Kind of get it. . . Kind of.

[zerl]

I said I moved because I didn't want to subject my fellow slashers to all my agitated ramblings. Er, looks like I lied. This post is pretty cranky and I think I'm being something of a man-hater and a heterosexist and. . . well. All in all. Not nice

Comments

[homasse]

I wrote this two years or so ago, but I think it applies.

Queering Queer (plus, hey, Hth commented and she had some ineresting thigns to say, too).

[homasse]

...and a slightly more finished and polished version of it is here.

[zerl]

Ah, I hadn't read this one. Thanks for the link

[homasse]

One thing I was thinking about, reading what you said, was the idea of it being "fair" to have people switch off. I guess, too me, it doesn't seem too terribly odd an idea, so I started trying to think of why it's like that. The thing I can best come up with is that in some ways, it's an aspect of Western culture, going back to Ancient Greece--in Ancient Greece, men were expected to have a younger male lover...but adult men were always seme; uke was a sign of weakness and not being a complete male--being, in other words, female. And in some ways, that idea still persists, as well as the idea that you're not *really* gay unless you're the one getting done