blueAlto

More easy as pie website applications! 

Never one to get especially excited about new applications in the social networking realm, I took on Twitter after some prodding. Yeah, what a complete cult like drinking game flashback to second year that was. I'm sorry, it makes me nervous, very nervous. Because really, I don't care what you are wearing when you do your laundry, before you groom your cat!

And no facebook people, I don't want to be your friend. Go away strange cling on person. Even if we do have two contacts in common from thirty years ago.

Evil, Facebook person breathlessly says. "How cool is that?

Sorry to put a damper on it, but ~ not very.

And then came tumblr.

In the case of blueAlto (reloaded), very simply, tumblr, is a combination of media formats, all taken directly from published work on bluealto, but presented in an extremely different style, one that previews work through various site boxes. Turns out is a real innovative blog application that allows users to post text, images, videos, audio, quotes, chats, and a multitude of other features. The best thing in my opinion? The original, minimal, yet alternative and divergent theme choices available to a completely free site.

Check out the blueAlto (reloaded page). Maybe even get one of your own!

What is it?  In this context I refer to dealing with intention and need. An approach which offers assistance based on need, not a loopy, circuitous attempt at ones own personal redemption via assistance to another. My opinion here is arrived at through personal observation, and could be seen as unfairly cynical in the description. Stay with me.

I think most people who do not regularly give of themselves, when they do get involved, have a very internal motivation for helping those in need. That is often to “show they care”,  show they realize the inherent inequity in our cultural mosaic, and they just need to "give something back". That's one very common, usually transparent, rallying cry you hear from the do gooders at say, Christmas. 

Before you go about reclaiming the "masculine warrior God within", maybe an awareness of what the fuck that is might prove helpful to your rabid pursuit.

Let me back up here. Anyone who has been blogging for even a moderate length of time, has no doubt had the very common experience of that little voice in the back of ones head that occasionally says, "now may not be the best time for that specific little tirade Skippy". Referring of course, to the good sense one should exercise when they have been made aware that if they engage the rant that is brewing in their head, there exists a real risk of communicating less than objective opinion on an issue.

Though in my case, my lengthy history of selective auditory skill when it comes to those little voices, makes the issue moot to begin with. Therefore caution has been thrown to the wind and I need to offer a few thoughts on the latest author to come out of his pidley little gay community studio and offer his hateful screed to the world at large.  If you are sensing I am not a fan, hey, we're in sync.

In that case, I will go out on a limb and offer an opinion on a book I have yet to even read. Correction, a book I have yet to read, and a book that also will never grace the entrance to my home, let alone have me pay one more ounce of attention to its bigoted howlings.  Here we are talking about first time "author" Jack Malebranche. Now, I'm sure Jack is a really swell guy, and if he has found an identity that grooves for him, I say great!  Anything is better than his misguided dalliance with the ill conceived vocation of Satanic minister, but that is all in the past. Supposedly, anyway.

But....for the love of God, if I hear one more nerdy little gay man publicly embrace his masculine awareness via a direct condemnation and derision of another's, I swear my head is going to spontaneously fucking explode!

But let's cover the usual bases first, shall we. It's certainly not that I reject masculinity. Indeed, I personally embody many traits of what we currently define as traditionally masculine.  And no, I will not take a compliment, nor will I make an excuse for the trait. It is what it is, and that is simply an affectation. No more, no less.  And whether it is a fluke, or perhaps a result of a lack of specific reliance on said trait, call me crazy, but I'm just not all that bloody concerned with how individual men come to know, or not know, their own specific relationship to or with traditional masculinity.

So, why would the rantings of a guy like Jack burn my ass as much as they do?  Simply put, men like Jack lack an ability to exist and be comfortable in their own skin. It's as if a sense of their own masculine identification, is somehow garnered through a concurrent need to admonish others perceived masculine deficits.

Men who love other men have little if nothing in common with lesbians, transvestites, transsexuals, and all of the other "under-dogs" that are huddled under the ever-growing GLBTQ umbrella. We are encouraged to seek out examples of exemplary manhood in the men in our lives and to build ourselves up as men of honor and integrity.

One doesn't need to read that far to realize they are headed into one nasty swamp pit of internalized homophobia. And I will go as far as to say that it seems to be a trait among similar individuals in the gay community, that when advocating an intense focus be placed on masculinity, more often than not, those views are stemming from an obvious insecurity around their own personal deportment, a disgust with "gay culture", and always, very entrenched misogynist beliefs. 

So Jack, babe; if you want to butch it up, butch it up. But some things really are better practiced solo.  So, when you think you have it, without resorting to the grunting word vomit against "the queens", please, take the following advice.  Dude, do a better accuracy check than you did last time, as just between you and me, you are coming across as more than a tad glaring.

Hello everyone. Yes, i am back. Things are okay. But more about that in the next day or two.

First, happy Canada Day and happy belated Pride week. As usual, Toronto ushered in gay Pride week last Monday with all the parties and fan fare one comes to expect from what is now the largest pride celebration in North America. Take that SF!

For me, pride has a history that is both celebratory as well as deeply painful. Having both the luck to know many wonderful friends, and the misfortune to see many of them die in their prime, the day that we celebrate our community resolve has always been in many ways bittersweet for me. Combine the experience with the very ironic and singular benefit of one very isolating genetic trait I recently discussed, and the reality of community loss, and I often have a difficult time enjoying the revelry around the events. Not to be a complete downer on this topic, I usually of course am able to place those emotions and enjoy what we are coming together as a community for.

My overall point here being, it is not a day on the calendar I approach with glee. Enough said. Though this year was interesting. During the week prior to the Sunday parade, a wealth of cultural and community events occur. Literally, something for everyone. As it is something that I have done since the early nineties, I make a point to attend the candle light AIDS vigil held early in the week at sundown. For the first time in a long time, I was moved and inspired by the tone of the event and the words expressed. Truly celebrating the rich and diverse lives of the men and women who had gone before, several musical selections were employed. The following, an ABBA remake from my one of my favorite Australian films, Muriel's Wedding, seems an odd choice.

I think you will be as surprised as I was, and agree that for a remembrance that is both celebratory and mournful, the choice could simply not have been better.

In response to yet another "I just can't understand why the fags can't be responsible and use a condom every time", article on the topic of our failed HIV prevention strategies, consider this my response.

Though I should offer a warning.  If you are the type of individual to steadfastly ignore the evidence in front of you, and instead retreat to a position of relative emotional insularity, this may not be the read for you.  As it tends to begin at the place we currently are. I know, what a novel concept.

After twenty six years of a disease, there are some things we can say for sure, and we can be totally at peace with the facts of those assertions.  Lets look at a few, shall we?

Shame, blame, and moralizing ridicule may be wonderful tools to aid in ones perception of personal importance, however as a prevention method for a global pandemic, they actually do little to help.  Many argue, myself included, that they may in fact make the problem worse, by helping to set up dynamics of entrenched and marginalized sub culture, where what eventually manifests as norms in response to unrelenting persecution, are examples of discordant personal and community responses to crisis.

What else have we learned from twenty six years of a plague that has affected the gay community on a scale similar to war time?  We have learned that people are going to continue having sex in the face of a crisis, or under threat of death, or even with great personal risk.  In fact, under these circumstances, many will have more sex than they would in normal conditions.

Another lesson from the past quarter century of public health and epidemiological data?  Abstinence is a rock solid theory on the prevention of HIV, but, like Communism, it just never really works out as planned.  Uganda, for example, has been heralded as the modern example of  "old fashioned values at work".  President Bush gave an unprecedented figure in the high millions to help in that countries fight against HIV.  With of course, a catch.  That condoms be used as only a third line resource; never a first or second line intervention. 

In a country where well over fifty per cent of its female victims acquire HIV through a non choiced sexual encounter, either rape or prostitution out of necessity, the public health professionals would have told you that approach was a recipe for disaster.  It was the correct assumption.  The last stats for the region show HIV infection rates to be up by more than 86%.

I'm going to propose something radical. Radical as in, like radical feminism, relating to the root.  Read it twice if you so require.

If we expect a community, an individual, or a planet for that matter, to respond appropriately in the time of extra ordinary circumstance, then it would be a logical extension that we offer that culture, community, individual, and planet, a standing in society that mandates equality.  That is humanity 101, and is central to the human nature of moral individuals.

This point is so key in this crisis, I cannot understand why we have not been dealing with it from the start.  The gay community of the early eighties was a young and a culturally immature community.  It was also less than five years out of the era which saw Anita Bryant and the Briggs initiative, teachers fired from their positions for being gay, landlords, employers, even stores, routinely deny service to gays and lesbians.  Untold examples of families rejecting their gay and lesbians sons and daughters, brothers and sisters.

July, 1981

Consider what happens when, cruel irony being the bitch that she is, makes her entrance:

Bringing with her a new, fatal in all cases, very disfiguring gay cancer. 

It happens to target a community not accepted in most ways by a very fearful, hostile and intolerant greater society. 

Add on a good fifteen years of unrelenting death.

Don't add in a cure, because there was none.

But please, add in more death. 

Add in grieving and more grieving, eventually experienced as a learned art.

Entire circles of friends - gone.

Cut to 1996.  

For the first time since this crisis began, people start to whisper about hope.

The whisper turns into an official announcement.

New medications. 

People stop dying in massive number.

And, like human beings are known to do, people react in very human ways. 

Many say thank God, I can now forget for a while. 

Many see the beginning of an end they dream, hope, and pray for. 

And a few, see it for what it is....

Cruel Irony: Act II

Rinse, repeat.

Cut to 2008.  Well, what do you know? We have a prevention crisis in the gay community!

Now, please ask yourself:  Is it not possible that the dynamics I describe very briefly above, could have helped in part to create a less than optimal environment in which to self advocate for personal health?  Or, a less verbose way of saying it;  the past two and a half decades have been one hell of a twisted mind fuck for an entire community.  It has known more loss, with an equal amount of non acknowledgment, than most people could ever conceive of. 

Some may ask why the intense detailing.  Because, it shows that our community response to this crisis is not the norm.  The actions people counter with, are, in many ways, only adding to the problem.  Whether it be the right wing fundie, or the puritanical gay man still not over his sexual shame who harshly condemns, or the "not a care about anybody else in the fucking world" methed out party boy who has unprotected sex with everyone from Toronto to San Fran.  Our responses culturally, and our responses personally, are often making this situation worse. 

Strange?  Ironic?  Evil?  Flagrant disregard for life?  Suggesting a lack of humanity?  Hardly.  What these responses demonstrate, are the textbook markers and clinical identifiers of community acquired post traumatic stress disorder. Reacting out of the range of what "should be done", is an entirely normal response given the current context.

Chris from Creek Running North made some interesting and relevant observations recently regarding the idea of online discourse. Is it even possible for us to have a truly humane discourse on line? Chris said:

Sometimes the negative links direct attention to things that need to be addressed, to offenses that would have flown under the collective radar in offline life, and sometimes the mass uproar that follows educates people who would not have been reached by position papers. As a glorified phone tree to alert people to actions that need to be taken to combat short-term horrible, the net is a wonderful thing.

It’s just that it seems to me that there’s a threshold of linkage beyond which political discussions, as opposed to political alerts, become less than useful over time. I’m not suggesting any hard and fast metrics, but I do know that some of the most useful, challenging, rewarding and worthwhile conversations I’ve read online have taken place among regular readers of the blog in question, and I know that I’ve seen outside linkage derail more useful and enlightening conversations than I can count.

I like how Chris points out the duality here. That for every negative conversation in the blog world, there are ones that reflect the opposite point. Balance then, is key. However as many of us know, balance, is very often hard to maintain. Given what occurred yesterday on Joe.My.God via a small number of comments leaving some real vitriolic sentiment for a gay father, and then keeping up the attack at the guys own blog, this is a discussion we as a community really need to have.

The outcome yesterday wasn't good. To be fair, I'm sure it was not Joe's intention to cause this individual any damage, and he has issued a heartfelt apology, but the fact remains, the man in question took down what was his very inspirational and high quality site. I think we need to ask ourselves, ultimately, who plays a role when those things occur?

It's an important question, as silencing voices, is the opposite of what we are supposed to be doing here. Isn't it? Thoughts?

A menu description might include:

A meaty, yet tender slice of synaptically engaged nourishment. Sunday dinner will highlight the rich and diverse flavor of what is out there, and hints at tastes yet to come.

No, that is not me writing the next overly descriptive Red Lobster menu, it is me using cheesy food metaphors to introduce the first of a weekly Sunday feature here at blueAlto.  Or, an overly verbose way of saying, welcome to three previews, two links and a realtively short, though somewhat justifiable endictament of religious seniors with the term Godbag. Kidding about the seniors, though serious about the rant. You'll see....

It's a feature that is based in as much formative structure as it is in intention. Yes, I will be linking to some of the best out in the ether blog stuff I have read in the past week, but I am also very deliberately setting up a bit of my post MFA structure. It's extremely exciting, but also humbling, and not a small amount daunting, that my entire academic life of the past three years has a total of three weeks and one very large, and very required thesis defense, until it is awarded what will be the third alphabet soup like title in the BA, MA string. Crossing fingers that the transition which adds MFA onto that string will be smooth.

Because really, the none too slight pre occupation I have with being seen as excessively self absorbed, when I reference a third degree, particularly a creative, fine arts degree, can be seen in all it's clarity through what I call "channeling with mom". A sage example....

"You've still pulling that struggling artist / thoughtful student thing? Dear, cutting edge doesn't have that same independent punch at forty as it did at thirty five. Get back to work"!

Thanks Mom.

Following that sarcastic self deprecation, and we arrive neatly at my reason for the weekly Sunday Dinner. Because the whole manically engaged, bi polar art of working towards the MFA, will very soon be over. In effect and by extension so will my entire daily schedule. Setting a purposeful structure of not only writing, but thinking, reading, free form expressing, discussing, researching, observing and emotionally engaging is a must do. These were the program tools that by design, became the structure I simply walked into in the fall of 2005, and have immersed myself in since.

Considering my experience with ingrained pattern change, has, in the past, been nothing less than a bitch on wheels, it's time to get more than a little pro actively intentional, and then get busy.  So here you go, a preview of what's to come on this site (affirming what I must then do) and some thoughts as to the best of what is currently out there (assures me I have in fact been reading, and can reference other ideas in formulating and developing, both into and from, some of my own).

Coming Soon To blueAlto:

1. A detailed look at the process, and personal journey narratives of writing, and how both of those experiences can fundamentally tie into a personal vision of social justice dedication, through a coomitment to ethically intentional works. Especially works of memoir and creative non fiction.
2. A longer more thoughtful series on mens relationship to feminism, and how we can move beyond the limiting constraints, while at the same time offer women our ally status. It then changes direction, branching off from ideas expressed in my recently published essay Men, Feminism & Ethics: How Men Can Assist In The Struggle For Female Autonomy and Equality.
3. Coming Soon: Almost completly finalized, this will be a two member team approach utilizing a multi blog venue, of a ten week series of fiction writing, crafted and presented in the long forgotten art of the personal letter. Interest peaked? Good, stay tune. Here and elsewhere.
   

And how interesting that number two brings me to a not so artfully placed segue into this weeks unhinged - pontificating - soapbox  hint of a what's - to -come - rant. This one will be in both spirit and solidarity with all those "ism 101" threads everywhere. Specifically, it will quickly address this aggressively annoying (in a not so dis similar experience of a painful UTI) theme I have seen pop up on more than one gay male blog of late. The idea that if, as a man, I must absolutely demand my feminist creed be validated by being called nothing less than a feminist! Well Skippy, (or Mike or Joe) I would suggest before you get all completely offended, you give an ounce of consideration to the following points.

1. That from a purely self referential perspective, and from a childish and deterministic "I want to be therefore I am" perspective, you are a feminist sunshine! Or a pro feminist! Or a human rights ist! Or if you want, a fucking three ring tailed pink kangaroo! This is where I do a quick little Zen inspired appropriation and offer a smug little bow, hands clasped in front of me in prayer symbol, and say " go, be happy oh feminist one". Or, "go be happy oh  three ring tailed kangaroo of the pink variety."
2. But, if you are looking for an identity as a feminist with a bit of substance behind it, or, you know, with a bit of the respect of the people central to the movement you hope to represent, (that would be women sunshine), than may I suggest that whatever you call yourself, either feminist, pro feminist, or male, three ring tailed pink kangaroo, needs to be backed up in daily life by actions, thoughts and behaviors which would lead one (who is in fact a feminist) to actually believe you when you assert that you have an ounce of an idea about what a feminist is, before you feel the need to unfairly appropriate, thus highjack the term.
   

In the grand scheme no one really cares! Don't get particularly caught up on "feminist" or "pro feminist". Personally, I have identified as pro feminist for at least the last ten years. Why "pro" as opposed to simply feminist? I believe it implies a level of thought has been given to the identity, not just one that has been unfairly appropriated. There is a distinct difference between a male feminist and a female feminist. Only one can know and experience male applied oppression based on gender. And it ain't the man! In my experience, most women who are feminists don't care what you call yourself, so long as you back it up with relevant action in your daily life. Though if you run across women who are not on board with the idea of a "male feminist", simply defer to pro feminist. Because really, the end goal is not about how we as men label ourselves.

Perhaps my points on this subject are too subtle, and lacking an affirmative tone. Well In that case, and also because it is on its own, a damn fine example of quality writing through a personal lens, elegantly informing and describing a sense of political consciousness, consider this from Theriomorph, where she discusses When Abundance Goes Wrong:

Very occasionally, I meet men with whom I do not have to explain and argue the most basic experiences of my day to day life in a misogynist world. These pro-feminist, feminist, ally (choose your moniker) men have already loved a human being who was a woman concerned with justice, and have also actually listened to her, so they’ve spent some time thinking about the subject already. They have come to the stunning realization that a woman is not, in fact, terribly mysterious, except in the ways all people are to one another: she is, fundamentally, a lot like them. A unique mind and body with a set of experiences, emotions, interests, passions, quirks, pet peeves, opinions, and skills who is a sovereign and individual being deserving of the same basic human rights they expect for themselves, about whom they should presume nothing. They also get that she runs into brick walls all the time, and that it would be really great for him to not be another one.

I am going to suggest that before you loudly claim your right to the title of your choosing, in a movement you wish to embody, for whatever reason that may be, you would be wise to ask yourself about the men that are described in that passage. Do you think they care, in any sense, about a one word descriptive marker to say all things about their own relationship in and to a movement? 

I go on record as saying that men like this, could not care in the least, and have a much deeper and nuanced relationship to, and awareness of,  their own feminism / pro feminism / what have you identity, than can be conveyed in a word. Next time boys, try the deep end.

Ending on a note that nods to some truly quality writing, check out this brave, and I say brave very intentionally here, post from Tate on a personal recollection of that school age positioning on the bully - picked on continuum. We all have these stories and they are things we could all gain some self reflection from, I imagine.

While I have never been overly impressed with the on line dating / hook up scene, I have maintained an add on one of the larger gay dating web pages for quite some time. No, I am not saying which one, and no, I am not putting a link up! Though really, it's not that hard to figure out. However recently, I updated it with new text and pictures. And that's when things got interesting.

One of the additions I included in the text was a clarification around my rule of not responding to adds without face pictures. A very common statement and frequent request by gay men who use these sites. But I decided to go one step further and clearly explain why I had made that a rule. That's when the proverbial shit hit the fan. Here's the part of my add that I reference, and evidently causes great offense:

As a rule, I do not respond to men without a recent face picture in their profile, even if you are willing to send one after initial contact. I find the inability to show ones face in an online dating profile says some specific things about your comfort level as an out gay man that I doubt would make us compatible. Otherwise, I do answer all friendly messages.

Now to be fair, along with the massive amount of mail telling me I am a smug, arrogant, elitist and cocky asshole for requesting such a thing, I have had roughly the same amount of mail telling me that what I wrote was refreshing, respectful, or some other description considered positive. In total, just over one hundred and fifty responses for that specific issue alone.

Personally, I am floored that it would cause offense at all. Though I can understand a little easier why someone might praise it, since the tone and manners expressed in many of these profiles would make Ann Landers turn over in her grave. 

So I began thinking about etiquette online and on these sites, and the greater idea of what exactly is the best way to tell someone what you are not interested in. Is there ever a polite way to do that, or is it best to tell by omission and just indicate the things you are looking for? Given that there are still those repulsive "no blacks, fats, or fems" in many, many profiles, some people obviously do not see it as an issue. Is singling out something physical or racial that you specifically do not want, ever acceptable? Or do you feel it is best to deal with those things on a one on one basis as they come up?

My own view is that listing specific negatively framed traits (overweight, balding, short) or specific racial identities that you will never consider, is always in bad form, and deopending on the way it is phrased, can often be seen as aggressive, and / or racist.

What do you think on both of these issues? 

For a specific explanation regarding my motivation for video choice, the comment thread from yesterday is more than sufficient.

Climbing Up On Large Soapbox:

The theme of this video has always been a sobering one to gay men of my generation. The fact that the same oppressive dynamic often operates within our own community, is as tragic as it is shameful. In my personal view, it is a dynamic that needs to be called out wherever and whenever it is engaged.

Climbing Down Off Large Soapbox. 

Have a good weekend everybody. 

As valid as my occasional complaints of apathy, lack of engagement etc. are when I discuss some of the young people I teach, it's days like today that make me realize that the vast majority of young adults completely rock! Once a semester, the teaching team from cultural studies gets together with all the first year students and conducts workshops on homophobia, sexism, and racism. Today, I led the homophobia lecture.

The following are all ideas and suggestions from students on the damage caused by homophobia, and how they can be a better straight ally to gays and lesbians. Needless to say, I was impressed.

1. Homophobia forces us to act "macho" if we are a man or "feminine" if we are a woman. This limits our individuality and self-expression.
   
2. Homophobia puts pressure on straight people to act aggressively and angrily towards LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, questioning) people.
   
3. Homophobia makes it hard to be close friends with someone of the same sex.
4. Homophobia causes youth to become sexually active before they are ready in order to prove they are "normal." This can lead to an increase in unwanted pregnancies and STDs (sexually transmitted diseases).
5. Homophobia prevents vital information on sex and sexuality to be taught in schools. Without this information, youth are putting themselves at a greater risk for HIV and other STDs. 
6. Homophobia can be used to hurt a straight person if they "appear to be gay." 
7. Homophobia makes it hard for straight people and LGBTQ people to be friends. 
8. Homophobia along with racism, sexism, classism, etc. makes it hard to put an end to AIDS. 
9. Homophobia makes it hard to appreciate true diversity and the unique traits that are not mainstream or "normal."
   

Some ways to combat prejudice and homophobia as a straight ally:

1. Organize discussion groups in class or after school to talk about the how homophobia affects straight people as well.
2. Use neutral labels like "partner" or "significant other" instead of "boyfriend," "girlfriend," etc. when writing papers/emails or talking to others. 
3. Bring up LGBTQ issues in conversations with friends or discussions in class. 
4. Interrupt anti-LGBTQ jokes, comments or any other behaviors that make homophobia appear OK. 
5. Put LGBTQ-positive posters in the halls and classrooms or wear shirts, buttons, etc. that promote tolerance. 
6. Don't make assumptions about peoples' sexual orientations or gender identities. Assume there are LGBTQ people in all classes, sports, meetings, daily life, etc. 
7. Don't assume that "feminine-acting men" and "masculine-acting women" are not heterosexual. 
8. Don't assume that "macho males" or "feminine females" are heterosexual.

by: Karen

Not sure about where you are, but the first of March finds Toronto still very much in the grip of winter. Precisely the reason today's featured sites and entries were chosen to uplift, inspire, and maybe warm us a bit while struggling through this relentless and seemingly never ending season.

First up, Change Me. Both a beautiful website and ambitious anthropology project, Change Me asks us to examines the possibilities of change through grassroots organizing, leadership, and vision. Read the discussion area for some truly inspiring examples of the capabilities of everyday people, many whom never dreamed what their passion could eventually amount to. 

And then there is someone for whom an early spring has already arrived, Drop by and offer congratulations to this wonderful writer, as well as equally wonderful woman. It is very well deserved.

Hoping with all my strength for the same early spring to be visited upon this astute blogger. Sara's blog was the first one I ever read, and she has been a consistent read since. Unfortunately, at the moment she is dealing with some very real health concerns; your energy and support would be appreciated,  And while you are there, check out her archives and you will realize why she enjoys the huge outpouring of support she has received. Best wishes Sara, for a full and complete recovery.

Recently, Karen and I had a discussion about what our goals were for the site, both personal goals and goals in the sense of a wider community. We both felt that adding to an environment that encourages and is supportive of individuals having a voice and being heard, is fundamental to why we do this. To that end, we felt that a blogroll, in other words a drop down folder of a a bunch of sites that we read everyday, is just not enough.

Beginning today, and following every Saturday, we will highlight posts and authors from that blogroll who have said something in the past week or two that we really think should be passed on. The way I look at it, I have a blogroll for a reason; ostensibly because I enjoy what a specific blog has to say, I find it funny, or maybe it is my ideological polarity, but it's refreshingly respectful. In all those cases, I would rather actively pass examples of that on, not just have it sitting undiscovered in a drop down folder.

So, first up this week, is an inspiring read from Tater that is sure to put a smile on your face. And if you like the look of his new site, you can always just make a mental note of the influence present from my skills and talent at harmonious and minimal design (snort). Not that I helped out or anything.

Doralong has penned a fun and nostalgic tale about a chance encounter and a little black dress. The personal reference by the way, was unexpected and appreciated. If that tale makes you smile, this video from Sylvia is sure to make you cringe and have an interesting visceral reaction. Well, it will for the men anyway.

If you are still inspiration starved, Theriomorph does more than quench that thirst at the Commonplace Buffet. 

Karen was going to leave this as a comment, but we had a very lively discussion about it and decided to turn this post into the official blueAlto fashion code.

That's right, I, the man who's understanding and interest in mens fashion will never go beyond the initials of J. Crew, MEC (mountain equipment co op), and a boot store named after a forest, has co authored an opinion piece / fashion code. Just because the concept of mens fashion both bores and amuses me, does not mean I cannot occasionally demonstrate my very exacting awareness of female style sensibilities.

But first things first. I think that given the tone of the current crop of OCM* additions to discussions, the suggestion by Doralong that we ignore the unpleasantness, is a very wise one. Secondly, since Karen is not available tonight (it's date night), and since I know what her very strong opinion is on feminism and fashion, and since it is an opinion I strongly share, and lastly, since it is our blog, on these pages this will be the once and for all final word on this nonsense about feminism and fashion.

Before you critique her fashion choice, please read the fine print:

Opinions on what a woman wears, her level of femininity, her lack of feminity, her attractiveness, her breast size, her weight, her personal fashion, makeup and hair choices, etc, etc, and on and on, are never the concern of anyone but the woman making the choice of what she will wear, weigh, and how she will groom. Period.

Anyone who thinks that the credibility of a feminist has anything remotely to do with hem length or heel height, needs to get their bogged down in advanced concepts of theory head out of their ass and into a history book, because if petty arguments over "lipstick as a tool of the patriarchy" are occurring, you can always be assured that important things are not occurring. Enough said. 

        ~ Al & Karen 

The above shall serve as fair warning that if one decides to engage the worth of opinion based on arbitrary worth of physical presentation arguments, they should be advised to wear protective gear when making a comment, since be assured you will be called on it. 

In the first year course I am teaching, Identity & Experience: Minority Representation In Modern American Literature, before assigning any specific texts, I like to make sure the students have a solid understanding of the concepts of identity and experience being distinct, but also interdependent. How personal identity is formed, and in what type of circumstance (routine or crisis), is another theme that is referenced.

To make the point that we all have examples of identity formation that is rather routine, often boring, as well as moderately nuanced to completely foreign, to what we are completely terrified of, I ask the students to do a simple exercise and hand it in at the beginning of the next class. They are to type out on a single sheet of paper, a short, phrase length description of who they confidently feel they are, right now. They are not to indicate their name, and nothing else is meant to appear on the sheet. It's a very "I am a good football player" type of one dimensional way of seeing self. In other words, a self validating tool.

Then, they are to asked write the same short phrase like description for who they are not sure at all they are, or are not sure who they want to be, or perhaps who they wish to reject because they know they are becoming. It's a tie in to an unconscious discomfort with a label or a limiting factor that the individual does not wish to integrate, or instead prefers to reject. Again they are asked to type their descriptions out and not to indicate their name or identity on the form.

The next class we are ready to share. Randomly, they draw from a hat and each read a phrase from the "confident selves". Much laughter, a few smiles, but largely a very non threatening experience.

Then it's time to read out the identities that were not a great fit, the ones that no one was comfortable about. For a level of personal safety, because it is still early on in the course, I read them out. The tone is strikingly different. The phrases are short, angry, confused, some are afraid, many are sad, and there are always the one or two that break your heart.

This is just a sample from this course, as well as the last two semesters I have taught this specific activity. 

~ I am so normal it hurts.

~ I am the dumb, fat bitch I tease and make feel like shit.

~ I have no clue who I am.

~ I am whatever they think I am.

~ I am not always smart but I know if I try I can fool some.

~ I am the cum dump for the army who killed my parents 

~ I am a girl whose name begins with B and I think the teacher is hot.

 ~ I am the girl who aborted her baby on Christmas Day and then bled at the table and smiled. 

~  I'm the one who is never good enough.

~  I'm the one they laugh at. 

~  I'm always the one they forget.

~  I'm the one with bad teeth that has never kissed a girl.

~  I'm the one I doubt they will miss.

~  I am my mother.

~ I  am the scared wimp who threw up before class because he's a wuss.

~  I am someone who has killed a faggot and got a boner.

~   am someone who thinks this is a fucking waste of time. 

I know, there are a few that are more than troubling. Though I am guessing "hard on by murder boy" is perhaps pulling our legs. At any rate, it gives them a very relevant experience in non grounding. To have an identity that you see, and others may be able to see, depending on how careful you are, but you have no control over it, and you know you will suffer greatly over it. After this, we will just begin to enter into a discussion on oppression.

My friend Bruce has a term he uses when referencing my way of thinking on issues of a more philosophical bent. He sees it as "wrapping myself around an existential lamp post several times, while usually coming out the other end relatively unscathed." Though he wasn't at brunch this past Sunday, I doubt he would view the discussion that evolved as anything different.

After stuffing ourselves at brunch, we were lounged around in the living room when I mentioned the undergrad course I'll be teaching in January. A second year literature class titled Establishing Identity: Popular Fictional Accounts. Basically an introductory "ism" course that address experience with race, gender, class and sexuality, and how those themes have been portrayed over time in fictional narrative.

In a related point, my friend Dan mentioned the idea that some people identify as gay, some as queer, and some even use that trite clinical phrase, "men who sleep with men and don't self identify as gay". An aside: That last definition, my mother is fond of telling me, is one that "in my day we called it married". I'm sure that's still the case in more than a few examples, but it most certainly doesn't account for all.

A great discussion ensued and several interesting points were raised. The central theme being what exactly does it mean when we call ourselves, gay, queer, straight, bi, etc? To ourselves, and to others. A few of my thoughts on this follow below.

Viewing sexuality through a personally specific definition, has the potential of being annoyingly complicated. So I'll address what I see as the two distinct ways that identity can apply to both a personal and cultural definition of homosexuality. In my own case, I see sexual orientation as applying to a dominantly exclusive homosexual categorization.

I have had experiences in my past that were realized as exclusively heterosexual, and in so far as my ideas of what constitutes "good" or "bad" sex, the experiences are ones I consider to have been "good sex". But I don't view my orientation in any way related to either a bisexual or heterosexual understanding. So by those parameters, I would say I am very comfortable with the identification of gay, as I don't view it being contradictory to what I define above. Though I think it's worth stating that in 2007, "gay" can mean many divergent things, depending on exactly who is defining the central criteria.

In a general definition of orientation, "gay" can imply:

1. a generic way of simply referring to a homosexual man,
2. can refer to a more culturally specific understanding of a politically driven, and issue focused identity.

I'm not suggesting the later is one I personally embrace, but I am okay with the idea that invalidated assumptions are something people may hold, and that does not in and of itself alter my personal understanding of gay. even if it is open to misinterpretation.

The other idea that was discussed was if there is now a political or social context to sexual identity, how does that influence our ease and use of the term? When we break it down, is it just a personally specific sexual definition for what gender we relate to both emotionally and sexually, or perhaps more of a culturally constructed attribute that says specific things about ones personal politics? Example "queer".

I think some people have what they view as a sincere and important desire to see orientation reference not only sexually specific preferences, but be something that demonstrates both communal and specifically delineated political beliefs that one holds, in large part, from their specific experiences as a gay person. Even if the experience isn't one that knows significant oppression, an awareness of being a minority will always color perception.

Do I think it's required to mesh sexual and political identities? Absolutely not. I have never been of the mindset that sees political belief and personal philosophical vantage points in an essential framework. Viewing anything that is experientially based as an essential attribute is dangerous and limiting, I think. Even though there are compelling reasons to show that political ideologies have specific carry over potential to ones sexual orientation, based largely on experience.

In my case, more often than not, the typically liberal and progressive political perspectives are ones that I personally share, though I can think of a few examples where I fundamentally disagree with how the majority of the community sees certain issues. In the end I would rather those differences as based on my own values as a human being, and not by mandatory participation in a borg like belief system.

What are your thoughts on the role your own sexual identity has in determining your politics?

While I certainly have enjoyed the comment thread on the last post, I find it interesting that the actual idea we had begun to discuss in the first place, an open attitude about others differences, and making teenagers a little less alone in the world through acceptance and friendship, was very quickly and obviously derailed. Not by a number of comments, but by one, made by an individual who time after time tends to do exactly that; disrupt and derail discussion.

Interesting even further, that the first time this individual made an appearance at my site, almost a year ago, she was the catalyst for this entry that originally appeared March 30 / 2007. I repost it now with the original comments intact. 

*** 

Occasionally, the inspiration for a blog entry tends to sneak up on one at the oddest of times and the most unlikely events. In the case of this specific entry, my inspiration arrived in the form of a rather nasty thread