Last night I wrote about the trouble gay men and women come across when they meet an allegedly closeted homosexual person. The idea that a person we know might be gay can be both troubling and perplexing. As I explained earlier, when first asserting to the relevant people that a person might be gay, the normal reaction from heterosexuals (although not exclusively) is one of complete bewilderment. People just can't imagine a closeted gay man acting straight.
I was watching a very funny episode of 30 Rock. Tina Fey's character was attending her high school reunion. She was nervous because she always thought she was the antagonized geek that no one liked and she thought attending the reunion would bring about all those old dynamics with her high school peers. When she finally did arrive, she learned that her classmates despised her not because she was a geek, but rather because she herself was the actual bully. One of the people she used to be "friends" with was a man that she always assumed was gay and always tried to make him feel comfortable by telling him that she knew and it was OK. In a hilarious dialogue between Fey and the angry, flamboyantly gay man, he introduced her to his wife with whom he raised two very beautiful . . . dogs. Because he was so angry with Fey for always thinking he was gay, the only thing he could do was "dance."
I think that situation depicted in 30 Rock is what heterosexual people expect when it comes to closeted gay men and women. However, something that people don't seem to realize is that the whole point of being closeted is to keep people from knowing you are gay. It does not make much sense to be closeted when it oozes through your every pore and invades your every gesture.
No doubt, those men and women do exist. I think there are many people whose homosexuality is embodied in their mannerisms and other features, no matter how hard they try to hide it. I myself have known many guys in that situation. However, I think that is a precarious judgment to make simply because, as we all know, one's sexuality does not necessarily have to match up with our outer appearance and demeanor. However, I think heterosexuals, and many times even homosexuals, think that those are the only closeted people that exist. What they don't realize is that there are people out there who superficially embody the paradigm of heterosexuality and still are gay.
Actually, I take that back, I do think people realize that those people do exist. What I am trying to get across is that it never registers that the outwardly heterosexual friend might actually be gay and we cannot tell because they have no characteristics or mannerisms that would define them as gay. Indeed, I myself was shocked when my close, happily married law school friend started coming on to me. He seemed so straight. He was married. It then hit me that the only element necessary to make a person gay is a sexual attraction to the other person. Indeed, it is the only thing that matters and is relevant to a judgment as to whether someone is gay.
I have an example of this. One of my friends had a boyfriend for twelve years. I've met him on numerous occasions and he was a wonderful guy. One night, she was going through his e-mail (I realize that's improper, but let's quell our moral issues with that for now) and came across dozens of e-mail exchanges between him and his online boyfriends. These e-mails were very explicit and left nothing to the imagination as to what they were about. So basically, this guy, whom no one ever suspected had any homosexual tendencies (including myself), and never once acted in a suspiciously homosexual manner, was caught red-handed.
The situation described above exemplifies the problems I see with the staunchly closeted homosexual person. I think the problem is that cleverly secret homosexual men go such lengths to hide their sexual identity, they end up putting themselves in precarious, morally suspect positions. My friend was devastated when she read her boyfriends e-mails. She actually did not even believe them at first, she thought they had to be a joke, that he was playing a trick on her . . . a trick that involved over sixty fabricated e-mails written over the course of a couple months. The chances of that being the case have to be zero.
I feel like this is where gay men and women play an integral part in the development of good heterosexual relationships and marriages. Like I said before, the only reliable indicator of a person's sexual identity is their sexual and romantic behavior. Since there are closeted gay men and women out there that do not embody the persona of a gay man, that is the only device that can be used in making these determinations. The only way these men are going to act is if they a) know (or suspect) another man is gay and b) they are certain they can get what they want without blowing their secret. I was the only gay man in the group I was with during that recent evening. I was the only person that had any chance of figuring out that this guy might actually be gay. My heterosexual friends were never going to figure it out (or get a hint of his possible homosexuality) simply because there was nothing to look for. The only thing they, as heterosexuals, could observe is the rare occurrence of him hitting on another man, which they probably would never see.
Now, I am not saying that I, as a gay man who has a first-hand account (indeed, the only account) of what happened, have any business going and telling his wife. I, of course, told my close friend, but she is my confidante and I do not think it is inappropriate to do so. A lot of people would disagree with me on the disclosure issue. Several of my good girlfriends in law school (after realizing that our friend was gay and witnessed him coming precariously close to cheating on his wife) were adamant that someone should tell his wife. I and one other friend adamantly disagreed with them. Even if I could find some string of logic that would morally allow me to do so, she'd never have believed any of us. Further, I do believe it is a conversation that someone should have exclusively with their spouse.
I was reading an interesting article on one of my favorite legal blogs by one of my favorite legal writers. Her name is Julie Hilden and she writes on a lot of free speech, first amendment issues, as well as intellectual property. In this particular article, she was discussing how people were outraged when Tom Cruise was speaking negatively about postpartum depression and psychology. The retorts that Tom Cruise received were that he did not have the personal experience necessary to speak on such subjects. Hilden adamantly disagreed with those assertions, saying that personal experience, although valuable, is not a valid a prerequisite to knowledge. I partly agree, and partly disagree. I think she is right. A male gynecologist, although he is not a woman and has never had a personal experience with his areas of practice, still is (most likely) an expert in the field of gynecology (I know some of my female friends may disagree with me on this, but I am trying to be brave). I also saw her point when talking about Tom Cruise. She said his comments sparked furious, good debate on the issue. That is very true. However, I wonder what Hilden would say about personal experience as being an alleged prerequisite for my topic.
In all honesty, I think out and proud gay men and women have a lot to offer due to their experience with the coming out narrative. As strange as it may sound, there is something in gay men and women that picks up on the subtle tendencies in other members of our same gender that hint to us that someone might be gay. I also believe that most heterosexual people simply do not have this ability. Now let me clear, I am not a proponent of "gaydar," I do not think homosexuals can smell it on each other. I think it's simply recognizing the subtle behavior in people that reminds us of ourselves when we were first learning of our sexual identities. I think the experience is invaluable and usually necessary. You know your own kind. Also, I do not think this is something on which heterosexuals are incapable of speaking or that all heterosexuals are deprived of the ability to recognize the subtle gay man. I do think it's a rare case though, the heterosexual person who has so much familiarity with the gay culture that their actual heterosexuality is not an impediment in their judgment.
Now, of course, there is the whole "does it matter" question. Personally I think it does, it greatly matters. I've known several people, all women (save for one), who have dated men that have turned out to be gay (or have a homosexual attraction). I think it is a serious problem, especially when the situation involves a married couple. For the record, I am only speaking of closeted men and women that are hiding their sexuality from relevant people, such as a heterosexual spouse. I am a firm believer that people should be able to design their personal relationships in whatever way to suit their emotional and sexual needs. If a heterosexual, female fiance is aware that her future husband has homosexual tendencies and she is put on notice of the consequences, then I think the couple is free to live how they want. It is when men are blatantly lying to their spouses about these things and they didn't disclose their tendencies before their marriage, or even before starting a serious relationship that is not a marriage. I think that is a major breach of the marital agreement. Actually, I think it is an egregious breach. It's a double lie.
Before people go and say that this is just a waste of time and nobody really cares, there are psychologists and therapists out there that have dedicated their practices to helping straight men and women who have inadvertently found themselves in a serious relationship with a homosexual spouse. I would direct people to look up Bonnie Kaye on the internet, a licensed therapist who has counseled over 30,000 women, all of whom found out their husbands were gay. It's an extremely interesting website. I've engaged in some e-mail conversation with her on the topic and it is very interesting and emotional.
There is a question begged by all this analysis. What are heterosexual people supposed to do? If a man could be gay, but there is basically no way to tell unless you catch him red-handed, how is a woman supposed to protect herself against this kind of trap? What if he is just extremely careful and leaves absolutely no tracks? Bonnie Kaye has some very interesting ways of being able to figure out if a man is closeted, and with most of them I disagree. She suggests getting online tracking devices and lists a number of ways to tell if your husband is gay, i.e. he has gay friends or he watches homosexual pornography (well . . . yeah!). Again, I think those can be somewhat indicative of homosexuality, but I do not think they are in the least bit reliable and should never be given too great of weight. If my friend's long term boyfriend and I decide to get a beer once a week or something like that, I would hope she wouldn't think I was trying to get on her man. Bonnie Kaye assumes that the woman will be able to come across evidence of that sort. I think closeted men are much more clever than that. Indeed, many of them spend years and years perfecting their secrecy.
To be honest, I think the best device is good judgment and intuition. I think every woman, even those without any experience with homosexual culture, knows her man well enough to suspect if something is wrong. Men and women are not that resilient to moral guilt. If the man you love, and loves you, is engaging in behavior like that, then you are likely to pick up on it, even it you cannot identify it as homosexuality. Of course there is always the off-chance that you find the person who is incapable of feeling guilt, but I do think that is rare.
I do think it is terribly sad to find men and women in this situation. For as much contempt as I have for these lying, closeted individuals, I do have pangs of sympathy. Being an out gay man or woman is not always easy, and there are times when even the most out and proud members of the gay community feel the need to tone down their "gayness." Until society really comes around and accepts being gay as normal, there will always be closeted homosexuals. Even then, I think there are people, mostly men, who simply refuse to "be gay" because it's not manly. But who knows? There is always hope.
As for what to do about the debacle, I am a firm believer that marriage laws need to reflect the pain and suffering heterosexual spouses go through after finding out their spouse is homosexually active. In addition to the health problems (I really hate to think about that), the revelation that your spouse is gay and has been cheating with members of their same gender creates such emotional turmoil. Bonnie Kaye sent me several packets of letters she has received from women over the years who have been subjected to this problem. They are heart-wrenching and tear-jerking to say the least. I think it is time for society to stop condoning these marriages between homosexual men and women and their uninformed spouses. Under the no fault divorce regimes active in most states, spouses who breach their marital agreements in this egregious form receive no sort of punishment. I hate using the word "punishment," but I truly believe that is what form the retribution for that breach should be. I think it raises major moral problems.
For the record, I am not saying that criminal sanctions should be used. Actually, I adamantly believe that criminal sanctions should never be used to rectify a marital breaches (except for killing your spouse of course). I think there should be some form of civil liability placed upon these cheating spouses. I think the law needs to deter these men and women from entering into heterosexual marriage. Obviously, every person has a right to heterosexual marriage, but not a right to go and cheat on your spouse with another man or woman. I wont get into a major legal discussion, but I will admit that my proposal is highly controversial and is not without its problems. However, I do think the burdens of this type of legal reform would be greatly outweighed by the benefits.
No comments:
Post a Comment