Awright: Lemme state the reason and assumptions of the question(s) before I ask 'em.
Note: since the second half of the question is about me and my reactions, I figured that this wouldn’t be really appropriate for Esprix’s “Ask the Gay Guy” thread (Volume 4!! of this summer’s blockbuster hit now available in a Great Debates thread near YOU!)
Anyway a pal of mine, gay, invited me over for dinner last night to meet his new “friend” (his term: “friend”). Said “friend” is a nice enough guy, we actually had quite a bit in common…but he either overdoing a gag/routine or he really normally behaved like the classic gay stereotype: Slight lisp, literally a limp wrist, doing the “Oh MARY!” thing: but not doing it as camp (unless there was some subtle joke in doing it all night and I didn’t get it…entirely possible), etc. In other words, outside of someone having a camp moment, I’ve never been around someone who’s done this on a permanant basis. He did it all evening.
Assumption 1: I refuse to accept that there’s any genetic component to linking Gayness to weak wrist muscles, or speech impediments. I’ve met enough gay guys that I know this ‘behavior’ isn’t universal for gay men. (My pal more often goes for bears/macho leather types as a rule.)
Question 1: Where did the stereotype come from? How did lisping and limp wristed-ness get associated with gays? Was it a method for gays in more closeted times to recognize each other? Was it a affectation that women employed when the stereotype was first applied and the idea is that gay = effeminate? WHEN did the stereotype start? (I know it dates back to at least the late '60s, but I’ll bet it goes back further)
Assumption 2: It was my friend’s apartment, he and his “friends” can behave any way they want. I’m usually cool with that. I’m NOT criticizing the “friend”'s behavior and I certainly don’t expect him to change, however…
Question 2: …why did the lispy-limp-wristed thing make me so uncomfortable? It’s not that it made me aware of his sexuality, I’ve been around some of the more…extreme(?) members of the leather community via my pal and other than the wincing thought (“But doesn’t that outfit chafe!?”) it didn’t bother me or make me uncomfortable. The limp-wristy, flouncy thing did. It’s up to me to get over my discomfort, but it’s bugging me that I was uncomfortable and I don’t know why I was so uncomfortable.
Ok, Fen, since 'Spree is away on his Very Important Thread-Managing Duties, I’ll take a crack at least some of your questions…
**
Hoo boy, you’ve managed to squish several dissertations into one short paragraph. Congratulations!
We’ll start with an almost epistemological point: how do we know what we’re talking about? What today we define as an average “homosexual” relationship, involving two persons of the same gender and similar social status may in fact be an artifact of the industrial West. For purposes of clarity, I’ll call that kind of relationship “homophilic.” Much of what is subsumed under the heading of homosexuality isn’t homophilic at all - instead, it’s (using a less-judgmental term) ephebophilia or (using what seems to me the more accurate, if inflammatory term) pederasty. It’s what we see in classical Greece, Persia, some periods in Rome, certain Japanese traditions, perhaps some Pacific Island cultures, maybe early Renaissance Florence, and so forth, structured around the initiation by an older man of a younger (usually adolescent) boy. During the relationship the sexual roles tend to be fixed, with the boy assuming the submissive, penetrated or “female” role. When the boy becomes an adult the relationship ends, the boy usually going on to marry a women and eventually initiating other boys himself; thus homosexuality in this sort of context really is a stage, with a defined beginning and end. (My word choice is intentionally equivocal: the evidence for pederasty in cultures other than Greece and Rome is not as reliable or ample as one would like. The evidence of historic homophilic relationships is vanishingly slender.)
Effeminacy exists outside this system, emerging only in the potential for ostracism should the older man allow himself to take what’s “properly” the boy’s position (literally and figuratively). As I recall, certain Roman comedies made fun of these men, perhaps resulting in the epithet said of Caesar: every woman’s husband and every man’s wife. Arguably, these might be the earliest written expression of fears of effeminacy, but since the context is so different from what we know today it’s open to dispute.
John Boswell (author of Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality) would say that the more modern fear, rooted to some degree in Christian theology, emerged full-force in the 12th and 13th centuries. His thesis is still much debated and I’m not really qualified to evaluate it - but there’s another starting point for you.
Now, implicit in your broader question is the issue of effeminacy’s origins. Richard Green tried to address this in The ‘Sissy Boy Syndrome’ and the Development of Homosexuality, which I read quite some time ago; as I recall, he concluded that “sissy boys” where more born than made, and that although they were most likely to turn out gay, a minority (about 20%) actually don’t. A limitation is that Green studied mainly those boys who were extremely effeminate, so it’s not conclusive for people more towards the middle of the spectrum.
My personal experience is that although some guys are genuinely effeminate from birth, most of us are only a little effeminate, and many gay men assume effeminate mannerisms from time to time for effect. I suspect this friend-of-a-friend fell in the first category.
Hum. The short, feminist-political-theory answer is that in a society that’s still pretty sexist, people who cross gender lines can cause greater discomfort. For some, men who express stereotypical female characteristics are especially threatening, in that they suggest that masculinity is something of a put-on. I doubt that’s the case for you - rather, either (a) you’ve absorbed others’ discomfort or (b) it’s more a matter of degree than substance. Being around someone who’s dramatic is tiring regardless of the form the drama takes.
Fenris, could the very fact that you are very gay-friendly have anything to do with it? Maybe seeing the stereotype played out in living color with stereo sound just kind of made you uncomfortable because of the fact that it was so “nancy”?
I’ll admit (and I apologize to those folks who are naturally effeminate) that the very, very stereotypical gay men make me feel embarrassed in front of straight folks, but not in a majority-gay setting like a bar or club. And I do realize (for those folks that do act effeminate) that it’s not a positive or constructive feeling, and I try to work through it.
But it is the wholesale adoption of the stereotype in front of straight people that makes me uncomfortable, not the behavior itself.
Effeminacy among gay and bisexual men goes at least as far back as Ancient Greece, particularly Athens. Alcibiades, lover of Socrates, notorious womanizer, and fairly accomplished general, was so influential in his community that others affected his lisp in their own speech. Agathon, apparently a very effeminate man, was singled out on several occasions by the best commedian of the age, Aristophanes, as a “flamer.”
So whatever the reasons, such behavior transcends language, culture, and history.
I worked with a fellow who might have been the live model for South Park’s Mr. Garrison, 'scept this guy was totally out. I, too, was a little uncomfortable with this for awhile, until I got over whatever issues I had. I now know him as a bright, funny, very gentle person for whom I have a lot of respect. I scarcely notice it any longer, but the next time I take a girlfriend out to meet him, I’m going to write, “Mr. Garrison” on a piece of paper, put it in an envelope, and shove it in her pocket until afterward. Ought to be good for a chuckle at noone’s expense.
I heard a theory that this was started by “Gay-haters” decades ago, in an attempt to “isolate” something that they perceived as wrong away from the general populace.
Basically, by saying that “gay = effeminate” (and the other way around), it became easy to “target” something that was considered abnormal… homosexuality.
Nowadays, it’s more like a way for Hollywood to score a cheap laugh every now and then.