One of the factors underlying suspicion and prejudice directed against gay men, is a popular stereotype of a “hedonistic gay lifestyle”, of unrestrained sexual promiscuity, and excessive rates of alcohol and drug use. This image is certainly not applicable to all gay men, but statistically at least, there is a measure of truth to it. Instead of simply wishing the problem away, ignoring it or denying it, we should give more thought to just why it exists, how does it arise. I touched on this last month, raising it as one of the reasons why we should support gay marriage when I spoke on the subject to the Tablet Table, and have been reflecting on it further in attempting a response to a Commonweal article last week (“Can we talk about homosexuality?“), on how Catholic teaching itself contributes to the problems of sexual abuse by priests, and unhealthy sexual behaviour by gay students.
In attempting to write my response, I found I needed to refer back to some background from my own experience, which I was unable to summarize succinctly enough to include it as a simple introduction to the main post. So instead, I offer here some notes and conclusions from my own experience, when newly divorced and still in the closet back in the early 1980′s, and later after coming out, and in need of a new social network. I will return to my original post, responding to the Commonweal piece, later.
Cape Town: Divorce Workshop Group
When my marriage finally ended in somewhat traumatic circumstances, I was left with much the same difficulties as any other newly divorced parent (or one facing divorce, as I then was): the practical problems of single - parenting, coping with the emotional trauma, and the challenge of building new friendships - let alone deeper relationships.
These are major challenges, but in my case I was unexpected presented with major help, right on my doorstep. Soon after arriving home from work one evening, I answered a knock at the door, and found waiting for me an imperious blond woman, who announced in a thick East European accent, “I Gryszna. You come me, Divorce Workshop Group“.
The Polish Gryszna, it turned out, had a daughter who was in the same class at school as one of my own girls. As mothers do, she had picked up from the children’s gossip that I was newly single, and taken on herself the task of coming to my rescue. As we lived literally across the road from the school, it was easy for her to call on me on her way home, after meeting her own daughter. I don’t recall the detail of how I responded to her command, or which specific meeting it was, but I did indeed “go her”, to “Divorce Workshop Group” - and a very positive experience it turned out to be.
Cape Town’s DWG was a support group for those recently divorced and facing divorce, with a balanced range of activities: formal information lectures and discussions (on law, or mental health issues, or on children’s interests), organized outings and excursions (to a movie, theatre or restaurant), and informal social gatherings (known as “sundowners”), where people would gather for very simple drinks and snacks at a member’s home after work, with the possibility of continuing to a pizzeria, steakhouse or similar for supper to follow. From time to time (once or twice a month), daytime functions were arranged which were specifically designed to include participation by the children.
The range of activities was balanced and worked well together, but it was the club philosophy and principles that made it particularly valuable. Every member was given a listing of the complete membership, including addresses and telephone numbers (regularly updated), with explicit encouragement to call each other for conversation or companionship - but not for dating. The purpose was clearly stated, again and again: to encourage friendships, not sexual relationships. We were regularly reminded, that if one member (male) phoned another (female) and invited her out for a meal or movie, it meant “I would like your company for a meal or movie” - not (as is so often the case), “I want to fuck you”. A monthly newsletter gave notice of forthcoming functions, reported on the key points from the information meetings - and repeated the insistence that the club existed as a friendship group, not a singles club.
The formula worked really well. Freed of sexual subtexts, conversations easily developed into simple friendships, which are so important at a time of deep stress and loneliness. Some of these later developed into deeper, more intimate relationships - but that was a natural and healthy development. The prevailing ethos was clear: a social club, where members found information and friendship, not primarily a dating club.
Johannesburg: GASA Rand
That period of my life was when I was only just beginning to come out to myself, and had not yet done so to anybody else. That came a year later, after moving to Johannesburg. In a deliberate attempt to develop a social network, I soon joined an organization called GASA Rand - the Gay Association of South Africa, Witwatersrand region, which at the time (1984, when homosexual activity was still a criminal offence) was in effect the only gay organization functioning in Johannesburg. I also became a regular at one of Johannesburg’s only two gay bars, which was just a few blocks from my flat, and where I valued the conversation and friendships I developed, and the affirmation from the rare experience of just being in the company of other gay men. What I did NOT experience, was the regular sexual hook-ups that reading American gay fiction had led me to expect.
As I became more familiar with local gay life, I began to be concerned that so much of it seemed to depend on meeting in the bar or club environment, which is a turn off for some people who dislike it, and carries the dangers of over - indulgence for those who do. When I asked about other opportunities for meeting people socially, I learned that beyond simple friendship networks for entertaining at home, these hardly existed. This led me to reflect on my Cape Town experience with the Divorce Workshop Group, and I asked members of the GASA Rand committee if they would consider adopting similar ideas themselves, to provide a healthier alternative environment where gay men and women could meet socially. They did - and asked me to set it up.
In doing so, I made only two changes to the model I had benefited from in Cape Town: the need for discretion made it impossible to share members’ address and telephone details, or to publish the address details for gatherings in members’ homes, and there was also not the same need to make deliberate provision for functions inclusive of children. Otherwise, it was the mixture as before: roughly once a week, an informal “sundowner” gathering in a members’ home over wine, beer, or fruit juice and simple snacks of crisps and peanuts; once or twice a month a picnic / barbeque or walk in a public park; group visits to the cinema or theatre; and information/ education meetings. (The first two of these were probably the first ever public meetings in Johannesburg to address the problem of HIV/ Aids). The whole package was held together by a simple bi-monthly newsletter, which spelt out, as the Cape Town model had done: this is a friendship group - not a fuck club.
The outcome was gratifying: the Sundowner gatherings worked as well for Johannesburg’s gay men and lesbians as they had done for Cape Town’s divorced straights. Friendships developed naturally, and quite quickly, there developed a few specialist interest groups, such as a music group that met monthly to discuss favourite recordings. As in Cape Town, some of these friendships developed into longer, intimate relationships. No doubt, there were also one-night stands that followed some meetings (as they did for the DWG also), but these were not the focus of the gatherings. People met, talked, and enjoyed social interactions without sexual undertones dominating .
The lesson I drew from this, is simple. While there is some statistical truth in the stereotype of a hedonistic gay life style, with a degree of sexual promiscuity, and greater indulgence in alcohol and drugs, this is not typical of all gay men, nor is it inherent in the orientation itself. Some heterosexual single men share some of the same behaviours, there are similarities between straight single bars and gay bars. There are also notable differences in behaviour between divorced straight men and married men. The important behavioural distinction is not between men who are gay and those who are straight, but between single men who have access to sound structures for meeting and forging healthy relationships - and those who don’t.
Heterosexual men and women have lesser need for deliberately created structures than we do: from childhood on, they are socialized into learning how to interact and deal with the opposite sex. They are constantly meeting others in daily life, and when they meet others, there is an automatic assumption that they too, are straight. Yet even they at times find value in deliberately created friendship clubs, such as the DWG. Gay men and lesbians have grown up with none of the socialization advantages of the straights. It is not surprising that among the coping strategies they have adopted simply to meet people have been recourse to the bars and clubs, cruising grounds and internet hook-up sites.
To counter the excesses of gay hedonism, we need to provide alternatives, including public roles models in public life and on our screens, visible queer families, a willingness to talk frankly about our identities and lives - and spaces for people to meet and talk to each other, at all stages of our lives, from adolescence to old age.
Related articles
- Can we talk about homosexuality? (Commonweal)
- Why Straight Women Are Attracted to Gay Men (psychologytoday.com)
Over all, I’d say you are right. Though I do not have nearly as positive an outlook as you do in regards to hedonism and promiscuity (in at least a majority of gay men) being “environmental” or “inherent”. The meyers-briggs personality profile indicates that people with strong “s” type characteristics (sensates) are easily seduced by and frequently seek out physical sensations - whether it be music, art/architecture, strong or unique smells, or various physical sensations. they rely on physical sensation to get them through life rather than intuition or whatever. These people are often artistic (and when we applied this profiling to various religions, the traditional Tridentine Catholic Mass was very high on the list of “preferred religious rituals” by those with very strong “s” characteristics), but they are also prone to hedonistic lifestyles and must be extra careful to avoid falling into excessive promiscuity. I think that it is likely that a majority of gay-men have very strong “sensate” characteristics.
But, like I said, your suggestions and points definitely are solid and should be taken seriously and implemented. It is likely that had I had something like that I could have avoided most self-destructive stages, even though at the time I would not have wanted to be in such a group.
Ah well, I am very strongly “INTP,” extremely so in all those categories, and I have had my issues with hedonism. Being older now, matters are a bit calmer. Still, I think my youth might have benefited from a bit of social structure for channeling one to greater prudence. I think churches are the only places where I see that happening, and they largely reject us. Perhaps they will come around some time before I die, but, even if they do, I think that we will be a puzzle to them. Perhaps that is best. When I see the absolute poison put out by the RCC and its depraved peers, hedonism is probably better.