.com.
posted by Bobby on
“They have this thing now called the internet; we are talking about rentboys.dot.com.”
—And you think only closet gays go there? adam4adam also has an escort category, aside from the usual guys who give it away for free. The finding sex online has become so popular that some gay bars are closing. In fact, the last time I went to a gay bar near my house there was hardly anyone there.
posted by Jimmy on
“And you think only closet gays go there?”
Of course not. All one has to do is Google: male escorts – XYZ city. What do you think I’m trying to say, Bobby? Any one of these type of men, if they are anywhere near a city of any size, doesn’t need to go within a country mile of a gay bar to get laid if he has broadband, dial up even.
posted by Throbert McGee on
Gosh, Pat, could you maybe make up your fuckin’ mind? Because just a little bit upthread — not even 24 hours earlier — you wrote:
posted by Pat on
Throbert, let me try to explain. Yes, teens, and perhaps young adults could possibly be influenced. My position hasn’t changed on that. But, as you said, it is easy to type in the letters of bareback on Google. Again, no argument there. But then these potentially influencial teens and young adults would have to actually type those letters, as opposed to anything else they might try to Google. I suppose there is a chance, they may accidentally type those letters, and come across it, when they otherwise wouldn’t. I’ve never heard of the term until about 10 years myself, long after my teen years. So there would have been no reason for me to Google bareback.
Rekers, on the other hand, is more of a public figure. And one is more likely to hear his message than Morris’s.
Anyway, I don’t mind being called out on any inconsistencies. But,
Gosh, Pat, could you maybe make up your fuckin’ mind?
Yeesh! Take it easy there.
posted by Throbert McGee on
First, Pat, you ought to consider the possibility that they might deliberately type “bareback” into Google because they already know perfectly well what it means, but are trying to find out whether this is really a widespread practice, or merely an anti-gay urban legend. And having typed it in, they will get lots and lots of gay porn sites openly celebrating “bareback” sex as the ultimate in intimacy, and thus tending to confirm that it’s relatively widespread and a normal thing for a gay man to do.
Second, if you go to a site like Xtube and simply specify that you are a man interested in men, your eyes will be dazzled with banner advertisements for amateur bareback videos, without having to type the word “bareback” at all. That is, if you identify yourself as a gay male user of Xtube, the site’s servers will tell your browser to display bareback content in the banner-ad spaces, on the assumption that many gay men want to see ads for bareback fucking. And why should Xtube do differently?
After all, although many gay men love to fuss and complain and wring their hands about the terrible, terrible damage that people like Rekers do to impressionable gay youth…
…many gay men are, on the other hand, exactly like you in their blind fundamentalist faith that constant exposure to gay-made barebacking imagery does not have the smallest detrimental effect on the psychology and rational decision-making of gay men.
As long as it’s gay men screwing up other gay men, it doesn’t even ping on your radar of Things To Get Angry About.
posted by Pat on
Throbert, you’ve made excellent points. Well worth thinking about, which is probably why I even gave my opinion. I sometimes do this to see if I can be swayed to change it.
You’re right that if youth are impressionable, they can be easily impressed by people who are pushing barebacking and by people like Rekers. And if one is questioning barebacking, they will probably google it and see what it’s all about. By the time I was about 20, I knew that anal sex without a condom was a likely cause of AIDS (although I don’t even know if the term barebacking was around then, for what is worth), and as naive as I was, there was no way I was going to engage in such behavior. On the other hand, I would have been more influenced by people like Rekers back then. But that’s me. And perhaps other young gay people would be and are being influenced differently.
…many gay men are, on the other hand, exactly like you in their blind fundamentalist faith that constant exposure to gay-made barebacking imagery does not have the smallest detrimental effect on the psychology and rational decision-making of gay men.
And I still believe it shouldn’t. And it still seems odd to me that a person’s decision to bareback would be influenced by such imagery. But, again, I may be wrong about that.
As long as it’s gay men screwing up other gay men, it doesn’t even ping on your radar of Things To Get Angry About.
Not quite. I have plenty of qualms about the gay community.
posted by TS on
Wowww this thread went off on a tangent.