Common Sense	Common Sense Archive

Have the qualities of homophobia changed in the past 25 years? By "qualities," I do not mean what the word can denote-- excellences or accomplishments-- but rather in the sense of "aspects" or "attributes," the parts of the damn thing. I just looked up "homophobia" in my desk dictionary and was surprised to find it listed. Why surprised? The word was minted in 1972 and has had 32 years to get in the dictionaries. What word or words were used before 1972 to describe the phenomenon? I don't recall. To answer my first question, I think yes. Just the naming of the beast changed the discourse and turned the conversation. One wonders what other useful neologisms need to be coined to more fully describe our world.

View our poll archive

I heard some right-wing homophobe on the radio, frothing about how "gay marriage" in Massachusetts was leading the world to hell in a hand barrel-- you'd think he would have said hand basket!-- and somewhere in his frothing, he paused to note: "But I'm not a homophobe!" This statement was obviously disingenuous; I found it strange that he felt he had to insert this phrase in his ranting. The progress of our community since the invention of the word homophobia is particularly striking-- the shrinks taking our "condition" off their list of pathologies, overturning sodomy laws, employment and housing protections, civil unions in some states. But the homophobia is still very much with us and since it is an irrational force, hard to address.

As with most tools of oppression, the homophobia seeped into every aspect of culture, even into the behaviors and attitudes of gay men. It's what I call the "Roy Cohn Syndrome." Cohn, promiscuously homosexual, always self-identified as a heterosexual man, but one who had sex with men. It gets confusing. I can understand why some men would come to think that identifying as homosexual would not look good on their résumé-- though the current Pope has Hitler Youth and the Inquisition on his CV and he got the brass ring (probably something higher grade than brass). But the results can be some very strange personality configurations and, à la Cohn, we find the right-wing anti-gay homosexual man. They continue to pop up in the news, even though you would think their time was over.

We have here in Massachusetts a man who has raised pots and pots of money for some of the republic's most reactionary politicians-- Jesse Helms's name comes to mind-- and this gent up-and-married his boyfriend recently at his North Shore mansion. Does money buy this man happiness?

On the other side of the country, we have the case of the mayor in the state of Washington-- publicly and aggressively homophobic, but soliciting dates with young men on web sites. Don't these guys know that there is no such thing as a secret life anymore? Just putting up with all that stress must take years off a life.

I think Allen Ginsberg's example is far more useful. Back in the 1940s, when Ginsberg had decided that his sexual orientation was of the same-sex variety, he went to see a psychiatrist. His psychiatrist was sympathetic. When Ginsberg told him he was homosexual, the doctor told him, and I paraphrase, that it was now his job to be the best homosexual he could possibly be, a mission that Allen fulfilled in an exemplary manner. It's hard to imagine the mid-to-late 20th-century cultural scene, much less the history of homosexuality, without Allen. He had the good sense to get famous young and manage it all pretty well.

What is the source of that hate that manifests itself as homophobia? I don't know, but I presume, in our culture, it is traditional religious beliefs. At least that's what the homophobes themselves say, and they probably have a good case. I would like to see a considerable diminution of religious influence in our society and, when I was younger, we seemed to be heading in that direction. But no longer. In fact, we seem to have an administration in the nation's capital that is rushing pell-mell to dismantle the remaining barriers separating church and state. The fish rots from the head.

But I have also come around to an idea that I once resisted-- that men who are the biggest homophobes probably suffer the Roy Cohn Syndrome and are screwed up because of all sorts of sexual desires, behaviors, and identities that are not integrated or even addressed. Can someone actually enjoy the condition of self-loathing? There is also something I hear in the voices of the homophobes: they need the Evil Other. With the collapse of the Soviet Empire, the "gay agenda" has been moved in as the replacement. But their worldview is based on hating something and/or someone; it's quite a disturbing realization that our society is set up to churn out these people. It all seems so foreign to me.

Author Profile:  Mitzel
	Mitzel was a founding member of the Fag Rag collective, and has been a Guide columnist since 1986. He manages Calamus Books near Boston's South Station.
	Email:	mitzel@calamusbooks.com
	Website:	calamusbooks.com