Almost the definition of a silly question
Dec. 1st, 2007 04:36 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sparkindarknessA question I’ve been asked over and over by people - some of whom should have known better. Some have been genuinely ignorant (and not just about sexuality but about gender roles it seems). Some are clearly living in the 50s. Some are just looking for a way to insult me, as they do. Whatever the reason, the question keeps coming up
“Which one of you is the woman?” (variations include “who’s the wife?” and “Who wears the trousers?”)
(Lesbians are often asked which one is the “man” or which one is “butch” or “femme”)
Just read that again and try not to choke at the sheer WRONGNESS of it.
We’re gay, we’re male. By definition that should say that NEITHER of us is the “woman.” The homosexuality thing pretty much means that this is a boobie free zone. There are no women here.
Now, since you’d think even the most insane bigot could figure out that much it follows that they mean something else other than gender - possibilities and things they HAVE meant:
1) Who is top/bottom during sex? Well, there is a simple answer to this - none of your freaking business! Honestly I have been asked this by people who do not come close to knowing me well enough to ask that question. Seriously, since when is it remotely appropriate to ask intimate sexual details of people you hardly know?
A good alternate answer is “whoever gets tied up first” because you get that wonderful breaking sound when their brain runs out their ears.
2)Who is the dominant/submissive partner? This is what I mean by seriously messed up gender issues dating back to the 50s. Aren’t we past the time when the man was the “head of the household?” Even if you DID need a dominant/submissive partner there’s no requirement that the dom has to be male. So this can easily be answered by stripping away the silly sexism.
We’ve reached a balance we like. Neither of is inherently dominant. We both recognise that the other has skills/knowledge/inclination that makes them better at some things. When it comes to buying cars, electrical appliances or anything else vaguely like that I instantly hand it all over to Beloved. When it comes to the bank books, cheque books, investments and stuff he defers to me. When it comes to actually budgeting we both tussle, since he is better at budgeting but IMO he budgets too much and we both control each other’s excessive fads and whims. We both have a good sense of when the other is being silly to put our foot down, and enough sense of when WE are being silly to back down. Occasionally one will make decisions for the other and the reaction will range from “Oh, I love how he knows me so well he knows what I was going to say” through to “who died and made you king?” depending on mood/inclination/breakfast/coffee consumption. Other than that? We debate, we discuss, we argue, we see just how important something IS to the other and make decisions like that. Probably the same as every other modern couple.
The idea that one of us is the boss is kind of laughable. We arrange our affairs like everyone else - lots of arguing, sulking and passive aggression :p
I think the only difference is that one may occasionally pull a “dom” and take command (usually Beloved) but that’s more of a sexual taste thing than a lifestyle thing since any attempt to use it in a “RL” situation would result in much slappage - and not sexual happy slappage either.
3) Roles in the house As silly as no.2 really. But in case it needs to be said neither of us are barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. We both work full time. We both cook (badly). We both clean (well, I clean more, because I hate dirt and he tidies more because he can’t stand clutter) we both try to make the other do the ironing, we both avoid doing the gardening. Any insects that infiltrate our house we can both deal with on our own. Should a mouse ever infiltrate our home neither of us will be standing on a stool squealing. If an appliance breaks down Beloved will likely tinker with it for a little while and I will ring the repairman who should arrive just in time for beloved to announce it’s completely broken and we need a new one.
You know what gets me about all this? Anyone in the 21st century should KNOW the answer to this question. The ignorance and lack of thought is utterly stunning - and not just about sexuality but about gender itself. I fear for their wives.
“Which one of you is the woman?” (variations include “who’s the wife?” and “Who wears the trousers?”)
(Lesbians are often asked which one is the “man” or which one is “butch” or “femme”)
Just read that again and try not to choke at the sheer WRONGNESS of it.
We’re gay, we’re male. By definition that should say that NEITHER of us is the “woman.” The homosexuality thing pretty much means that this is a boobie free zone. There are no women here.
Now, since you’d think even the most insane bigot could figure out that much it follows that they mean something else other than gender - possibilities and things they HAVE meant:
1) Who is top/bottom during sex? Well, there is a simple answer to this - none of your freaking business! Honestly I have been asked this by people who do not come close to knowing me well enough to ask that question. Seriously, since when is it remotely appropriate to ask intimate sexual details of people you hardly know?
A good alternate answer is “whoever gets tied up first” because you get that wonderful breaking sound when their brain runs out their ears.
2)Who is the dominant/submissive partner? This is what I mean by seriously messed up gender issues dating back to the 50s. Aren’t we past the time when the man was the “head of the household?” Even if you DID need a dominant/submissive partner there’s no requirement that the dom has to be male. So this can easily be answered by stripping away the silly sexism.
We’ve reached a balance we like. Neither of is inherently dominant. We both recognise that the other has skills/knowledge/inclination that makes them better at some things. When it comes to buying cars, electrical appliances or anything else vaguely like that I instantly hand it all over to Beloved. When it comes to the bank books, cheque books, investments and stuff he defers to me. When it comes to actually budgeting we both tussle, since he is better at budgeting but IMO he budgets too much and we both control each other’s excessive fads and whims. We both have a good sense of when the other is being silly to put our foot down, and enough sense of when WE are being silly to back down. Occasionally one will make decisions for the other and the reaction will range from “Oh, I love how he knows me so well he knows what I was going to say” through to “who died and made you king?” depending on mood/inclination/breakfast/coffee consumption. Other than that? We debate, we discuss, we argue, we see just how important something IS to the other and make decisions like that. Probably the same as every other modern couple.
The idea that one of us is the boss is kind of laughable. We arrange our affairs like everyone else - lots of arguing, sulking and passive aggression :p
I think the only difference is that one may occasionally pull a “dom” and take command (usually Beloved) but that’s more of a sexual taste thing than a lifestyle thing since any attempt to use it in a “RL” situation would result in much slappage - and not sexual happy slappage either.
3) Roles in the house As silly as no.2 really. But in case it needs to be said neither of us are barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. We both work full time. We both cook (badly). We both clean (well, I clean more, because I hate dirt and he tidies more because he can’t stand clutter) we both try to make the other do the ironing, we both avoid doing the gardening. Any insects that infiltrate our house we can both deal with on our own. Should a mouse ever infiltrate our home neither of us will be standing on a stool squealing. If an appliance breaks down Beloved will likely tinker with it for a little while and I will ring the repairman who should arrive just in time for beloved to announce it’s completely broken and we need a new one.
You know what gets me about all this? Anyone in the 21st century should KNOW the answer to this question. The ignorance and lack of thought is utterly stunning - and not just about sexuality but about gender itself. I fear for their wives.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 04:43 pm (UTC)yeah. i wonder about people, sometimes. okay, no i lie, i wonder about them A LOT. the frightening thing is, i look at this, and i realize really the only difference is that these people feel the need to ask you this. these same people look at me and my husband and just make assumptions. ick.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 03:20 am (UTC)Ick to infinity. In some ways (at least with the genuinely curious) I welcome the opportunity to explain things sensibly to the incredibly ignorant. You're right that it's so much better than them looking at a couple - gay or interracial - and assuming several quite quite quite insane things
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 05:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 05:23 pm (UTC)Reminds me of something I recently read, a very interesting (and DEPRESSING) scientific study by Human Rights Watch on the issue of rape in male prisons in the US. Officially it is not an issue. According to various estimates by inmates and guards, it's happening to 1/8th to 1/5th of the prison population, and that's probably only counting violent encounters, and not the pervasive manipulative coercion. The social dynamic that was described overall absolutely chills me to the bone-- it's not about sex, at all, it's about domination, and the aggressors are overwhelmingly straight. This is the mentality that has infiltrated our world-- particularly in the US, which has a larger prison population than anywhere else on the planet. Any man who's on the receiving end at any point-- willingly or not-- gets labeled 'gay' permanently, and immediately booted to Omega of the pile, a status he can't shake without raping somebody ELSE. Those so labeled are treated as property, as disgraced, barely human... and they are defined, in an essential way, as women. So that's where the stigma comes from-- gayness = humiliation, degredation, shame, weakness, suffering. All this... apparently woman's natural habitat. *twitch*
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:13 pm (UTC)Rape of prisoners is a shame and a scandal; - these people are placed in the most utterly vulnerable and dependent position, we have a DUTY to keep them safe. But because they're prisoners they are completely written off and no-one cares if they face shocking abuse
I think most rape/sex abuse IS about domination. It's about attacking something you hate or forcing control over others. And for male rape that is doubly true in that the rapists have these backward idea that the victim is "feminised" thereby weakened in the rapist's eyes
Even outside of prisons, most men who rape men are straight, according to the MET (though the victims are usually gay). It is actually often a shocking form of homophobic attack. The 'dominant' straight man expressing his physical power over the 'weak' 'feminised' victim.
I think you can see it even in the gay community - some foolish men who scream that they are only EVER tops and this somehow makes them less gay or better than other gays (especially common with the down low loonies). And it all stems from the idea that someone taking penetrative sex is feminised and therefore is weak - which is a horrendous indictment of their opinion of women
Really, socity is severely messed up and should be past this. Long past this
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 06:55 pm (UTC)Overall the way people act when the veneer of civilization slips, really reminds me of any documentary I've ever seen about wild monkeys-- they do this too.
Actually I'm starting to think that 'homophobia' isn't even the right term for this reaction, since it's not really a fear of male-on-male SEX or relationships, it's a (fairly logical) fear of torment and humiliation. If the two could be separated that might really help make sense of things for those poor sods.
This whole thing is an issue among lesbians, too, weirdly enough-- there's a lot of hysteria in certain lesbian populations, a stigma against penetration of ANY kind... like, since men (who go around acting like monkeys all the time) are evil, they don't want lovers who try to act like men, or something... as if penetration itself is the problem/symbol of all the 'bad' things that men represent, and taking it means weakness.
It really pisses me off, what this stuff has done to civilization. And then I end up poking at the religious nutcases on YouTube, trying to stick up for the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence and getting told I'm on my way to hell. These PEOPLE... right out of the DARK AGES.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-06 04:23 pm (UTC)Thanks for the well wishes, also. I've made it through the other side and am firmly entrenched in my convalescence. Speaking of...why do mother's find it necessary to continuously point out the glaringly obvious? Ugh.
Anyway. I'm attempting to ketchup. I think I'm around 140-160 back. I am insane.
Hank
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 05:42 pm (UTC)...y'know, I also thought we were past the whole 'head of the household' thing, until an acquaintance of mine suddenly leapt with both feet into the barefoot-pathetic*-pregnant (well, trying to be) - including putting the whole 'obey' thing back into her vows... I'm still trying to work out how the hell I should interact with her, given that she seems to have resigned all status as an individual & is trying to be an appendage... (At least with the kink crowd, they're more honest about what they're doing?)
*I add this because there's absolutely nothing wrong with being pregnant or barefoot, unless one is treating either as a reason to be pathetic.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:22 pm (UTC)We should be past this. It's beyond archaic.
Oh gods, this is what worries me, when women themselves play into the whole ridiculous edifice, it shows how deeply ingrained it is.
I was going to say - is she doing this because she's a wonderful kinkster?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-04 08:50 pm (UTC)Sadly not.. :( I mean there might be a little bit of kink in there but if there is, I don't wanna know. But seriously, I really want to throttle the girl sometimes, for the insult - way I see it, just because this time around I happen to be in a body with boobs, hasn't changed who I am or made me any less capable, and suggesting otherwise is offensive...
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 06:15 pm (UTC)2. Who the fuck prompted this and may I have the pleasure of using the Haddock?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 04:37 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:24 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 06:35 pm (UTC)Actually, I'm going digress instead: When my sister started to go to the gym and doing some weights (just for fun and health, not to look like Arnie), other men regularly asked her husband if he wasn't afraid of her now.
My comment: so do these guys really think that the only reason their wives aren't beating them up now is that they aren't strong enough for it? And if yes, why isn't that deeply bothering them?
I once asked a guy who thought it was reasonable to quiz me on my eating habits (I'm a bit overweight) how often he masturbated. He got all flustered and none-of-your-businessy, which I answered with a pointedly raised eyebrow. I think he got it in the end.
Some people just seem to think that anything that takes you away from the norm takes away your right to have normal rules of politeness and empathy apply to you. 'He's not like me, so he can't feel like me.' Idiots.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:29 pm (UTC)That's a main thing (though as I said to Kami in some ways it's better to answer the questiopns than let the assumptions roam) but it amazed me how people who were near strangers felt they had a right to ask me some very personal questiosn. That's just crazy!
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 05:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 07:46 pm (UTC)I stop now lest I rant.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:31 pm (UTC)Or, to give them some charitable benefit of the doubt. They are SO ignorant and SO ridiculous with their iron clad gender roles that they DON'T THINK a relationship CAN happen unless these gender roles are adhered to. they think their standard is the norm and the onyl right way and we could never achieve that.
Argh, now I am ranting!
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 08:25 pm (UTC)Perfectly reasonable thing to ask - provided they will give you their bank account information, their PIN, their email passwords, and tell you how often they have anal and who does who.
See, one of the reasons I like to write slash, is that one can just shed all this gender-rigid shit, although plenty of writers in this genre are perfectly happy imposing the traditional divisions on two guys (which makes me wonder, why are you writing slash, exactly?)
This is the one of the reasons gay marriage should be encouraged (and no doubt one of the reasons conservatives hate it) - it allows everyone, gay or straight, to be able to move away from these outdated stereotypes and just concentrate on how the relationship works.
I could have picked you for the tidy one :)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:37 pm (UTC)I wonder at that sometimes as well. I've read many a sotry where I've thought "wow, a 1950s husband/wife couple - only the wife has a dick!" I've ranted about it before :)
It can finally drive a stake into the vampire of gender roles - people have the roles THEY want, not because they have certain genatalia. It can do a lot of good for a lot of peopkle - of course, that's whyb the conservatives hate it so much
Moi? LOL, not oragnised enough for it. I hate DIRT, drives me mad, but I'm happy to have piles of things on desks, to leave things lying around - because I remember where I put things (kinda/usually) unless Beloved MOVES them (grrr)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 09:13 pm (UTC)Unbelievable.
Oddly enough, I just wrote a scene on this subject in my latest WIP. I was thinking about taking it out, because I wondered if readers would accept that these attitudes would still exist in the 22nd century, but having read your post, I think I'll leave it in.
~
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-01 10:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:09 am (UTC)and other people, like your good self, are basically awesome.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:45 pm (UTC)Thank you. We rock, but why are we so outnumbered?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 08:19 pm (UTC)Dude, because you two *stole* all the awesome!
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:10 am (UTC)But as for the people who are asking you questions, I'm pretty sure I don't want to take their conception of the "woman" position in my relationship just because I've cleverly internalized my genitalia. Come to think of it, I wouldn't want to be "the man" either. I don't think my husband could handle control of the finances or grilling, and there's no way I'm taking on icky-bug-and-substance disposal detail.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 01:56 pm (UTC)No, you have the sneaky internalised genatalia, you need to be scared of mousies and bare foot and preganant chained to your oven, apparently
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 02:56 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 02:04 pm (UTC)Play to strengths and make sure you get them to use their strengths, standard relationship fodder
People make huge assumptions and, I think, ask the questions either to insult or to point out the 'flaw' in our relationship - because without boobies we can get no washing or cooking done, apparently :)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-03 12:14 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 03:44 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 02:05 pm (UTC)I have no idea, but it has an infinite supply
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 10:51 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 02:09 pm (UTC)You know, that's the silliest thing. These people ask me intimate, private details about my sex life but they are so squicked by the idea of gay sex that ANY answer I give is going to break them. Silly silly people
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-03 01:52 pm (UTC)Oh, god, that is awesome. I almost wish I were gay so I would have a chance to use that line.
Whether someone is gay or straight, male or female, should have nothing to do with household roles. And I know it's slightly hypocritical of me to say that, considering I'm a woman and I do all of the housework. But I also have an insane urge to just take care of everyone. Sometimes it drives me crazy, but I can't seem to help it. I try to feed everyone who walks into my house, and then clean up after them.
The worst part is that I grew up in a house where my father did all of the housework (still does) and all of the cooking (still does). And he did it all on top of working a physically demanding job full time (retired). So maybe my insane urge has nothing to do with being female, it's because I'm just like my dad.
Um. Oh, holy shit. After typing all of that, I think I just realized something. Ya know how people always say that women marry guys just like their dad? I think I married a guy just like my mom. Oh god. That is so disturbing. I think I need a shrink.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-07 09:12 pm (UTC)I know I'm days late here, but I just had to answer to this: I (girl) married a guy who's like my mom and my dad, mooshed together. He's my mom's grounded sanity and responsibility to me and my dad's dysfunctional eccentricity... with a liberal dose of eccentricity in the mix (same brand as mine) so he understands where I'm coming from. He just remembers to don pants before leaving the house, whereas I sometimes have to be reminded.
Our kids (if any) are doomed. Heck, our cat is already crazily eccentric.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-03 03:14 pm (UTC)::hugs Spark:: I'm sorry people can be such crapheads.