Gay "cliques"?

MJRS

Right, I'm pretty new to the gay scene, in a lot of respects. Today, I was talking to a gay friend and he mentioned twinks, and I thought "oh yeah, skinny, pretty, hairless guys." Then he started talking about bears, cubs, otters, straight-acting, lipstick lesbians, etc etc. Now I'd heard of bears and twinks, but what the hell are the rest? Does anyone now anymore of these cliques? Probably the wrong word, but whatever!

I'm guessing, but I'm gonna say cubs are young bears? Or young guys who like bears? Straight acting, I knew as a description, but is there straight acting cliques? This stuff is gas! Is there something inherently odd about the gay community attaching so many labels to it's members, when labels tend to be a pretty negative thing when used by people outside the gay community? Or is it a tongue in cheek thing, like the reclamation of the word queer?

Pretty interesting topic! I saw this in the funny side thread, it seemed to be a pisstake of the whole thing..

Conor30

They're not cliques. simply 'categories' of gays! There are also cliques on the scene too!

Thanks for the funny pics by the way!

Countess Markievicz

The pics are funny OP, I wonder is there a Lesbian version? No doubt I would fall under the 90's lesbian category

Killer Pigeon

Hmm, I'm a mix between Gaymer, Always Online and Bear. I think there's a few categories left out though.

L.Jenkins

What, there's more? :eek:

Killer Pigeon

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

What, there's more? :eek:

otters, chubs, etc..

Hunchback

don't forget the 'lesbians who look like justin bieber' category!!! http://lesbianswholooklikejustinbieber.tumblr.com/

Killer Pigeon

Or the skinhead lesbians.

(sorry, I don't know what the PC term is ... G.I. Janes?)

Captain Graphite

Am I the only person who's really creeped out by all these categories/cliques/whatever you wanna call them? This inexplicable need to label everything and identify as some subculture baffles and irritates me. The type of guy I like would probably be close enough to the description of a "twink" but that word just makes me cringe, as do terms like bear. Maybe it's just me but I find the whole thing really off-putting.

Caiseoipe19

Captain Graphite wrote: »

Am I the only person who's really creeped out by all these categories/cliques/whatever you wanna call them? This inexplicable need to label everything and identify as some subculture baffles and irritates me. The type of guy I like would probably be close enough to the description of a "twink" but that word just makes me cringe, as do terms like bear. Maybe it's just me but I find the whole thing really off-putting.

I wasn't going to say anything because everyone else found them funny but while I wouldn't say I'm creeped out by them but I don't like them myself to be honest. I don't like people putting stereotypes on gay people, be they gay themselves or not. So no, it's not just you. :cool:

JohnnyTodd

I'm surprised there is none for puff? That's a big one in the us

Funny pictures though

Conor30

Captain Graphite wrote: »

Am I the only person who's really creeped out by all these categories/cliques/whatever you wanna call them? This inexplicable need to label everything and identify as some subculture baffles and irritates me. The type of guy I like would probably be close enough to the description of a "twink" but that word just makes me cringe, as do terms like bear. Maybe it's just me but I find the whole thing really off-putting.

It's a very American thing. It's simply stereotyping, which itself is potentialy self-reinforcing. Even in their "high schools", they have group categories for all the students :rolleyes: : 'Normal', Emos, preps, jocks, nerds, rockers, Asians, Hispanics, Christians, skaters, 'gangsters'...

Aard

Bar a few obvious ones, could these 'labels' not be equally applied to straight guys?

Caiseoipe19

Conor30 wrote: »

It's a very American thing. It's simply stereotyping, which itself is potentialy self-reinforcing. Even in their "high schools", they have group categories for all the students :rolleyes: : 'Normal', Emos, preps, jocks, nerds, rockers, Asians, Hispanics, Christians, skaters, 'gangsters'...

I going to make that point but I could only think of nerds and jocks so I thought it's be a weak point with just two examples! But the thing is, it's one thing for a bunch of teenagers wanting a group to identify with, but do they not leave most of these identities behind them when they leave school/college? On the other hand, these labels on gay people are used by adults, that you'd think would have grown out of the "Can I be part of your group?" phase.

Aard wrote: »

Bar a few obvious ones, could these 'labels' not be equally applied to straight guys?

The one's in the pictures yeah they could be, but there are the common ones like "Bear" "Cub" "Twink" "Otter" "DILF" that are used, from what has been said. The point is that these labels are only put onto gay people with these traits while they are not put onto straight people with them.

jaffacakesyum

*shudders* using the terms 'bear' or 'cub' or 'twink' just makes me cringe. I understand why people need to categorise people but the terms are just so cringey

ninty9er

It seems American as I've never heard the phrase "hot mess" used outside of the US east coast.

Maybe I just live a sheltered life, but hot mess would mean something different to me and certainly isn't a category.

baby and crumble

Countess Markievicz wrote: »

The pics are funny OP, I wonder is there a Lesbian version? No doubt I would fall under the 90's lesbian category

Yup, check it here:

Lez Look Book

That's mostly based on fashion, but it's still kind of funny if you ask me.

I like to think I'm in between Dandy Dyke and Literary Lez, but I think I'm probably overselling myself!

kingofslaves

Labels are for tins - not people ! That is all I have to say

CdeC

The gays love their categories and boxes, at the end of the day we are all just people....or is that a clique as well. : (

wonderfulname

Is saying "the gays" all love categories and boxes not the exact same or worse than pointing out some glaringly obvious style cliques?

"The straights" love their categories and boxes too, judging by the picture in the OP most of them are the same ones and all.

Caiseoipe19

God I hate when people use "gay" as a noun instead of an adjective. It sounds like you're talking about a type of animal or something.

wonderfulname

Yeah, it has to be spelt right for it not to grate on me - "ghey"

Annasopra

"The ghey" really irritates me

stephen_n

I think the context in which it was used should give even the smallest indication of the irony which was intended :rolleyes:

Annasopra

stephen_n wrote: »

I think the context in which it was used should give even the smallest indication of the irony which was intended :rolleyes:

I did read the post above :rolleyes:

the_syco

Kevin Smith once talked about "bears" in one of his Q&A sessions. Seems his friend is gay, and tells Kevin about "bears" (the furry ones in the bars, not the furry ones in the zoo).

I'd say the "bear" sub-section could be used in a similar fashion to straight people who likes specific types; allowing gay people to define what sort of gay personality that they want to f**k.

Someone mentioned that tins have labels, and not people. That's a bucket of sh|te, imo. If all gays are the same, how would you tell someone what you like? Personally, I'm a straight guy who likes goths. That would narrow down the pubs I'll goto and the music said pubs would be playing.

baby and crumble

the_syco wrote: »

I'd say the "bear" sub-section could be used in a similar fashion to straight people who likes specific types; allowing gay people to define what sort of gay personality that they want to f**k.

Someone mentioned that tins have labels, and not people. That's a bucket of sh|te, imo. If all gays are the same, how would you tell someone what you like? Personally, I'm a straight guy who likes goths. That would narrow down the pubs I'll goto and the music said pubs would be playing.

That's a really good point. Every human being likes labels and boxes, even if it's on a relatively small level. When you meet someone new, the first few questions you ask help you label them in your head; Where are you from? What do you do? Where do you live? it's natural and normal. Now, if you ask me the problem lies in someone who is stubbornly holding onto a negative label they have for someone, after it's been proved false.

stephen_n

mango salsa wrote: »

I did read the post above :rolleyes:

Your post wasn't there when I started replying I was more referring to the other two posts!

Barna77

Are the fag hags included?

:pac:

waterglass305

My admittingly limited experiance there is no set gay clique (thank God in my opinion). A lot of the guys do dress better and more colourful but not all of them do that (I don't and I'm 100% homo ). They do have better style BUT a few straight guys have better fashion senses. In fact I really can't tell whose gay and who isn't most of the time.
And then the girls, God they're impossible to categorize. None of them act in a stereotype way. I could say "she acts like that and he acts like that" but honestly you'd have to be over-analyzing their behavior.

Having said that there are one or two guys with the camp voice compared to a dozen of normal sounding guys in our lgbt society (all gay).

I personally think its the people you hang out with; if you're camp you will hang out with other camp people and people then think 'oh all gay people are camp' and so forth.
Hell I know a guy with undoubtedly the best dress sense and he's straight with a girlfriend. I really though he was gay, nope.

So I think the whole behavior thing is more of a social thing you conform to rather than gay peoples natural behavior. Given the great progress of lgbt rights I foresee a future where it will be accepted for straight guys to be as camp as the guys from Queer eye and gays guys to be captains of the GAA and be very masculine with no fashion or dress sense.

Oh and fyi, I'm gay, a guy and I don't wear make-up, I don't have a concept of fashion and I'm not camp. People genuinly think I'm straight.

gaa131

It never ceases to amaze me how on one hand the gay movement harps on about acceptance and integration while on the other no other sub-culture is so drawn towards tagging, differentiation and disintegration.

In my opinion all of these practices and tags dehumanise human beings by reducing them to a set of specifications commonly referred to as a 'type'. If you don't conform to a type or do not concur with the consensus view, the gay scene can very quickly become a hostile and unaccepting environment where diversity, in terms of opinion and outlook, is very unwelcome.

AodhDub

I'm happy to say I don't fit into any one of those categories. Just a normal guy that happens to be gay and I'm sure there's plenty of others the same.

Such nonsense this need to label people. I've become less and less tolerant of people who, after talking to someone for 5 minutes, will label them as...whatever, some category. People in general are far too diverse for this, in my experience.

Davyhal

I always find it funny cos I always thought I was up-to-date with "the lingo", but recently I was confused when my friend said to me "I've seen you grow from being a twink into a fine young otter"... I had never heard of otter before, surely this is relatively new? Like I have been around the scene for 3-4 years and this was the first I ever heard of it!

Barna77

Davyhal wrote: »

I always find it funny cos I always thought I was up-to-date with "the lingo", but recently I was confused when my friend said to me "I've seen you grow from being a twink into a fine young otter"... I had never heard of otter before, surely this is relatively new? Like I have been around the scene for 3-4 years and this was the first I ever heard of it!

hahahaha that's an improvement

fluffybiscuits

Davyhal wrote: »

I always find it funny cos I always thought I was up-to-date with "the lingo", but recently I was confused when my friend said to me "I've seen you grow from being a twink into a fine young otter"... I had never heard of otter before, surely this is relatively new? Like I have been around the scene for 3-4 years and this was the first I ever heard of it!

ROFL came across that phrase recently myself. There is a few cliques on the scene and they usually throw this lexicon of words around, they end up sounding like ****ing gob****es. I admit Im prone to using it the odd time if describing physical characteristics but wouldnt just form cliques based on it. !