Reply to 3 posts

POST 1

Within Chapter 5 of  "Coming Together: Contested Identities and the Emergence of Communities" I want to focus on the cartoon displayed on page 114 “swish”. This photo stood out to me because I have been a long time fan of cartoons and think they have a more powerful effect on people than generally assumed. This cartoon to me represents the external judgment of someone’s sexuality by dress and demeanor. We see a woman deeply shocked as she watches a man, possibly a “fairy” walk into the woman’s bathroom. This particular scene stands out to me as important because we are seeing the perception of gender inversion within the scene depicted. Because this is an effeminate man he must have gender inversion making it so he has a female soul and uses the woman’s bathroom. This stands out to me a lot in today’s day in age because the bathroom is still a highly debated topic surrounding gender identity and freedom of with gendered bathroom a person wishes to use. It is interesting to see that back in this time the bathroom was also being displayed as a deeply shocking space that one may encounter “gender deviance. This cartoon makes many outward assumptions, that this man is “queer” or a:” fairy” second that his gender is inverted, and that because of this he prefers the women’s restroom. This to me is a really good representation of the misunderstanding of people outside of their “normative culture”, and the shock, discomfort that people felt and spread around society. 

POST 2

“Many queers also viewed their love of other men as part of a masculine and noble tradition, or as an expression of egalitarian modernity, rather than a sign of innate femininity.” (Clement, 58)

One of the most notable concepts that I encountered over this reading was the concept of masculinity being challenged. Starting in post revolutionary times, and right up until this era, the stereotypical man was considered to be very masculine. They were tough, rugged, lacking in emotion or any flamboyancy, and stoic. As it had been, this was the designated gender role for men in the US. However, this role, and therefore mens masculinity, were challenged with the development of 'faeries'. These faeries were stark opposites to what was considered to be true masculinity; they were flamboyant, colorful and, most importantly, gay. The creation of this new type of 'gender' created a situation where mens masculinity was challenged. Due to this, these flamboyant men had to be careful about being out about their sexual orientation. Many times they needed to use code words and have designated meeting spots.

"Working-class neighbors clearly recognized fairies as a third gender category and tolerated them in their midst, but that is not to say that they accepted them. Being a fairy involved giving up masculine privilege, something unthinkable to the majority of working-class people. The identity of fairy could allow one to express queer gender or desire, but also positioned the person as effeminate and thus subordinate in working-class society. This left fairies subject to harassment, rape and other violence ordinarily directed at women.” (Clement, 55).

While it can be argued that these faeries threatened masculinity as we know it, it can also be said that these men had to give up their masculinity in favor of femininity. In this way they were actually preserving our notions of masculinity, opting instead to live a more effeminate life. Through this act of giving up their masculinity to preserve it for society, these fairies were treated with much disdain, often times being abused by the community around them. I think it can be stated that these men must have felt a strong bond to their identity of fairy, as to take such a designation meant to give up your given identity as well as being abused.

POST 3

Something I found particularly interesting over these readings was just the idea about how this all started. This is expressed in the Clement reading:

“As the individual began to replace the family as the main economic unit of society, wage labor freed some white men from economic dependence on marriage and children. Men could earn wages to support themselves rather than work as part of a family unit. This allowed men attracted to other men to organize their lives around their affective and sexual desires, which some of them then began to do.” (53)

 This shows us that by releasing themselves from the constraints of heteronormativity, these people were given the opportunity to explore their sexuality in a way that had not been possible previously. While women still had some constraints as to working and supporting themselves, for the most part the industrialization of the US made it possible for someone to earn a living wage and support themselves. It was no longer necessary to marry young in an attempt to create a working family unit. Instead, people were able to support themselves, leaving them single and able to seek out companionship outside of marriage. 

Modernly, there is a lot of talk about how industrialization, consumerism, and capitalism have done a decent job at moving us away from traditional values and the family. People are away from their family more, working for a corporation. Many people feel like life is not a rat race, always having the need to move further up that corporate ladder. Children and parents both, spend all day separated from each other, doing the work for someone else. It has been often times said that this is the cause at waning family values and a traditional America. And this all could very well be true. But, we seldom think about the positive situations that have been created because of industrialization. The emergence of the gay scene, and the newfound ability for these gay individuals to express their orientations, could easily be considered as a positive outcome of industrialization.