Launch of New Blog on Queer Chican@ Theology

Over the past few years I have been shifting my work to have a more theological focus, as my way of approaching how I engage LGBT and Queer activism. It was during my time at Harvard Divinity School that I began to tease out my interests and begin honing in on what I wanted to focus my energy and time toward. I have wrestled with developing a queer theology that moves beyond homonormative thinking, while affirming the multicultural make-up of queers. I've been trying to liberate myself from a liberation theology that does not foreground my queerness as something that deserves to be liberated from the structures in place that oppress me. And I have arrived at a space where I find it necessary to begin having those conversations.

With the rise of jotería studies, an emerging field engaging queerness and Chicana/o studies, I am interested in how using this new language in conversation with my background in theology will open doors to begin looking at how we talk about same-sex desire in Latin American and Chicana/o contexts. What I'm basically getting at is, I started a new blog! One that will be receiving more attention than this, as that's where I feel my heart is at right now.

JOT(E)LOGÍA is an experimental conversation about understanding same-sex desire and queerness on a postcolonial, theological level. In other words, how representations of the sexualized body function as religious and spiritual practice. I endeavor to use an intersectional, intertextual, and intersexual approach to looking into what this new area looks like, making use of texts, images, videos, art, etc. So please make you're way over there to bookmark it and join in on the conversation! I really do look forward to seeing what comes of this project.

While my energy will focused on moving into this next chapter of my writing and thinking, I am still committed to speaking out against the ex-gay movement and affirming safe-spaces within the church and religious institutions for LGBTQ individuals. I look forward to still traveling the country to share my story and the stories of others on how we have found a place of reconciliation within ourselves. For information on booking me to speak at your school, church, or event, please email booking@vincentcervantes.com for more information.

The Image of a Scout

A recent letter to the editor in the LA Times responded to an op-ed piece by Charles Fleming (a former Scout, current professor at USC) that criticized the Boy Scouts of America and its continued discrimination against gays.

The writer of the letter (Howard Lockwood) expressed his resentment towards Fleming's article, saying that, "It appears he [Fleming] became politically liberal and ashamed of being an Eagle Scout [...] Fleming and the ACLU want to kill Scouting unless it conforms to their liberal views."

It appears that Lockwood wants to preserve the traditional, conservative nature of the organization. He references several prominent past scouts that appear to epitomize the image of scouting.

Lockwood believes that "Scouting builds character and responsibility and develops personal fitness. Any boy would be lucky to be in Scouting, and now more than ever its positive influence is needed."

It is difficult to see how one's sexual orientation could inhibit them from building their character and responsibility and developing their fitness through Scouting. If Lockwood truly stands behind his claims, shouldn't "any boy" truly mean "any boy," regardless of their sexual orientation?

It is understandable that Lockwood wants to preserve the traditional, historic image of Scouting, and apparently manhood, that he hold so closely to his personal life and heart, but does it necessarily have to be a postwar, uncritically bourgeois and stridently heterosexist image? Perhaps Lockwood needs to re-imagine what it means to be a Scout.

Black Masculinity and Higher Education

Morehouse College, an all-male historically Black college in Atlanta, Georgia has decided to enforce a dress code policy. The new dress code prohibits women's clothing, makeup, high heels, purses etc. Additionally the new policy does not allow students to wear pajamas in public, sagging pants, and do-rags.

The new policy has created mixed reviews among students and outsiders. The message of "the image of masculinity" is very present in the statements from people supporting the new policy. CNN covered the story with an article and a video.

This policy change and the message of "masculinity" that is being discussed here is actually heavily related to the research I'm doing right now for my thesis.

One way that Black masculinity is performed is by control of the body (style of dress) and the rejection of anything that could possibly portray them as passive and weak. Thus their decision to ban "cross-dressing" is in response to insecurities they have in their image.

The ban on "pajamas in public, do-rags, sagging pants, sunglasses in class and walking barefoot on campus" follows the idea of transcending and rejecting the stereotypical tropes of "Blackness." In the video they even say that these items give their community a negative image, so they default back to the images of leading Black men in history, like Martin Luther King Jr. and Maynard Jackson, who wore shirts and ties. These men presented themselves in suits to solicit respect. It was in response to White masculinity.

It is interesting that this rhetoric is still very prevalent, but disappointing that it's become part of the educational system.

F*cking the Binary

Everyone, say hello to Carmen!  For those of you that don't know, I recently made my drag debut at the University of California, Riverside's Annual Dragalicious Drag Ball.  It was certainly a lot of fun and my wig even fell off, so yea, great times!  I was asked some questions by our student newspaper about the event and one question stood with me after I answered:  What is the purpose of tonight?

When I got home someone had sent me a message on Facebook asking what is the purpose of drag, since he was under the impression that it meant that I was trying to fulfill my desire to be a girl because I must feel like I'm really a girl inside (so basically asking if I was transitioning).  My answer to him was my answer to the student newspaper:  The purpose of drag is first and foremost to have fun!  But also, to deconstruct the gender binary structure that society has locked all of us into.  Or as one of my friends said, "To f*ck the gender binary!" Drag allows people to play with gender and rip up the binary table!  One of our drag king performers actually did a great performance of that actually!  Click here to watch that.

I offer a workshop/presentation called, (trans) it, that focuses on transgender and gender diversity where I discuss the gender spectrum and how there is a brick wall that separates masculine from feminine.  The wall exists because society has lead us to believe that we always have to know which is which.  In the beginning of the presentation I share a YouTube video from Chris Crocker.  I share it with you now:

My Personal Gay Christian Theme Song

I have written a few times about my wonderful experiences I had while I was in choir at Azusa Pacific University.  Music was the way I was able to process things. It was a way for me to transfer my energy and frustration into something productive and creative.  As I am studying for my final exams I have my iTunes playing in the background.  My study playlist includes not only show tunes (given) but also recordings of the Azusa Pacific Men's Chorale.

As I was listening through some of my favorite songs, I came across the song, "If Any Man Be In Christ."  It was a song I really enjoyed performing.  I actually didn't realize how gendered the song was, it was an adaptation of "If Any One Be In Christ"--changed for to accommodate an all-male choir.  But I began reflecting over the lyrics and started really feeling like this song sums up for me my own journey of being a gay Christian.

All things are made new,

For God has reconciled us

Through faith in Jesus Christ.

Our sins have been forgiven

Now we are children of light.

We are ambassadors

For Christ...

We now implore you,

We now implore in the name of Jesus.

Be reconciled,

Be reconciled to God.

At first I had to reflect on what "sin" it is that God has forgiven me of as a gay Christian.  And then it made sense:  before coming out I was truly bearing false witness to who I was and to God's creation.  I turned my back on God because 1.) I was angry that zie wouldn't "deliver me" from homosexuality, and 2.) I was ashamed that I was unable to change, I thought you couldn't be gay and be a Christian.  God forgave me for turning away and for denying the beauty of hir creation.  And once God forgave me, all things were made new.

As a gay Christian I am an ambassador.  I strive to be a living example of reconciling love and grace.  I implore other Christians in the name of Jesus to practice his teachings of love and grace.  Listen to "If Any Man Be In Christ" below.

Dude-Sex

Straight Dude Drunk and Horny . . . Any str8 bud wanna jack? – 27. Here’s the deal. Went out drinking and clubbing, thought I’d hook up with a chick, but didn’t pan out. I’m buzzed, horny, checking out porn. Is there any other straight dude out there who would be into jacking while watching porn?...I’d rather hook up with a chick, but none of the CL [Craigslist] chicks ever work out.

Journey on over to Craigslist and read some of the postings for "Men Interested in Men" and you will find a BUNCH of postings just like this one--definitely some a bit more graphic.  A while back I wrote a blog titled, "No Fems!" that expressed my frustration with gay and bisexual men that place a lot of emphasis on masculine gender expression and label it "straight-acting."  But more recently I have been intrigued by another group of men:  straight-identified men that have sex with men.

I just read an amazing article by a professor, Jane Ward, that I will soon be one of my faculty advisors here at the University of California, Riverside, titled, “Dude-Sex: White Masculinities and ‘Authentic’ Heterosexuality Among Dudes Who Have Sex With Dudes.”

Abstract: Based on examination of an online community in which white "str8"-identified men assert that sex with other white men bolsters their heterosexual masculinity, this article examines the heterosexual and racialized meanings that white str8 dudes attach to their same-sex behaviors... I argue that in a culture constituted by both a racial and sexual binary, whiteness and heterosexuality are "natural" bedfellows that simultaneously signify the "really, really normal" subject. [Abstract from publisher's website]

Ward does an amazing job shedding light on this subject and I highly recommend reading the article if you are able to access it from the publisher's website.

There are so many questions that are raised when thinking about straight-identified men that have sex with other men--particularly identity questions.  I have had my own encounters with men this category of men.  Men that will have sex with men just for the sake of having sex (the ecstasy, the pleasure, etc.) but identify as straight.  They claim that sex is just a physical thing and they are able to separate sex from emotions.

So is it possible?  Can one identify as one sexual orientation and cross over sexually just for the sake of physical and sexual satisfaction?

When I began peaking out of the closet I was very hesitant about meeting anyone since I was not willing to allow myself to "outed" or even really to admit that I was seeking out guys because that would mean that I accepted my homosexual identity (I was still convinced that I was straight, or would at least end up straight).  I met this one guy in my dorm hall that I started fooling around with.  It was a way for me to start understanding my attractions for other men, even if I was determined to make them go away.  The guy on the other hand had no same-sex attractions.  He was a rather sexually active straight college student.  Our little rendezvous were (at least for him) just another way to be sexually satisfied.  He made it very clear that it was sex for the sake of sex and that he was straight.

Our little "meetings" ended when I confessed to my counselor that I was seeing a regular sex partner.  In my quest to freedom from homosexuality I had no problem cutting him out of my life--although it was tough because he lived down the hall.  I look back and see that area of my life as part of my coming out experience and how I was able to make sense out of why I am naturally attracted to men.

After I ended my sessions with my counselor and came out as openly gay I made contact with him again.  I figured sharing my journey with him and how I was able to affirm my own sexual orientation would at least inspire him to feel comfortable with himself and accept his own gay identity.  Except, he doesn't have a gay identity.  It was sex for the sake of sex.

I think it is important to then move away from (or perhaps past) being defined solely by sexual activity.  Were I to never have sex again, I would still be gay.

I discussed this topic with my friend Brian Murphy and we both raised some very important questions about sex and sexual orientation:  How much weight do we place on sex acts?  What is "straight" or "heterosexual"?   How do we balance identification with action?  How has a "straight" identity (ours or another) impeded relationships or personal growth?

I personally would like to argue that one's sexual orientation is not defined by their sexual activity.  Looking at ancient civilizations, it is easier to to understand how this argument can be true.

All around I think this is an interesting topic for us to think about and to begin processing.  How much of our identity is based on our actions?  I look forward to posting more about this subject and I welcome feedback and different perspectives.

ManBQ: Overcooking Gender Roles

One of the wonderful things about Facebook is newsfeed, it's like the gossip column of the 21st century in my opinion.  Through the newsfeed on Facebook I became aware of an event that several of my Facebook friends from Azusa Pacific University will be attending, "ManBQ."

Attention all MEN, we're hosting a BBQ this Wednesday night! Come to Trinity lawn for some free CARNE ASADA, conversation, and a chance to talk about Godly sexuality and manhood.  Author Jack Balswick, who spoke in chapel last year, will be sharing his thoughts. The conversation will be candid and you will be able to ask questions. Come out for free food and a great chance to talk about what it means to be a MAN. [Emphasis in original].

Besides being annoyed by the over-masculinized and patriarchal tone of the description, my attention was drawn to the discussion about Godly sexuality and the presence of Jack Balswick.  As I mentioned in my "True Love Waits" post, most discussions about sexuality in evangelical settings are usually misleading and in my opinion, don't offer any valuable advice.  Since this discussion will be within the context of "manhood," I can only imagine how misleading their discussion will be.  When I was a student at Azusa Pacific, I remember discussions about manliness being very depressing.  Often it was a group of guys trying to reassert and reaffirm their masculinity by discussing how they were different than women.  A lot of emphasis was placed on strength and how we were to assert our God-given strength, etc.  I never felt that I could identify with the masculine image that was being presented.  Although I would try and in the end feel like I was a hopeless little nelly.

This discussion will be aided by Jack Balswick, a sociologist from Fuller Theological Seminary that focuses on marriage and family.  The issue of homosexuality is rather troublesome for Balswick, considering his commitment to belief that the Bible is an authoritative text.  He accepts Fuller's strong commitment to heterosexual marriage but at the same time wants to avoid anything that resembles gay-bashing.  The result is language like this, from the book Authentic Human Sexuality: An Integrated Christian Approach (1999):

We acknowledge that some gay Christians may choose to commit themselves to a lifelong, monogamous homosexual union, believing this is God's best for them. They believe that this reflects an authentic sexuality that is congruent for them and their view of Scripture. Even though we hold to the model of a heterosexual, lifelong, monogamous union, our compassion brings us to support all persons as they move in the direction of God's ideal for their lives.

Thus, Balswick has developed a very "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy when it comes to homosexuality; go figure, so has APU and most other Christian colleges and universities.  But I wonder then how Balswick will approach this discussion about Godly sexuality and manhood; Jack and his wife co-author their books together, and they often discuss modern gender roles and lean towards shared roles in some parts, so I wonder if that progressive belief will fit well with a discussion about manhood.

My challenge to my colleagues at Azusa Pacific is to step back from what you think makes you manly, or trying to affirm your masculinity.  Instead affirm just your individuality.  When we try to define what is manly and what is manhood, we create boundaries.  And when someone doesn't fit that definition they are thrown into an identity crisis because they realize that they are out of bounds.  Let us remember that gender roles are socially constructed; therefore, each of us get to decide what it means to be a man or a woman for ourselves.  

True Love Waits

I am currently finishing up a book by Heather Hendershot titled, Shaking The World For Jesus: Media and Conservative Evangelical Culture.  In this book Hendershot looks at the "center" of conservative evangelical culture, primarily though the white middle-class.  This is an excellent book to read especially if you've grown up in an evangelical setting like I have.  The book is divided into three sections; the first section discusses the "commodification" part of evangelical culture, such as Christian cultural products, films, shows, and contemporary Christian music.  The second section discusses sexuality, a very interesting that I want to talk about.  In the first chapter of this section, Hendershot discusses the chastity movement within evangelical culture, such as the True Love Waits campaign.  And the second chapter of the section examines the Cathedral of Hope, the world's largest LGBTQ church, as well as focusing on ex-gay survivors that are still Christians and how they have reconciled their faith with their sexual orientation after having experienced reparative therapy.

Hendershot raises a very important issue through this section of her book: sexuality, when discussed in evangelical media, is very one-sided.  Discussions about marriage, chastity, and sexual control remain reserved only for heterosexual Christians, while mainstream Christian videos, books, and magazines reject LGBTQ Christians.

During my high school years, I remember reading the upcoming topics in the bulletin that would be coming up in youth group.  The topic of "Sex" would usually catch my eye, as it did for the other hormonal teenagers.  It was always an interesting topic and it was addressed in different ways throughout my four years of high school.  Sometimes they would separate the boys and girls, other times we would remain together by on different sides of the room, and I think one time we were able to intermingle.  We were reminded that our bodies are temples and they are sacred, etc.  Also that sex is a beautiful, wonderful, amazing thing, that God gives us so we can experience it ONLY when we are married.  High school did a better job talking about sex than college did for me--in college the guys were they were out of control horny pigs and women fear us for that reason.

One year, if I remember correctly it was my junior year, we were presented with True Love Wait commitment cards!  These cards were a contract between us and God that committed us to abstinence until marriage.  The direct lines on the card were:

Believing that true love waits, I make a commitment to God, myself, my family, my friends, my future mate, and my future children to a lifetime of purity including sexual abstinence from this day until the day I enter a biblical marriage relationship.

We were also to choose an accountability partner that we could turn to if we were feeling tempted; however, my accountability partner did not do a very good job keeping me accountable...

This contract I made with God served many problems for me.  I was to abstain from sexual activity "until the day I enter a biblical marriage."  Although some of my youth pastors never explicitly talked about homosexuality being sinful during youth group services, they certainly placed a lot of emphasis on what the Bible said about marriage.  They always discussed the nuclear model for marriage and there was no other alternative.  Part of my difficulty accepting my queer identity was due to my desire to want to get married and have a family.  Unfortunately the family portrait that was painted for me did not include two dads.

As Valentine's Day is approaching I can only imagine how many youth groups will be having their sex talks with their students.  I can only imagine how many True Love Waits cards will be signed.  In a way, I can support the idea of sexual abstinence until one enters into marriage or a committed partnership--the safest sex is no sex after all.  However, I cannot support a one-sided message.  It is not okay for LGBTQ youth to have feel like they're outsiders when evangelical chastity media comes out.  It is also not okay for LGBTQ youth to not be presented with the option to have a beautiful family with whomever they choose to be their partner.  True love knows no gender.

Sodom and Gomorrah

The Story of Sodom and Gomorrah has been used and overused to condemn homosexuality in the Church.  It is surprising actually that it still used today by many Christians, when many theologians have agreed that the Story of Sodom and Gomorrah isn't really a story about sexuality.  But it still comes up as an argument against homosexuality, so I decided to share my two cents...

Sodom was not about sex. And if it were, it still really wouldn’t be about sex.

Sodom's sins range from inhospitality and opulence to adultery and strengthening the hand of evil.

Ezekiel 16:48-49 says that the sins of these two cities are said to be excess of wealth, failure to provide for the poor, and inhospitality. The materialistic nature of the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah is exemplified by what happened to Lot’s wife. She looked back at the city, longing for the possessions she had left behind. Consequently, she was petrified, or turned into a pillar of salt as the story goes.

Isaiah 19:13 compares Sodom and Gomorrah to Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, thus making ungodly pride the crux of their immorality.

Deuteronomy 29:23 mentions that Admah and Zeboiim were also destroyed due to God’s wrath. The account of Sodom and Gomorrah is important in that it introduces Israel’s rival relatives from across the Jordan and east of the Dead Sea. The children born of the incestuous rape of Lot are Moab, which means ‘son of my father’, and Ben-Ammi or Ammon, which means son of my kin. The tribes born of them were constantly in conflict with the Israelites. Zephaniah 2:9 compares Moab (Moabites) to Sodom and Ammon (Ammonites) to Gomorrah. Thus, important historical context and genealogical reference was provided by the often misunderstood account of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Genesis 14:8-11 – Defeated warring nations included Sodom and Gomorrah.

Genesis 18:33 – Clearly, homosexuals did not comprise two entire towns. God promises Abraham that he would spare the city on account of ten righteous souls – not heterosexual.

Genesis 19:1 – Sodom was a gated community.

Genesis 19:3 – Lot presses the Angels strongly to sojourn with him because he saw their staying the night in a public location as a precarious risk.

Genesis 19:8 – “They have come under the shadow of my roof.”
Lot was charged with the protection of the angel messengers.

Matthew 10:13-15 – Jesus referred to Sodom and Gomorrah. His focus, however, was on how to deal with inhospitality. If his disciples were not welcomed as guests, despite being strangers, they were to shake the dust off of their feet. He continued to say that the punishment for those who rejected them would be worse than it was for Sodom and Gomorrah.

Furthermore, there are several linguistic inconsistencies when dealing with the Sodom and Gomorrah story.

Implication of Sexual Sins:

In Jude 1:7, fornication and the desiring of “strange flesh” is mentioned as the sin of Sodom.

With that in mind, there are several important facts to consider:

• The angels with whom the men wanted to fornicate were not human.
• Sexual intimacy between humans and angels was condemned earlier in the Genesis. Prior to the great deluge, spirit creatures took corporeal form to have sexual relations with people. The result was a race of genetic hybrids that terrorized the human population.
• If fornication is implied, the men of the city wanted to forcibly know the angels, or gang-rape them. Rape is a violent crime that has little to do with loving expression and does not reflect sexual orientation or identity. Genesis 19:9
• But fornication clearly was not the core of their iniquity. Lot later had sex with his daughters while intoxicated after being spared by God.
• According to Genesis 19:8, Lot offered his virgin daughters to the crowd, possibly as valuable sacrifices.
• The men of Sodom and Gomorrah believed the angels to be spies. Their greed and their selfish concern with their wealth led to such thoughts. Therefore, their inhospitality and deviant intentions were fueled by greed.
• And finally, the term heterosexual is derived from the term Greek sarkos heteras, which has been translated into strange flesh, perversion, and unnatural lust.

The Men of the City

The word ‘enowsh is used in Genesis 19:4, and is the first reference to the ‘men’ of the city. In actuality, it refers to any mortal in general. The following sentence says ‘even the men of the city’, specifically referring to the masculine gender. In verse 5, Sodom residents ask for the ‘enowsh so that they may know them.

And in verse 8 when describing his daughters as virgins, Lot uses the more definite ‘iysh to refer to men.

Knowing "To Know"

The Hebrew word yada, used to suggest a desire to know the men sexually, appears 943 times in the Hebrew text. All but 11 were used in the sense of literally becoming acquainted with strangers. 10 of those 11 times were used in clear reference to heterosexual sex. The word shakab more vividly and specifically denotes sexual relations.

(Thanks Jarrett)

Somehow I'll Make a Man Out of You

How many of you have heard that song from the Disney movie Mulan, "I'll Make a Man Out of You?" I feel like that song represents an interesting part of my ex-gay experience. I've been visiting San Diego State University for the past two weeks (my husband is a student here) and they've been having Greek Week, which is a time for students to find out about the fraternities and sororities on campus and then perhaps rush for them. There was one fraternity that really caught my eye, Alpha Gamma Omega, SDSU's only Christ-centered fraternity. So I decided to check out some of the things they do. They do: Worship Night, Wakeboarding, Beach Football, Broomball, and then "Bigger or Better" (I'm not sure what that means exactly).

Their activities they have planned really got me thinking about gender roles and how they could possibly be trying to re-assert their masculinity by these activities. I was taught through my reparative therapy counseling sessions that men engage in these activities not to necessarily "butch" ourselves up, but because sports are a natural way for guys to connect with another.

Because I was told that my father did an inadequate job raising me to be a "man of God," I was assigned to male mentor in the church.

For us guys in the program they partner us up with straight male mentors, particularly men who are a little older, overweight, and balding. Well, the therapeutic theory behind this is that they believe that these guys will serve as less of temptation for us. But I have a little confession to make. I find those guys kinda hot. --Chad, Doin' Time in the Homo No Mo Halfway House

My male mentor's job was to pretty much be the good Christian example that my father wasn't. We went out to play catch at the lake, we went to go see action flicks at the cinema, and like every good Christian "dad" he took me to a Promise Keepers convention where I was supposed to learn how to become a "man of integrity." From my mentor I was supposed to receive constant reaffirmation for the good things I did that were representative of an authentic "man of God."

However, through my attempts to "reconnect with my masculinity" I ironically began to feel like less of a man through the activities that I was doing. I felt like masculinity was being defined for me. I always knew that I was a feminine guy. I had heard that since I was a small boy and I had learned to accept it. But my male mentor didn't know how to respond to that. He had 2 sons that were older than me and I'm sure he was just doing what he done with his sons when he raised them. Eventually he had starting feeling like he was doing something wrong as a leader, but then changed his mind to the belief that there was just more that was wrong with me.

So as these fraternity brothers play their beach football and tackle one another with no shirts on, I wonder if they do so because they too believe that sports are just the natural way for men to connect with one another.

M Butterfly

For those that haven’t seen or read the play, or even seen the movie, I highly recommend you do so. M Butterfly is an absolutely amazing play about love—love that defies convention and really sparks your mind to begin thinking about gender in a whole new way. It is a story of a French man that finds his true love in a Chinese woman, his “butterfly,” but later discovers that his precious “butterfly” is indeed a man posing as woman to spy for the Chinese government.

In my Religion and Film class we just finished watching the movie and had an interesting discussion about the film. We discussed the different elements of love and spent a great deal of time examining the deception that took place in their relationship. The question that we spent the most time discussing though was: Did Rene Gallimard know that Song Liling was really man?

Everyone in the class was in utter shock! This couple had been together for over 20 years and the gender of Song was never discussed. There is a scene where Song is asked, “Did Mr. Gallimard know that you were a man?” The response from Song is deliciously perfect, “I never asked him.”

There was this thought floating around the class that Song deceived Rene and distorted his image of what or who his “butterfly” was. I challenged everyone to ask, “Does it matter?” Rene got everything he wanted out of his relationship with the “ideal Oriental woman.” He was loved, he got a child, he was sexually satisfied, he was happy! So in what way was his “love” distorted? Even after he discovered that Song was a man (although I argued along the lines of Song being gender queer) he was still in love!

The author of the play wrote in his afterword that it is Western mind that gets preoccupied with knowledge. We have a “false knowledge of gender, sexuality, etc.” It is the abuse of knowledge that sets us behind in a quest for equality. I have provided the final scene of the movie that was brilliantly done and shows the intensity of their love they had in their relationship. But I highly encourage everyone to either read or see the movie!

I Have the Only Women's Voice in My Family

At a family barbecue today, I learned why politics are to never be discussed at the dinner table. My father, being a native of Mexico, voiced that he is glad that Hillary Clinton won't receive the candidacy for President of the United States of America. His supporting argument: just because she is a woman. There were no other supporting reasons. Now who I support for the presidency of the United States of America is really irrelevant here, since his only argument is guilty of a fallacy that attacks the character of Clinton (being that she's a woman).

It shocked my father and the women in my family to hear me speak up and say that is unacceptable and wrong to undervalue and discriminate against a person based on their gender. Furthermore, that I personally believe that women are the superior gender (but that was just a personal opinion).

My father reassured me that he was right and that "man-to-man" I just to need see this from a man's point of view. That nearly sent me off the edge. I cordially responded in Spanish, "No Dad, that's the problem. We need to start looking at these issues from a gender neutral perspective, because if we continue to allow patriarchy to dictate our society, we will only be moving backwards. And with respect towards you as my father, please respectfully never talk to me 'man-to-man.'"

I then began to have to rebut misconceptions and really insults that he had about women: women being weak, not as intelligent, too soft, etc. All my responses had support and I sincerely wanted everyone to understand that it is not okay to continue undervaluing women and setting them in a category that makes them "less than."

It got me thinking that patriarchy tends to still dictate many communities, including Latin and Hispanic America. Many of the women in my family still stay at home to care for the children, clean up, and cook for their husbands. I have no objection to women who make the decision to be homemakers, but most of the women in family that do this, do it against their own will. All too often, Latina women are not given a voice. They accept this out this out of tradition and out of fear.

I join along with other Latina and Hispanic women that have began the feminist movement within Latin and Hispanic America. Women like Sor Juana de la Cruz, Gloria Anzaldua, and Ana Nieto Gomez. I leave you with a poem in Spanish by Sor Juana de la Cruz, "Las Redondillas":

Hombres necios que acusáis
a la mujer sin razón,
sin ver que sois la ocasión
de lo mismo que culpáis.

Si con ansia sin igual
solicitáis su desdén,
¿por qué queréis que obren bien
si las incitáis al mal?

Combatís su resistencia
y luego, con gravedad,
decís que fue liviandad
lo que hizo la diligencia.

Parecer quiere el denuedo
de vuestro parecer loco,
al niño que pone el coco
y luego le tiene miedo.

Queréis, con presunción necia,
hallar a la que buscáis
para, pretendida, Tais;
en la posesión, Lucrecia.

¿Qué humor puede ser más raro
que el que, falto de consejo,
él mismo empaña el espejo
y siente que no esté claro?

Con el favor y el desdén
tenéis condición igual:
quejándoos si os tratan mal;
burlándoos, si os quieren bien.

Opinión ninguna gana,
pues la que más se recata,
si no os admite, es ingrata,
y si os admite, es liviana.

Siempre tan necios andáis,
que, con desigual nivel,
a una culpáis por cruel
a otra por fácil culpáis.

¿Pues cómo ha de estar templada
la que vuestro amor pretende,
si la que es ingrata ofende
y la que es fácil enfada?

Mas entre el enfado y la pena
que vuestro gusto refiere,
bien haya la que no os quiere,
y quejaos enhorabuena.

Dan vuestras amantes penas
a sus libertades alas,
y después de hacerlas malas
las queréis hallar muy buenas.

¿Cuál mayor culpa ha tenido
en una pasión errada:
la que cae de rogada
o el que ruega de caído?

¿O cuál es más de culpar
aunque cualquiera mal haga:
la que peca por la paga
o el que paga por pecar?

¿Pues para qué os espantáis
de la culpa que tenéis?
Queredlas cual las hacéis
o hacedlas cual las buscáis.

Dejad de solicitar,
y después, con más razón,
acusaréis de afición
de la que os fuere a rogar.

Bien con muchas armas fundo
que lidia vuestra arrogancia,
pues en promesas e instancia
juntáis diablo, carne y mundo.

Pride Within Myself

Beyond Masculinity

What does it mean to be a queer man?

Beyond Masculinity is a groundbreaking collection of 20 smart, insightful essays from a diverse group of writers that all tackle this question. All published online and available anywhere in the world, 24/7, for free. Readers will find a tremendously diverse group of queer men thoughtfully reflecting on their experiences--and using those experiences to build powerful analyses of their social worlds,

including:

• Qwo-Li Driskill’s “Shaking Our Shells: Cherokee Two-Spirits Rebalancing Our World”: A poetic plea for Native American Two-Spirit peoples to search for their histories and become leaders in their communities

• Brian Lobel’s “Penis. Vagina. Penetration. The End”: A hilarious and moving recounting of the author’s quest to lose his virginity to a woman before a surgery to remove a cancerous tumor that threatens to leave him unable to ejaculate ever again

• Rob Day-Walker, “Jesus of San Francisco: Can Jesus be a Resource for Queer Masculinities?: A careful dissection of Biblical scripture, set against his own experiences as a Christian gay man, in search of a Jesus that is feminist and decidedly queer

• Daniel Solís y Martínez’s “Mestiza/o Gender: Notes Towards a Transformative Masculinity”: A brilliant attempt to understand how to build a queer identity that incorporates both his Latino/a heritage and Western ideas about homosexuality
  

And this is just the tip of the iceberg. From an 80-year old gay man’s reflections on living life “between” male and female (Autrey’s “Somewhere in Between”), to a transgender man’s plea for bottoms to please (Macey’s “Top to Bottom”), Beyond Masculinity collectively breaks through the typical and boldly describes a resilient, challenging understanding of being a queer man in the 21st century.

Beyond Masculinity isn’t your traditional anthology. Readers become listeners when they subscribe on iTunes and download essays recorded as podcasts. Built using blogging software, anyone can log on anywhere in the world and comment directly on the essays. In short, not only does this project break topical ground, but it also explores the potential power of the Internet to provide new tools for sparking smart dialogue on sexuality and gender.

I was able to identify with many of the essays, as I saw parts of my journey in these life stories and experiences.  I know many of you will discover the same thing.

"I'll Show You a Real Man!"

Children are precious, they really are. They are the future of the world, right? But as we also know, they are very impressionable. So when I see a child regurgitating what they have been taught, I never know if I'm supposed to laugh and think it's cute, or should I be concerned at the things they are putting out.

Yesterday, during my evening walk, I came across a young boy. He was probably around 6-8 years old, definitely younger than 10. From a distance I could hear him roaring. I initially thought that he was playing some animal safari game or pretending he was a lion. As I was passing him, he reached over to a huge stalk of flowers/field weeds and grabbed this huge stalk, uprooted it, lifted it over his head and roared again. I chuckled. Then, the young boy throws the stalk on the ground and yells, "I'll show your a real man!!" He then jumps on the stalk and starts to stomp the stalk to death as he continues to roar like the Incredible Hulk.

As I am walking away, I immediately stopped laughing. But I did turn around to observe. His father was sort of encouraging his beastly behavior. I began to think: why is it that this young boy think that being barbaric and beast-like is the definition of a "real man?" He was clearly equating super strength with being masculine as he uprooted the weeds. But he also connecting aggression and violence to being a man.

Sure he is just a child. He doesn't know what he's doing. He's just playing. I don't believe that. I believe that he is doing what he has been taught, whether it be by television, movies, or his father. At such a young age he was being taught "gender roles" as defined by most of society. It's happened to all of us. Many young boys used to role-play "Power Rangers" because fighting off the bad guys was masculine in the 90s--of course they always made me the female Pink Ranger though. I've said it before on this blog: are we really this far behind? I honestly don't feel like I'm taking the child's behavior beyond what I should be. This is very legit and very alarming. I don't want the future generations of men to think that to be masculine means you have to have super strength and be aggressively beast-like.

Be A Man!

In my US History class we are currently learning about imperialism.  In our discussion about the social psychology of imperialism we discussed "manliness;" it was very important to display the qualities of being a man.  They had to accept the "code."   It was really the middle class' attempt to embody the benefits of being male.  Which is why organizations like the "Boy Scouts" were created, to instill the military virtues that made men, manly men.  I then came across a poem by Rudyard Kipling.  The poem "If" was written in 1895 by Kipling to his son.  A great example of the "code" and the qualities that the middle class was trying to embody:

If

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or, being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise;

If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with triumph and disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with wornout tools;

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on";

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch;
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run -
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man my son!

I began to think, "Are we still trying to enforce this code on men today?"  Is there still this pressure to be like this?  Kipling set the bar pretty high!  But really though, has anything changed?  I still remember when I was growing up and if I feel and scraped my knee, the first thing my dad would say is, "Stop crying!  Be a man!"  I still hear fathers say that.  Or why is that when athletic teams mess up, the coach is quick to call the team, "pussies," "sissies," or "girls?"

I feel that in the past 100 years very little has changed in terms of what we demand of men in our society.  Why are women unable to live by the standards that are set forth for men to achieve?  God forbid a woman is successful, strong, independent, and free, because she must be a lesbian!  One hundred years people!  Let's get with the 21st Century!

No Fems!

"20 year old gay Latino seeks straight-acting (no fems!) white or latino gay/bi guy..."

I know that I am not the only person that has seen this over and over again. But am I the only person that doesn't know what a "straight-acting" gay guy is? Sounds sort of like an oxymoron to me. How does a homosexual act straight? Does he have sex with women? In theory, there is no such thing.

Unfortunately though, many of friends often seek out these so-called "straight-acting" gays. So what are they are doing here? I know what they mean when they say it: they are seeking a masculine guy. But by calling masculine guys "straight-acting" they are asserting that masculinity is only a heterosexual trait. Sadly, they are also feeding into the stereotypical belief that gay men are feminine. Thus lumping together gender expression and sexual orientation. A common mistake that is happening more and more with many recent homosexuals. But why is that? Why are they after the "straight-acting" gays/bisexuals?

Talking with many of my friends who seek these type of guys, they often want a man that is an unnoticeable-gay or a deceiving guy, you know the ones where you have to question it and not be sure (coming back to the gender thing again). Many of my friends aren't "out;" therefore, if they aren't with a stereotypical guy and they are seen in public, they are less likely to be outed. Because if they were with a feminine guy, then preconceived notions about feminine guys will enter the minds of others and draw them to the conclusion that they are a gay couple.

This seems to be my latest frustration. I am doing my best to address this issue as it arises, but it either seems like they don't get it, or they don't want to understand. How do I break these misunderstandings?

Where's My Masculinity?

With finals beginning next week, I have had little time to get online to do anything that wasn't homework or study related. I need a break from the books though, so I am here to share something that has really been on my mind.

I think it has finally hit me how feminine I am. Like I'm really "fag-ish" by stereotypical definition. I think it is more so my voice that really shows my feminine side. I've known since, well since most of life, that I have a high-pitched feminine sounding voice. Throughout high school I would intentionally deepen my voice so that I wouldn't be called gay (it didn't work though). But I have been told by vocal trainers for singing that I don't speak correctly (in terms of technique).

Recently I've been making phone calls for various reasons and I am often called, "Ma'am" or asked if I'm my wife (Vince Cervantes' wife). In high school, I would take deep offense to that and I would correct them with the right title, but then there was just that awkward apology from the other party.

I'm not really bothered by being called, "Ma'am" anymore, in fact, I chuckle and just go with it. But what I really started thinking about is why it used to bother me so much that I would have "fem" moments. Why did it bother me when some would say that my "man points" were declining? Or even why I would get offended when people said I was effeminate?

I used to believe the misconception that gender expression was often associated with sexual orientation. So since I wasn't butch, then people would see that I was gay. I obviously didn't want them to think that because at the time I was still convinced that homosexuality was sinful. So I did my best to make myself as non-fem as possible. I played sports (although I did enjoy swimming) and I would deepen voice as much as sounded natural (which was hard for a first tenor singer).

While I going through conversion therapy we examined the fact that I was not masculine. I was told that I need to understand the masculinity of the holy spirit; therefore, I need to surround myself with strong men of God. However, I was matched up with older married men from the Men's Ministry group--I guess so that I wouldn't develop attractions for the guys my age. What I learned about masculinity from them though was how to subjugate women. Apparently making women inferior validates a man's masculinity.

As I am beginning to study gender more and more I am fascinated by what society has made of gender and what religion has made of gender. Why is my gender expression so often connected with my sexual orientation? Why can't we seem to believe a "feminine" acting man when he says he's straight? Recently I've began to call myself gender queer. I am hesitant at times to identify as gender queer because I am not fully sure what that means for me. But so far, I feel that because I cannot fit into the mold society has created for what it is masculine, then I don't want to conform to make myself pass. I call myself a man because I am one. But I am through with letting society try to define that for me. I'm masculine in my own ways!

In the words of Angel from Rent: "I'm more of man than you'll ever be and more of woman than you'll ever get!"