I am not sure what Cecil Adams mean by “A plausible explanation for what many refuse to admit is a real phenomenon. But for now it’s the best I can do.” on this article. So, is Mr. Adams trying to say that this stereotype, which may be considered by some to be homophobic because it sets a difference between gays and non-gays, can actually have some real backup? Hmmm… interesting.
Can anybody lead me into the right direction where I can find support for this claim? I wonder where Cecil Adams is getting this. By my judgment, is Adams trying to say that some stereotypes may be true? I don’t know, but it sort of feels like it.
Now, I am not saying that Adams is homophobic (of course not! How can a person who knows everything be so?); I’m merely interested in how he knows about this.
The last sentence also feels like he can’t predict the future. Does that mean he is losing his omniscience? :dubious:
Homophobia is dislike of homosexuality. Thinking there is a difference between a thing and other things does not mean one dislikes that thing. At most, Cecil is saying there is a linguistic habit that is more prevalent amongst gay men than non-gay men. That is hardly homophobic. For all you know, Cecil likes guys who lisp. Cecil certainly doesn’t say anything negative about either lisping or homosexuality. Taken to its logical extreme your reasoning, such as it is, would mean it was homophobic to say that homosexuality existed, since doing so “sets up a difference between gays and non-gays”.
Further, he’s not even suggesting that the increased tendency to lisp amongst gay guys (if there is such) is anything innate. He’s merely suggesting that a particular (gay) sub-culture may have adopted a sub-cultural linguistic habit which has made that habit more prevalent amongst gay guys. Not exactly a ground breaking or insulting revelation.
According to wikipedia, two studies were conducted that found evidence for a gay lisp. Dan Savage acknowledged it when taking on Marcus Bachmann too (and another study is discussed in that article). I can’t find the studies on google and usually can’t find any journals through my university’s search function, so I can’t tell you anything about the cohort or the theoretical support (that is, whether it has the same basis in in the biological mechanisms that contribute to homosexuality or whether it is a social construct designed to illustrate effeminacy). Dan Savage did answer a question in a youtube clip I can’t find any more about how, more often than not, people that have a higher register after coming out aren’t effecting the new voice, they were adopting the low register in order to “pass”… I guess the anecdote doesn’t count for much though.
I’m straight, but in the course of my life I’ve been deeply involved in opera and operetta, classic theatre, and Oz (as in Dorothy) fandom, so I’ve known hundreds of “out” gays. Some of the stereotypes are often (but not always) to be seen. On the other hand, I’ve known some straight guys who adhere to some stereotypically “gay” behaviors, though it’s unusual. I think the most reliable sign used to be the forearms-horizontal-hands-flopping-down stance, but I only recall seeing that in men born in the 1910s–1920s or so.
I do feel obliged to point out, though, that lisping used to be stereotypical Jewish behavior, at least in England.
“Fashions / There are in love as in all else; they change / As variously.”
— William Dunlap, André: a Tragedy in Five Acts (1798)
Repeating this is not helpful. Some stereotypes emerge as an attempt to discredit certain parties and have no basis in fact. Others are based on a misunderstanding of statistics. Most are the results of framing.
For example, Dan Savage (mentioned above) said that the gay stereotype during the '70s and '80s was that they lived a hedonistic life dedicated entirely to pleasure and had no concern for higher pursuits. When Churches like the affirming baptists became receptive to homosexuals and they sought to adopt and marry, the stereotype suddenly flipped: they should be content to have all sorts of kinky, promiscuous sex, but instead they want to settle down and destroy the sanctity of marriage.
Some stereotypes are built on fabrications, like the myth of well poisoning or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Others are based on misreporting of studies that may no longer be applicable to the population anyway.
Having looked over the other threads on this topic as well, I’m left with a question that I hope will not offend: do gay couples tend to pair up as masculine/feminine opposites? (The connection to the topic at hand: As many have noted, many gay men do not have the outward signs society identifies with gayness – lissssps, “effeminate” behavior. Some here say such things are adoped to fit into the gay culture in general – but that doesn’t explain those who don’t match the stereotype. Could it be that those traits – adopted or natural – are not a sign of being gay per se, but of being one of two archetypes – or, at the least, of locating oneself on one particular end of a spectrum?)
I mean, I know several lesbian couples who are matches of a dress-wearing, lipstick-using, flowing-haired feminine archetype with a short-haired, slacks-and-shirt type. Sometimes it’s very pronounced – the second partner is thick-bodied, deeper-voiced, etc.; other times it’s less so; think Anne Heche & Ellen DeGeneres.
On the male side, my sample size is even smaller, and much less clear. But there are gay men I would classify as Neil Patrick Harris types – suave but not swishy – who pair up with partners whose sexual orientation is much less ambiguous to onlookers, though not necessarily of Charles Nelson Reilly proportions.
Am I just paying more attention to couples that fit a preconceived notion – maybe because, as a straight, I expect to be able to sort out ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ roles?
I’m sure this isn’t 100% true of all gay couples, but – is it indeed common to find this yin-yang (no pun intended) pairing, or just as coincidental as, say, an exceptionally tall man marrying an exceptionally short woman?
Bringing it back to the topic at hand, do lisssspers tend to pair up with other lisssspers, or quite the opposite?
I think it’s confirmation bias. I’ve seen lesbian couples that both are butch. I’ve seen lesbian couples that both are lipstick.
I’m not as familiar with gay male couples. I assume the span the gamut as well. People like what they like, even if those desires don’t fit into heterosexual molds. I can imagine two “bears” together. Not that I want to.
