My sweet Gravity, if we were going to think everything through to the end, and adjust everything correctly so we could all do what we had the right to so, we’d be changing a damn sight more than just who can walk into a bar.
Things go wa-ay back to who’s not allowed where: politics, private organizations, children’s clubhouses even, and while yes, it boils down to how wrong it really can be, I personally see no problem with anyone who wants to watch and spend their money in any facility they are wandering in.
I just wanted to elaborate that in this case, it might be a more kind act of seperation than some others, or, so I had always believed.
My one comment is that I do think that the montreal event should be called Queerdope, if only because the Big Central Event ™ is the pride parade, and we don’t want people suffering illusions.
I think that the idea of safe space is intrinsically difficult on a few levels, but worth persuing. I go to lesbian/bisexual women’s meetings on a weekly basis at school, and there’s a certain … well, there are things that we all understand, know about, and to a certain extent go through. It’s difficult to explain and even harder to justify, but I do feel strongly that these sorts of things have their place.
At a pride parade, though, bring all comers. It’s about the party.
I think the things some people are feeling might be described this way:
There’s nothing wrong with people wanting to do something exclusive; it happens all the time. I throw a party, I only invite certain people. I apply to a school, I don’t get in. I can’t imagine how we would manage if everybody had to include everybody all the time.
What is painful, though, is when someone who I consider a friend says I’m not welcome because of my sexual orientation (I don’t think I ever thought as a straight guy I’d ever have a reason to say that). When someone can talk with me and spend time with me and treat me just like everyone else, and then can turn around and say, “hey, I’m going to this club/party/whatever but you can’t 'cause you’re not gay, and I’m not comfortable with you.” That’s painful, and I think that’s what jarbabyj and Jodi are getting at (please correct me if I’m wrong).
That just feels like my friend isn’t really my friend, and he (or she) has erected a barrier between us that will never be breached. That says to me, “we can be friends, but we can never really be close, because I’ve decided that your sexuality is a threat to me.”
So now my gay friend is alienating the very people he or she would like to be accepted by. I don’t think you can have it both ways; complete acceptance and tolerance on the one hand, and exclusiveness on the other.
See, here’s my thinking about it. I have lots of friends who exclude me from a specific sort of event: sexual encounters. I don’t feel sad when my friend says, “I’m having my girlfriend over tonight, so you’re not invited.” I completely understand.
If my friend was polyamorous and was having over his girlfriend and another couple and didn’t invite me, I’d still understand, and not feel hurt by it.
If my friend was throwing a big sexual party and didn’t invite me, I’d still understand.
So why should I feel upset if a stranger doesn’t invite me to their big sexual party?
Having never been in a gay bar before, I’m kinda just talking out of my ass here, but here goes.
I’m imagining a lesbian bar. Women hanging out, drinking, dancing, maybe a little kiss and tickle in the back. A man shows up unescorted. My first impression? He’s only there to gawk. Maybe that’s a kneejerk reaction, but there it is. Perhaps the boys are just trying to prevent that situation in reverse. You’re (“you” being a random straight woman trying to enter gay fetish club) not gay, so you aren’t looking for action. You’re alone, so it’s not like you’re just hanging with a friend. So why that club? Because you’re curious, I know, but perhaps that’s exactly what they want to avoid. Maybe they just don’t want to worry about women looking at them in a sexual way? Or like caged curiosities? Unlikely to be their intent (man on man is not a common fantasy for women, unlike women on women seems to be for lots of guys) but how can they be sure?
I think it’s an extreme reaction to eliminate a minor risk, but I can empathize.
EONWE, I think you’re exactly right on an emotional level, and I agree with what you said. But the point for me is more that I see exclusions such as JAR encountered to be a bad thing on a societal level, since they stand for the assumption that excluding people from public gatherings on the basis of their sexual orientation alone is ever okay. As I have said, this seems to me to be a proposition that is far more detrimental to gay people than it is to straight people. And I say “public gatherings” because, sure, if you want to have a private party, obviously you should feel perfectly free to invite whomever you want (and only whom you want). But we’re not talking about private parties; we’re talking about open-for-business bars.
DANIEL –
You shouldn’t. But the question here is why you should not be upset when you try to go have a drink at a bar but are not allowed in solely because you’re gay (or straight).
ANDYGIRL –
Sure. Just as there are things I go through as a straight woman that you probably will never be able to relate to perfectly, because you’re not straight. In the end, none of us will ever perfectly comprehend the experiences of any other individual, because we are all different people. The question is whether a person’s inability to “get it” entirely is reason enough to exclude them, even if they’re trying to understand and are totally respectful. And, again, I would say that a support group (or quasi-support group) is a much different thing than a totally social situation, such as a bar. I think the idea of “safe space” has much more relevance in the context of a support group than it does at a bar or club.
I’m not saying I don’t understand the desire to be “just us” on occasion. I get that. And I’m certainly not condemning it as a legitimate desire. But I am saying that if we deny straight people the option of being “just us straights” at public businesses – which we generally do, and ought to do because it’s exclusionary and wrong – then it’s difficult for me at least to see any justification for allowing gay people to do the exact same thing.
And I’m not talking about private parties; I’m not talking about support groups or shelters; I’m not talking about sex clubs where participation is reasonably demanded or assumed. I’m talking about bars, clubs, coffee houses, restaurants, and other for-profit businesses generally open to the public to provide a forum for socializing.
Ahh, here’s the rub - should there be a “bright line” test, or should there be individual analysis? (See, the law isn’t totally divorced from the real world.)
You are absolutely right, Jodi - the line should not be drawn to exclude the non-judgmental, etc. But how is a gay leather bar to determine that? If a woman (or someone like me - I’m told I exude straightness) walks up to the door, is the bouncer supposed to ask me ten questions? Hand me a written personality test? And if so, what about the other people behind me in line - do we want to add a half-hour to their wait?
Or should the bar be quick-and-dirty - if ya got breasts or if ya walk up with a hand on a woman’s breast, ya ain’t coming in?
I agree that this particular bright line is unfair and unduly restrictive. There may very well be a better bright line out there. But I don’t disagree with the idea of a bright line.
BELLA,you’ve just restated the “comfort” excuse: We exclude straight people because we feel more comfortable if they’re not there.
That just begs the question of whether comfort alone justifies exclusion on the basis of sexual orientation. And if so, then I think we must all admit that straight bars and “straight night” must also therefore be okay – or then go on to justify a double standard.
As a straight woman who’s been in the Manhole two, maybe three times (but not lately, maybe things have changed), I can say that I was allowed in but certainly in the minority–in fact, I may have been the only woman there at the time. I didn’t have to take my shirt off, either.
As a dyed-in-the-wool fag hag, I’ve visited many a gay nightspot where a good time was had by all. I can, however, also testify to a sense of outsiderness in my straight, female (the gay bars here in Chicago, as they may be in many areas, are predominantly male-oriented) existence. But then again, it’s the same kind of outsiderness I might feel strolling into the Cubby Bear on a game day, not knowing much about baseball and (pace Jarbaby and other Cubs fans) therefore not “feeling” the crowd as much as other folks.
Hey, I’m all in favor of bright line tests. They make life so much easier: If A, then you’re in; if not A, then you’re out. No ifs, ands, or buts; no muddy decisions.
So if you can theorize a bright line test that would work in this situation, I’d be happy to consider it. I am not saying that no bright line test could possibly be appropriate, I’m saying that this bright line test (gay = in, not gay = out) is not IMO justifiable. (And I gather you agree.) Beyond that, IMO if we accept a sexual orientation bright-line test as okay on the issue of comfort, then we have handed people who are hostile a very sharp sword to use against gays – no gays in my clubs, darling, because we’re just not comfortable with that sort.
So, in the abstract, I don’t disagree with the idea of a bright line test in the abstract. I just can’t think of what a workable bright-line test that would fit these circumstances.
I’m not saying that the patrons of these bars have some obligation to make people they’d rather not associate with (for whatever reason) feel totally comfortable. You go to a bar, some people maybe talk to you (if they feel like it), some people maybe don’t. I’m not saying the gay bar has a duty to roll out the welcome mat to non-gays, when non-gays are not really the clientele they want to cultivate. But I am saying that they should not bar people from even coming in based solely on sexual orientation. And of course, you’d hope the patrons would not be actively hostile towards the outsider, but I realize there’s no guarantee of that.
I have no idea what this means. To some guys, it’s an appreciation of Marlene Dietrich and Judy Garland. To others, it’s radical politics designed to transform the national poltical consciousness. To others, it’s sex clubs and fisting parties. IMHO, the term is so nebulous that is has nor real meaning. Nonetheless, I do think there is a gay bond of identity we have in common. No matter how different Hastur, Matt, and I may be in outlook and disposition, there is a commonality of identity that we share.
Women in Gay Bars
Depends on the place. I see no reason women can’t be in dance clubs, since those are traditionally shared spaces. I am happy to see women in regular gay bars where people go to socialize.
However, I think it is pushy and intrusive for women to want to go into gay male sex clubs and “back-room” bars. Guys go there specifically to have sex, and it is serious wood-kill to hear some high-pitched female chattering when one is servicing a hot leather daddy.
Staright People at Pride Parade
Come on over, we’re glad to have you (if not, you know, “have” you).
In summary, I didn’t think any gay people intend to “exclude” hetero folk from gay spaces and events in gneral. Maybe a good anaology would be going to an ethnic wedding. Sure, everybody is glad to have you and want you to have a good time, but there will be shared history, family catchphrases and tradtions, and the occasional strange custom that will make you feel out of place.
OK, well, safe spaces usually fall into the first three categories you mention. Bars with back rooms, establishments that cater to particular scenes with a much more sexual focus than regular bars, etc., I think fall into a grey area, and there’s reason to acknowledge their argument for belonging to category #3.
As for “bars, clubs, coffee houses, restaurants,” etc., I’d say that uness the neighbourhood is sufficiently homophobic that it’s reasonable to exclude outsiders (I went to the gay bar in Winnipeg - yes, the gay bar - and was grilled upon entry, since it was a ‘private’ club) - I would thoroughly disagree with the practice of excluding straight people from a garden-variety gay club.
Anyone who can understand that it’s set up for gay people, in a gay context, and can conduct themselves accordingly ought to be welcome.
