The following are some thoughts (and a question), over how best not to describe attributes of traditional masculinity in gay men. Specifically, whether the term “straight acting” is a relevant and appropriate description, or a remaining vestige of the internalized homophobia most gay men carry on some level, all of their lives.

I find the premise underlying this debate somewhat fascinating; provided one is discussing social anthropology or critical gender theory. However, the not insignificant problem, strikes me to be one of usage. The majority of times “straight acting” is engaged, it references traits gay men view as positive in partner selection, or describes how they think they self deport. In either context, I cannot state emphatically enough, “straight acting”, becomes a patently useless and divisive term. Most concerning, it is saddled with a lengthy and richly homophobic undercurrent.

In the usage I describe above, “straight-acting”, as a descriptive term is not only imprecise, but would appear sloppily unexamined if we reference the vague meanings individuals have attempted to apply to it. Beyond a somewhat generous assumption of a gross English language misuse, what is the term saying? What, exactly, does “straight acting” imply, and in a cultural context, what does it suggest? I assume it is supposed to, beyond a small, pseudo-masculine rainbow flag approvingly bestowed on the best of butch, say one thing and one thing only:

“I’m not one of those fags”.

Insert eye roll and visible wince here.

“Straight acting” is both a poor choice and a dangerous choice, since there is a pernicious assumption being missed. That being any potential to accurately depict traditional masculinity in gay men via a description of “straight acting”, is by nature both a pejorative and essentialist referencing. The fatal error hides in the word “acting”. Acting implies an intentional, fictitious performance, and therefore is the complete polarity of a naturally manifested personal affect. Gay men who appear traditionally masculine are thus “performing” masculinity. Hiding our essentially effeminate manner while swathed in stereotypical and reductionist Village People iconography. The widespread cultural interpretation likely becomes:

“Fags have to fake it”.

But where it gets even more concerning, is the suggestion that the trait one is seeking is not evident or attainable in gay men, therefore positioning all other manifestations of masculinity in conflict with a singular presentation of “natural”; anything else is, by mandate, an appropriated affectation.

In closing, what has struck me is the massive, glaring hole dead center in the “straight acting” theory: A not so subtle irony hiding just under the surface; where traditional masculine attributes are obsessively and highly prized by men who, via their own words and cultural narratives, believe “gay” never to be analogous to real masculinity. Ultimately, for the champions of “straight acting”, it is an amusingly self revealing choice, isn’t it? I’m guessing one the cheerleaders of selective and exclusionary deportment did not see coming.

Oops!