UPDATE (2017): Why I no longer write about Queer topics, and why am I now using the word “Queer?” That’s because there’s no hierarchy or politics involved in the word “Queer” as opposed to the hierarchy of that “LGBT” nonsense that’s saturated all over the internet. Also, Queers (and the word Queer) make breeders nervous and we enjoy every minute of it. (smile)
Hola a todos. Some readers who read my article below (“Gay “Assimilation:” Back to the 1950s”) and my subsequent Queer articles after that have asked me via e-mail: Why are you no longer writing about Queer topics? Well, that’s because I don’t see any reason to. Why should I bother? I’ve written about Queer topics for years and it didn’t do any good. Nothing changed for the positive. There’s nothing else to say about it. Only a few people seem to care in the big scheme of things. As with some other topics I used to write about, I seem to be “fighting an uphill battle” or “a lost cause.” Several examples that come to mind explaining this and some of which overlap: I’ve become disgusted with what the Queer community has become and turned into. Today, they are mostly pro-corporatists, pro-Establishment, DISCREET (translation: closeted, as in the 1950s and before), mainstream, DISCREET, non-alternative, DISCREET, non-proudly radical, DISCREET shallow sheeple trying to emulate the mainstream breeders. They are the DISCREET opposite of who and what they were during the decades of the Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement.
1. Monitoring television programming, one would think that the entire world consists of breeders. One gets the impression there’s not one openly Queer person in el mundo/the world, other than that heteronormative, corporatist, pro-Establishment, Obamabot Ellen daily promoting silly, dumbed-down and “stupid-is-in” and making millions doing so. She didn’t care how many immigrants the Deporter-in-Chief had deported or how many breeders and Queers Mr Nobel Peace Prize had droned or killed in other parts of the world in his 8 wars as she gushed over him at every opportunity? Or is she oblivious to all that? And I know Anderson Cooper is an openly-Queer boy, but I’m making a point here. Even most of the (closeted) Queer people before network cameras pretend to be breeders. They refuse to come out of the closet and announce that they’re Queer. Despite some advances that have been made for Queers over the decades, those advances are not reflected in 99.9% of corporate network television programming. All the programming on the español language networks I monitor is breeder-based. I am so tired of seeing him fawning over her, him making out with her, him holding needy-her’s hand, him holding her chin, him playing with her hair, her running over to him for more attention with one foot up in the back (she’s perched on one foot) desperate for attention, and him doing other things with her, when it’s more than obvious to me and my reliable Queerdar that “him” is really a closeted Queer boy. Such as the breeder-based dating programme that started on TV Azteca recently in the afternoons. According to my Queerdar, I’ve seen one closet case Queer boy after the other on there wanting to date a female. (roll eyes). Is this stuff for real or is staged just to create a programme? Do they ever have real dates? I don’t know. Mi amigo/My Queer friend says the same about the closet cases on television. In all of the Latino/Hispano/mexicano community, I only know of TWO Queer boys that are out of the closet. Just TWO. That’s it. Those two are Ricky Martín (Enrique Martín Morales) and Christian Chávez (José Christian Chávez Garza). All the others are closet cases despite the public being fed the wishful-thinking lie that “gay is now mainstream.” Yeah sure it is. That’s why I constantly read anti-Queer comments on political message forums and YouTube videos and everywhere else. “Gay is so mainstream” that’s why Queers are saturated all over my television. NOT!
I don’t watch the English-language networks but I would guess that they’re no different. I suspect 99% of the programming on those networks is breeder-based too. In the last few months I’ve read about one or two of those corporate networks planning to do a “gay programme” or bring back one they did in the past. Then some shallow, corporatist Queer organisation jumped up and down in celebration about this. Get. A. Grip. As some of us see it, it’s nothing but a “flash in the pan” in the big scheme of things and nothing to get excited about. Too often with these “gay programmes,” or when they feature a person who is supposedly Queer, they merely show stereotypical Queer guys and lesbians to continue outdated stereotypes. I’ll get exited when corporate networks changed their programming to where a large segment of their programming is Queer-based. I’m not holding my breathe for that to happen. But these little “token” gay programmes are meaningless in the big scheme of things as far as some of us are concerned.
2. 99.9% of the public — including Queers — use that cookie-cutter “LGBT” acronym nonsense because that’s what they see all over the internet. Even the anti-Queer far-right use “LGBT.” Some of us can’t stand the “LGBT” nonsense for several reasons:
1) to begin with, it leaves out Queers entirely…whatever nutball dreamed it up was prejudice against Queers.
2) “LGBT” is the hijacking of the original Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement by lesbians when they were not the dominant group of the moment so why are they getting “top-billing?” and
3) some people are asking: “What’s wrong with you gay guys, why are you giving “top billing” to lesbians? Why are you allowing that when you did most of the work during the Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement? Agreed. Yes, I fail to understand why lesbians get top billing. That makes no sense to me. I’ve read that the “L” was put first by one of those corporatist gay media organisations because lesbians were feeling neglected. (roll eyes) Oh the poor things. Well if their ass had done more during the Gay and Lesbian Movement they wouldn’t feel neglected. They deserve what they get, which is second billing as in GLBTQ, if one must use any acronym. That’s the way it should be written: GLBTQ. But personally, I’m starting to use the word Queer instead of any letters since this topic and acronyms feel like a lost cause.
3. The gay community to me and other Queers now seems dead and closeted. As I write in the article below, they’ve gone from proudly-radical and “out and proud” to proudly discreet which means either you’re closeted and/or cheating on somebody (or both). Looking at personal sex ads (on the site I call ClosetList), most gay guys today are calling themselves “bi” when they’re really gay. They think that “bi” makes them sound more like a breeder, more masculine, manly and macho even though they have no interest at all in pussy or in females but in today’s world lying and deception are in especially in personal sex ads where hardly anything is real about those. Calling oneself “bi” when one is really gay is a form of internalised homophobia because one is ashamed of the word “gay.” Didn’t most Queers work through this years ago during the decades of the Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement? Apparently not! And some of us see a major rise in internalised homophobia in the Queer commmunity today. It’s really pathetic what the Queer community has turned into. Mi amigo/My friend said the other day: “I get the impression that most Queer people are back in the closet.” That’s the impression I get too in the former Gay Mecca of San Francisco.
4. Just like with the breeders, from what we’re seeing most Queers today are wearing all-black or black and gray. What happened to the pretty Rainbow Flag colours, Queer boys? Today, it seems that most Queers consider the Rainbow Flag “too gay.” Yet another example of what I mean by going back in the closet with internalised homophobia. It’s as if Queers consider wearing colour an indicator that they’re Queer rather than a breeder and we can’t have that! No, the breeders are wearing all-black and/or black and gray and looking like white nationalists so the conformist Queers think they must do the same in order to “fit in” and “assimilate” with the breeders. Translation: Going back in the closet. Ugh.
5. In this new tech-zombie San Francisco, mi amigo (a Queer boy) has told me repeatedly about how he has made the mistake of fleetingly glancing at another guy on the sidewalk (no one cruises anyone anymore) — who apparently turns out to be a breeder — and the guy gives mi amigo a very disapproving, snarling angry look as if he’s about to say, “don’t you look at me you faggot.” Sigh. This anti-Queer behaviour did not happen in the San Francisco of the Gay Mecca. This has happened in the new Breeder Mecca and here which has taken over and replaced the former Gay Mecca. I should point out that people who are secure with themselves and their sexuality would not respond the way these breeder basura respond just because another guy happened to fleetingly look at them. Los pendejos.
So in conclusion, to me this all seems like an uphill battle and I’m tired of it and tired of wasting my time writing about it. All I see are breeder people (making out), or Queers (both guys and females) trying to pretend to be breeders and heteronormative so that no one will possibly think that they are Queer because we know how awful that is, right? (More internalised homophobia.) In San Francisco’s Castro, the former gay mecca, I now do a double-take when I see two guys kissing or making out because it is now so rare to see that. I even stop to watch briefly and appreciate them because it’s such a rare sight to see now here in The Breeder Mecca full of fleets of baby strollers. (Have these breeders never heard of birth control of any kind?) These days I expect to see breeders kissing or making out or nearly uncontrollably having sex on the sidewalk (as if they just met) in The Castro. The Castro has been ruined. The Castro today is nothing like it was when I moved here during the height of the Gay Mecca days. Get this: Can you believe that a group of Queers a year or so ago started a project to Queer The Castro? It hasn’t worked, but that’s how bad it’s gotten here with prudish and in some cases anti-Queer breeders taking over The Castro. It used to be that Queer boys and Queer couples walked by my window talking. Now it’s breeders with loud and/or screaming children walking by my window talking. And it seems to be a requirement with breeders that he has to be 3-4 feet taller than her — from my research that’s her requirement — and she has to be submissive to him as if she’s living in the Victorian era where females are supposed to be submissive and subservient to guys (in order to get his attention that needy and high-maintenance her constantly demands from him).
Upon reflection, it seems that Queers will have to have their rights eroded or removed completely to get them out of the closet again and off their electronic leashes and to return to the vigilance and activism of the decades of the former Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement. But from what I see of the apathetic and closeted Queer community today, I’m not holding my breathe that any of that is about to happen anytime soon. Because the attitude of most Queers today seems to be, “I’m like whatever” and “Where’s my phone?” Chau.—el barrio rosa
Here’s the original article, “Gay “Assimilation:” Back to the 1950s:”
Hola a todos. Some of us aren’t joking when we talk about people going back to the 1950s. Following the US Supreme Court’s ruling legalising same-gender/gay marriage here in The Cesspool/the US/Los Estados Unidos, the national gay and lesbian organisations who serve as self-appointed omnipotent authorities on all matters GLBTQ urged us to “assimilate.” Translation: Adopt to the ways of the heterosexual/heteronormative culture to fully blend in with them.
Why would we want to do that?!
After thinking about their call for “assimilation,” some of us strongly disagreed with it because “assimilation” is what GLBTQs were doing back in the 1950s and before the now-dead Gay Rights’ Movement began. And again, who would want to do that? Apparently a lot of people.
In the 1950s, gay people were thought of and referred to as “abnormal.” For sometime now many gay guys have been writing in their personal sex ads: “Please be normal” or “I’m normal.” That implies that the guy who wrote the ad is of the 1950s mindset and believes that some gay guys are “abnormal,” otherwise he wouldn’t be looking for a “normal” guy. I first noticed this “normal” nonsense awhile back but since then more and more guys are using it in their ads. The people who use this “be normal” language never say what they mean by it. Is it code for conservative? I suspect it means not the least bit “alternative,” would be my guess. Whatever the fuck “normal” means, who wants to be “normal?” “Normal” is Boring.
In the 1950s, gay people cruised each other discreetly and covertly out of the corner of their eyes so as to not be caught cruising a person of the same gender and being detected as being Queer. Here in 2016, literally thousands and thousands of gay guys — nearly every personal sex ad I see — all over the US are referring to themselves as “discreet” and/or they’re looking for “discreet” and “completely discreet,” and/or “DL” (Down Low = Closet Case). Others write, “This is just between you and me; nobody else will know; it’s our secret.” WTF? I’d like to say this to these guys who write this shit: You’re in Los Ángeles, Manhattan/NYC and San Francisco so who the fuck cares what you do sexually or with whom? Or are you cheating on your partner and don’t want your partner to know? You write as if you’re in some small hick town with prudish prying eyes yet you’re in a major city where no one gives a fuck what you do. Important note to GLBTQs: “Discreet” is the opposite of Pride, as in Gay Pride, you know that we marched for and celebrated over decades? Or have you deliberately erased all of that from your memory too in favour of being conformists? (Related: The “Discreet” Gay Guys in New York City and The “Discreet” Gay Guys).
What the fuck has happened to the gay community?
The Castro of the Gay Mecca Days had lots of cruising, gay guys hanging out and talking with each other and there was a sense of community, although cliquish at times. We even had a spot called Hibernia Beach. Today, I see no cruising and very few conversations between people — most are on their phones — in The Castro. There’s no sense of community. It’s a very different place today. And frankly it’s impossible to have “mutual cruising” (two people showing some interest in each other) when most people can’t take their eyes off their fucking
smartphone stupidphone screen long enough to see who’s around them. Look up!!! The “hot” guy you’re desperately searching for on those sex apps just walked by you but you didn’t see him because your face in buried in that screen. “Never take your eyes off that screen, San Francisco!” Ugh.
The 1950s were very conservative. Today in 2016, the gay community is very conservative and pro-Establishment, the opposite of who they were during the proudly-radical and alternative Gay Rights’ Movement days. I forget where I read it but I read recently that, “Gay guys love Hillary Clinton.” Pathetic. One would hope that gay guys would have higher standards than that imperialistic piece of work — although upon reflection they fell for their “messiah” Obama too — and what is there to love about that lying sack Hillary? Or is it that partisan “D” next to her name? I remember when a trans activist interrupted your “messiah” Obama en la casa blanca/the white house and the room full of gay guys (mostly) cheered their Obama and refused to give any support to the trans activist. Their pro-Establishment/Obamabot behaviour was fucking disgusting. What happened to your keen bull shit detectors that you had for decades, gay community? Or have you retired that too in order to be Establishment conformists so as to “assimilate?” I’ve seen some personal sex ads where a gay guy proudly wrote, “I’m not the least bit alternative.” The gay community has abandoned “proudly radical and alternative” and become very conformist just like the 1950s were very conformist.
In the 1950s, sex and nudity were viewed through conservative, prudish eyes. It’s the same today. A few years back the gay community in San Francisco led the campaign for a city-wide nudity ban authored by a gay prudish conservative, heteronormative, pro-Establishment piece of basura charading as a “Democrat.” During that nasty and heated campaign, some gay guys — who had been the subject of anti-gay bullying in their past — were seen and heard making fun of and bullying the 2-3 harmless naked guys who bothered nobody and who hung out around The Castro (mainly in the Jane Warner Plaza. These anti-nudist gay bullies seemed to forget or never knew that The Castro had a long history of nudity. Sadly, nudity is a thing of the past in today’s completely sanitised and conservative Castro barrio which has been made “Family-Friendly” complete with regularly scheduled musical sing-alongs for the breeding “straight” basura and their children at the local theatre. It’s like being in Walnut Creek, California. Today, some gay prudes whine about the gay sex videos shown in some gay bars on the rare occasion in that they’re “too explicit.” Los chicos: No one is forcing you to watch the sex video. You’re free to pivot your head in another direction and look elsewhere or leave the bar, you prudish assholes. Why don’t los pendejos go back to the conservative, prudish hick town hell hole they fled from when they came here rather than continuing to turn San Francisco into that? (Related: Sexual Freedom and Revolution). Also, for years the erotica/sex stores in The Castro have been required to cover up body part images (with white stickers) on the front of their sex video covers in their store front window for being “too explicit” — think 1950s or before — after complaints to the cops from prudish-asshole (gay) residents of The Castro. You might think I’m making this up but I’m not. You can contact the stores and they’re confirm it. The Castro of the Gay Mecca days didn’t cover up anything, fortunately.
What the fuck has happened to the gay community?
Does anybody remember what became known as “politically-correct language” which seems to have become abandoned and despised by most people today due to the right-wing’s whining about it. It’s always good to cater to the right-wing, don’t you think? [sarcasm intended]. In the 1950s, “politically-correct language” was unheard of. In 2016, many, if not most, GLBTQs in catering to the right-wing — who nearly always get their way — have completely abandoned the politically-correct language that they used for years. Today they don’t seem to care who they offend by what they say especially as to their personal preferences (for example: “no fats or fems” seen in gay personal sex ads). Los chicos: there are better ways of saying that without sounding like an asshole. For example:
Instead of saying “no fats,” you could say “I prefer a w/h proportion (weight and height proportion) guy.”
Instead of saying “no fems,” you could say “I prefer a masculine guy.”
That shouldn’t offend anyone. It’s a little bit more typing for you but what’s a little bit more typing when you likely spend hours bent over typing on your
smartphone stupidphone and you think nothing of that.
In the 1950s, many gay guys were marrying females to hide their gay sexuality and to follow The Family’s ScriptTM for them as well as heteronormative societal pressure from friends and family. Many gay guys have been married to females for decades and today some gay guys are still marrying females to hide their gay identity and to follow The Family’s ScriptTM. This is despite our repeatedly being told that “Gay Is Now Mainstream”. One wouldn’t think that gay guys would still be marrying females to use as “cover” if they really believed this “gay is now mainstream” nonsense. (Related: Closeted Gay Guys Moving Into San Francisco’s Castro). I was watching a music video the other day with mi amigo and he said about the musician in the video, “that guy is a Queer boy.” I thought so too. Then I did a little bit of research on him and found out that he has a wife. A wife? And I saw a picture of them together. I told mi amigo. He said, “ah, another Queer boy married to a female to hide his real sexual identity. I guess that problem will never end.” Not when society is rushing back to the Dark Ages it won’t.
The gay community used to be proudly radical/alternative-looking in outward appearance (earrings, hair styles and clothing). Today, it’s closer to the 1950s with conformity than the Gay Mecca years of radical and alternative. Unfortunately, that’s all mostly been sanitised for conformity so as to fit in with, blend in with and “assimilate” with the bland and boring cookie-cutter “straights” (dominant tall-him and submissive short-her). I remember when — what seemed like — everyone in The Castro was wearing bling earrings. Bling was all over the place — it looked good — and it wasn’t that long ago. That was a short-lived fad. Although I’m pleased to see many Latinos/Hispanos with bling earrings/earplugs on the television channels I monitor. But today, it’s rare for me to see a guy from earrings of any kind in The Castro. It’s so rare that I do a double-take when I see it or anything that reminds me of the proudly-radical and alternative San Francisco. Remember the coloured handkerchiefs that gay guys wore as code? They’re gone.
Since around the time of this call/proclamation for “assimilation” from the national gay and lesbian organisations, the (insecure) gay community has done their utmost to eat “straight” ass and sanitise themselves for the “straights” so as to “assimilate” with them to get their acceptance and approval. Ugh. Personally speaking, except in an employment situation where it may be required, I don’t change my appearance to be accepted by anybody. Either accept me as I am or fuck off. That’s the way I feel about it. I’m not about to change my appearance or who I am as a person to be accepted by or approved by any “straight” basura. I don’t care what they think. I don’t need their approval for anything I do.
Again, what has happened to the (insecure) gay community?
It’s as if they’ve gone completely loco. I don’t have the patience for this “assimilation” bull shit or this desire to go back to the 1950s or before (Dark Ages).
In talking with some locals about this call for “assimilation,” some have asked: How many gays and lesbians have gone back into the closet because of the hetero-invasion of San Francisco (Castro and Upper Market specifically) where one feels like a minority again in one’s own former-gay-mecca neighbourhood for the first time in decades? That’s because the majority population around one is mostly “straight,” or it feels that way much of the time these days depending upon where one is. It’s a climate where gay boys and others don’t feel comfortable being out of the closet in their own neighbourhood just like in the 1950s. And anti-GLBTQ remarks and anti-GLBTQ looks are on the rise in San Francisco’s Castro. It’s history repeating itself and yet many GLBTQs think that “all has been accomplished.” Idiots.
So why didn’t the corporatist basura that run these GLBTQ national organisations not foresee this outcome? Possibly because they’ve been too busy eating corporate ass for years (that of major league national corporate sports teams and serving as shills for the corporate and thoroughly corrupt undemocratic Democratic Party and their imperialistic neocon “messiah” Obama, whose policies overall have been to the right of illegitimate George W Bush).
The above are some examples of how the gay community has “assimilated” back to the 1950s. If you think of other examples, you can list them in the comments until they close. Gracias.
From what I can tell, the gay community’s decades-long activism has been replaced by two things: their
smartphone stupidphone addiction — that seems to be all that matters to them anymore — and by being obnoxious corporate sports “jocks” as they do their best to emulate the macho (drunk) “straight” guys. I guess the gay community thinks that being tech zombies makes them look “cool, hip and smart-looking.” It’s all about image. But why would they want to be seen as “smart” when stupid is in? And owning items that begin with the word “smart” doesn’t make stupid people smart. But in all other ways that I can think of, the gay community have become very regressive (despite their tech addiction) in going back to another era, and that era led to the need for the now-dead Gay Rights’ Movement.
Looking back in time, this “assimilation” nonsense is not at all new for Queers and it’s certainly not positive. It’s what Queers/GLBTQs have been doing for generations. Some of us just find it very short-sighted, sad and disgusting that these wealthy corporate GLBTQ organisations with their exorbitant executive salaries and the corporatist idiots that run them want us essentially returning to the closet and eating “straight” ass. That’s what it amounts to. They want us “assimilating” — well fuck that mierda! — and welcoming breeder “straights” with their screaming babies and gigantic baby strollers to our neighbourhoods to change them so that “straights” are comfortable here, even though “straights” have the entire world to be “comfortable” in. The “straights” don’t go out of their way to change their areas to accommodate us or make us feel “comfortable” where they are the dominant group. Not at all. And if “straights” are not “comfortable” in a gay area as it is, their ass is free to leave anytime they want. Many of us question why the fuck they’re here to begin with? Are they really closet cases? Is that why some “straights” go to gay bars? WTF? They’ve come to gay areas with a very specific conservative agenda — to take it over — and to change the gay area to the way they want it with the help of conservative GLBTQs: the assholes, who prefer to live among wealthy/white young “straight” couples rather than live among non-wealthy and poor Queers/couples. I never knew that the “straights” and what they want had/have priority over GLBTQs in our gay areas. That’s what it amounts to. That was quite a revelation to me when I realised that’s what was going on many years ago when the sanitising of San Francisco’s Castro began.
In my opinion and in the opinion of the people I’ve talked with, after giving it much thought we all agree that this proclamation for “assimilation” has completely backfired. Chau.—el barrio rosa