na§tee
07-28-2006, 03:33 AM
i would be interested to know all-a y'alls opinion on this. read on!
okay, so for those who don't know, i live with two gay people - a man and a woman - named scott and sarah. they are not your 'typical' gay people by any means. sure, they have elements of their personality, behaviour and appearance that, sometimes, you could point a finger at and go "ghey!" but they are not camp, or butch, or mincey. sarah is an actress, scott is a lead singer in a very trendy little band where lots of his girl fans have major crushes over the poor boy. hah. aaahahah. sorry, girls!
last weekend, we all went to this famous gay club in glasgow called the polo lounge. it was, ooh.. about 10pm. very early. we had all just gone for dinner, so when we arrived there were three gay people (scott, sarah, scott's boyfriend) and four straight people, including myself.
we try to get in and the woman at the door says "regulars only" because it is "really busy". seriously, it was dead. the doors are wide and you can see into the main bar and it wad dead. dying. a gonner.
by "regulars only" the bouncer meant "only gay people". i am not just assuming this. you could tell, when we challenged her and she picked out scott's boyfriend as a "regular", that it was their policy to fill the club up with gay people first and maybe let straight people in at the end when it is busier. guilty face. it has happened many times before with them where they have gone with a straight friend and their straight friend has been solely picked out and refused entry. bullshit!
i got very, very angry. i mean, fair enough, don't let me in because your club isn't aimed at my sexuality but please just be honest with me and don't give me that "busy" crap. also, what gives you that right to make such a massive assumption? her gaydar must have been on full power because she correctly picked out all the gay people as "regulars" *cough* GAY, but come on, really.. fair enough if it is a black only society, or a disabled person night or a women only function - but with such a fluid thing as sexuality, where is it right for one person to draw a line?
now, you could argue that hey! we were just exposed to the sort of discrimination that people who aren't straight and white and able-bodied like myself meet at numerous more occasions in their lives. why should they not have a club which is exclusively for them? is it discriminatory to create spaces of whatever kind that are purely gay? i don't know. what say you?
my gay friends argue that it promotes more understanding if straight people are exposed to the gay culture and community. certainly i have seen it in action. the guitarist in scott's band.. while obviously not being homophobic as he is friends with scott, he still had hold of that "oh it might dilute my masculinity if i speak to that faggy fag!" philosophy. a couple of months ago after his first trip to the polo, he was happily dancing with the queeniest of queens having a blast.
this is why, i think, straight people enjoy going to gay clubs - they (apart from the door staff, of course!) have this sort of tolerant attitude that stems from this desire for true acceptance: true acceptance that comes from mutual togetherness.
scott and sarah were, quite frankly, embarassed to be part of a community that so aggressively polices its borders that night. should gay people only be allowed to go drinking with their gay friends? where does inclusion stop and exclusion begin? is sexuality a special case, as opposed to gender or race or health? should all minority communities "police" their "borders"? this and all the other questions posed above.
what do you guys think? very interested in hearing your views.
(btw, we managed to get in a couple of hours later in separate groups of three with a gay person each, lolz. the person at the door apologised for her behaviour but she was being supervised - she said it just looks bad if such a big group with such a large majority of straight people come in early in the night. right)
okay, so for those who don't know, i live with two gay people - a man and a woman - named scott and sarah. they are not your 'typical' gay people by any means. sure, they have elements of their personality, behaviour and appearance that, sometimes, you could point a finger at and go "ghey!" but they are not camp, or butch, or mincey. sarah is an actress, scott is a lead singer in a very trendy little band where lots of his girl fans have major crushes over the poor boy. hah. aaahahah. sorry, girls!
last weekend, we all went to this famous gay club in glasgow called the polo lounge. it was, ooh.. about 10pm. very early. we had all just gone for dinner, so when we arrived there were three gay people (scott, sarah, scott's boyfriend) and four straight people, including myself.
we try to get in and the woman at the door says "regulars only" because it is "really busy". seriously, it was dead. the doors are wide and you can see into the main bar and it wad dead. dying. a gonner.
by "regulars only" the bouncer meant "only gay people". i am not just assuming this. you could tell, when we challenged her and she picked out scott's boyfriend as a "regular", that it was their policy to fill the club up with gay people first and maybe let straight people in at the end when it is busier. guilty face. it has happened many times before with them where they have gone with a straight friend and their straight friend has been solely picked out and refused entry. bullshit!
i got very, very angry. i mean, fair enough, don't let me in because your club isn't aimed at my sexuality but please just be honest with me and don't give me that "busy" crap. also, what gives you that right to make such a massive assumption? her gaydar must have been on full power because she correctly picked out all the gay people as "regulars" *cough* GAY, but come on, really.. fair enough if it is a black only society, or a disabled person night or a women only function - but with such a fluid thing as sexuality, where is it right for one person to draw a line?
now, you could argue that hey! we were just exposed to the sort of discrimination that people who aren't straight and white and able-bodied like myself meet at numerous more occasions in their lives. why should they not have a club which is exclusively for them? is it discriminatory to create spaces of whatever kind that are purely gay? i don't know. what say you?
my gay friends argue that it promotes more understanding if straight people are exposed to the gay culture and community. certainly i have seen it in action. the guitarist in scott's band.. while obviously not being homophobic as he is friends with scott, he still had hold of that "oh it might dilute my masculinity if i speak to that faggy fag!" philosophy. a couple of months ago after his first trip to the polo, he was happily dancing with the queeniest of queens having a blast.
this is why, i think, straight people enjoy going to gay clubs - they (apart from the door staff, of course!) have this sort of tolerant attitude that stems from this desire for true acceptance: true acceptance that comes from mutual togetherness.
scott and sarah were, quite frankly, embarassed to be part of a community that so aggressively polices its borders that night. should gay people only be allowed to go drinking with their gay friends? where does inclusion stop and exclusion begin? is sexuality a special case, as opposed to gender or race or health? should all minority communities "police" their "borders"? this and all the other questions posed above.
what do you guys think? very interested in hearing your views.
(btw, we managed to get in a couple of hours later in separate groups of three with a gay person each, lolz. the person at the door apologised for her behaviour but she was being supervised - she said it just looks bad if such a big group with such a large majority of straight people come in early in the night. right)