Evan Casper-Futterman ‘07

As many national political issues are wont to do, it seems that the debate on gay marriage in the United States has become rather monolithic—as if to suggest that it is the universal and uncontested desire of all gays and lesbians to share equally in the institution of marriage. On March 29th, the Queer Coalition of Vassar College screened the film Homotopia, which presents a strong critique of the gay marriage movement as it currently manifests itself on the political landscape of the United States.

Depicting a very traditional-looking white middle class gay wedding reception—interrupted by a strike team of young gay and transgender men, drag queens, and lesbians throwing water balloons and knocking over trays of drinks and snacks—the film and the filmmakers encourage us to re-evaluate how we think about gay marriage because of the post-colonial perspective they employ. Their critique is that the current gay marriage movement co-opts queer identities into discourses of middle class consumerism and mainstream patriotism. While I don’t believe that marriage—regardless of the sexualities of the individuals involved—is inherently middle class or materialistic, the filmmakers’ point is timely and deserves more attention.

In addition to challenging my own views on the issue of gay marriage, the movie went further and challenged my relationship with straight marriage as well. Previously, I had decided to forgo marriage in order to achieve solidarity with gay and lesbian couples that do not have that privilege of choice. Presently, I understand my own choice as one that is also relevant to other heterosexuals. And why not? As the movement for gay marriage brings “the American family” into the political spotlight, would it not behoove straight people, as the principal consumers of marriage, to consider our relationship to it, as well as with each other?

The involvement of those directly implicated in the issue at hand—in this case, heterosexual couples with the privilege of marriage—can provoke rapid and profound changes in any social movement. Other than simply offering themselves as allies of gay activism, heterosexuals would do well to take cues from the creativity that many queer, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender activists have brought to the issue of marriage over the past decades in order to push the debate around marriage beyond its current simplicity. The current public discussions surrounding marriage and the family in the United States could allow for significantly broader changes than the simple inclusion of same-sex couples into the institution of marriage—if heterosexuals dared to think as creatively as their homosexual activist counterparts.

It would not be unprecedented, either. Heterosexual couples have historically demonstrated a transformational impulse when it comes to marriage: The realization comes to us that heterosexuals transformed the institution of marriage from one exclusively of economic security and class status into one of two individuals who are in love.

Yet the heterosexual impulse and innovative imagination has been silent for the last few centuries. I fear we have become too complacent with a marred and inferior institution. So as long as we’re on the subject of imagination, I have my own idea for a movie—I think I’ll call it Heterotopia. We see panic and terror in the American heartland—“family values” country—and Fox News running the emergency broadcast system as the nuclear patriarchal normative “family” threatens to collapse.

This crisis of “the American family,” so long a fear of the conservative Christians is, in my movie, brought about not from allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, but rather because marriages have ceased outright. Hundreds of thousands of straight couples across the nation relinquish their privilege to marry because they view their own marriages as less sacred considering the historically violent and presently exclusive boundaries of the institution.

They would not be doing this out of a sense of “guilt.” Rather, quite the opposite: It would be an action taken because of an abundance of innocence. It is innocence that is the driving force allowing a heterosexual couple to accept their privilege of marriage without understanding its direct connection to the exclusion of homosexual couples. The idea that a privilege such as marriage can exist justly for some while being withheld from others is as flawed as those who disputed Lincoln’s claim that our country could not survive half enslaved and half free.

“The harvest is great, but the laborers are few,” as the saying goes. Why, at this crucial moment in the history of the institution of marriage, are heterosexuals leaving the transformation to others when they could become a juggernaut in the fight for a more just and equitable family life in this country? While I don’t think my movie will be in theaters anytime soon, I believe the time has come for heterosexuals to more fully accept and engage with their enormous socio-political potential that has languished for the last few centuries. Heterosexuals must come to grips with their own innocence and re-evaluate their participation in the institution of marriage. At the urging of the queer activist community, it seems that the time has come for people of all sexual orientations to come together to think about a future beyond marriage.

By Phillipe Kleefield ’09

As much as they might like to disagree, most gay men on Vassar campus are easily identifiable. Whether they wear their polos a little loose or their Diesel jeans baggy, they are easily distinguishable from your average straight boy. They may flamboyantly prance around campus or chose to lay low, but they are all equally homosexual; there are no shades of gray. However, in contrast to the gay man’s stereotype, the bear community is hyper-emasculating the gay man’s image and making its presence known New York City and around the world.

As of late, the gay community has seen a rise of the “bear culture.” Bears define themselves as mature, masculine men who seek to maintain an outwardly manly appearance. Bears come in many forms; however, generally, beards and chest hair are an unspoken requirement. Sometimes bears are chunky and overweight; sometimes they are muscular and defined, like your archetypal man’s man. For the most part, a bear is outwardly tough, lending no insight to the fact that in the bedroom, they may show a much more vulnerable side. Yet a complete definition of a bear is highly debatable.

Time-Out New York, a magazine dedicated to weekly events in New York City, recently focused their gay and lesbian subsection on the bear community. They listed an assortment of clubs for bears, ranging from campy monthly events such as “XXL’s Transatlantic Tea Dance,” to the more hardcore “WOOF bar” in Chelsea. Bears are everywhere, even invading the online dating scene with websites such as bigmusclebears.com or others, where one posts a picture and surfers determine whether or not you are a bear. GLAAD and the Center in NYC include links to bear-friendly websites, recognizing the presence of the bear community. While the bear movement started in the San Francisco bay area in the ‘80s, it contemporarily has become a popular, mainstream movement. Look closely at the muscle man sitting next to you on the subway; he might be on bigmusclebears.com.

Unfortunately, bears can be patronizing to gay men who display effeminate style and mannerisms. On popular bear dating sites, a typical ad might ask for “no fats or fems, hair’s a plus.” While many bears give off a “straight,” rugged, manly man vibe, many of them are just as flamboyant as the typical club kid, and condescension towards other gays is problematic. Bears may be bears, but there is no need to further segregate within a community that already suffers from so much discrimination. I’m not asking for peace and love; after all, gay men are not a homogenous group of people. I’m just asking for some common respect.

For fun, I recently posted a basic profile on bigmusclebears.com to see whether bears were really as selective as they come off. For those of you who know me, rugged, manly and masculine are not the first three adjectives that come to mind. I recently checked the profile and I’ve had 93 people put me on their “I like” list, an X-rated version of the Facebook “poke.” I’ve also received messages in which people ask me if they can be my Daddy. I was pretty surprised to find responses to my profile, mainly due to my “unbearly” qualities and my lack of use on the website. If bears are as manly, rugged and put off by effeminate men as they would like to think, then what do they want with an old queen like me?

The qualities that make you a bear are constantly in question. If you are hairless and effeminate, but really attracted to the bear-type, are you still a bear? If you have some qualities that fit the description, but not all, are you still a bear? If you want to find out for yourself, start up a profile on bigmusclebears.com—you might find a bear looking for a cub. Check out the local run down bar, and you might find a daddy looking for a boy toy. The bear community hasn’t quite made it to Vassar campus yet, but when it does, straight boys beware: your buddies might just be BITs (bears in training).