Last November, Kevin Troughton, in a piece for the Guardian, said that "the ‘straight−acting' are in the ascendency." Easily gleaned from the term itself, straight−acting refers to gay men (femme−butch in the context of lesbians will not be discussed) who do not fit the gay stereotype and conform to gender expectations. Often, the word appears in personals and online dating profiles as a trait and/or preference, valorizing normative gender behavior and interests. And if the word itself isn't used, other formulations (e.g. no femmes, masculine, butch) can imply the same meaning. In effect, the term essentializes sexuality, suggesting that gay men act in one manner and straight men act in another. It creates another binary that divides and discriminates and perhaps speaks to the self−image of gay men and their desires.
The concept of straight−acting has sparked numerous controversies in the gay male community. As alluded to above, gays have criticized as assimilationists those using the term to describe themselves, as individuals seeking to de−gay themselves to fit into the heterosexual world. Others point out that use of "straight−acting" clearly positions and marks gender−non−conforming gay men as undesirable and transgressive. Third, some highlight that it is a betrayal to the cause of LGBT rights and ungrateful to those who came before and paved the way for the visibility of straight−acting gays. These types of criticisms all imply an indictment of self−contempt and femiphobia — the fear in men of being feminine.
On the other hand, resentment clearly manifests in critiques articulating disbelief in the appeal of straight−acting. They fall back on straight male stereotypes to express disdain and disgust for such traits and tastes. The bitterness is understandable since straight−acting gays can most likely pass as straight and benefit from such privilege and evade social sanctions, regardless of the animosity directed toward them from other gays. Other gay men that do not "perform" or present an acceptable straight identity still have to face homophobia and discrimination on a day−to−day basis. The system then supports this binary dynamic that has not yet been dismantled.
Criticisms like the one just mentioned employ a type of analysis that plays up an oppositional narrative and falls prey to essentialism itself. The main backbone of the criticism of straight−acting lies in the fact that the term is problematic in positing a straight identity and performance inherent to heterosexuality. Yet, the backlash does the same in characterizing a homosexual identity as that which is contrary to or the opposite of a heterosexual one. It fails to recognize the multiplicity of human expression in constructing a gay identity and identifying it as one that transgresses relative to the straight identity. Characterizing gay men as the antithesis to the straight male is not a radical or revolutionary position. Let's move beyond binaries and oppositional narratives. They can only take us so far, and we've still a long way to go.
One point I want to go back to, however, is the disavowal of effeminate, feminine, queeny, campy, femme behaviors, mannerisms, dress and interests. This is evident in the desirability (to whatever extent) of masculinity and a straight persona in gay men. To expand further, we also see the same trend in the criticism of media representations. Critics often vilify it for its stereotypic representation of gay men. Of course, addressing media is always complicated for groups that lack a wide range of representation, but the criticism of media presence often expresses tinges of femiphobia without enough emphasis on the plurality of identity. Though it may seem obvious, we need to break down the present systems and conceptions of identity that only limit and pressure us to conform.
--
