Test 2

Please select your preferred language.

請選擇你慣用的語言。

请选择你惯用的语言。

English
中文简体
台灣繁體
香港繁體

登入

記住我

初到 Fridae?

Fridae Mobile

Advertisement
Highlights

More About Us

新聞&特寫

« 較新的 | 較舊的 »
31 Aug 2006

what to wear at your wedding?

The picture of a widely reported same-sex wedding in Kathmandu, Nepal last Saturday showed one partner dressed as a woman, the other as a man. Was this really a same-sex marriage? Douglas Sanders has more.

Nepal's Blue Diamond Society and Western media have described the event in Nepal as a 'same-sex' wedding, without comment on the bride's attire. (Click here to read related story) When the news magazine India Today deals with homosexuality, it shows men dressed in saris. Newspapers in Bangkok, where I live, constantly equate gay men with transgender kathoey.

In sharp contrast, the pioneering cover of The Economist, January 6, 1996, showed two men in tuxedos on the top of a wedding cake. The headline read "Let Them Wed." The image of two men, both in proper male formal wear, on a cake, was already familiar to many through postcards from San Francisco. Another, more recent US image, shows two women, both in full traditional white wedding dresses, getting married.

I can recall the struggle in the West in the 1960s by gay men to avoid the stereotype that we were all drag queens. I visited Amsterdam in 1968 and was impressed at the lack of drag. There were a couple of effeminate lady-boys - both from Asia. Oh, I said to myself, drag is a reaction to oppression. No oppression = no drag. That's what I said then.

Gays in the West successfully shook off the image of effeminacy. All the guys cut their hair, bought leather vests and worked out in the gym. The new butch image became famous as the "Castro clone." It is still the western porn star image, where two muscular guys take equal turns at insertion. No lady-boys at Falcon or Colt.

Metrosexual came much later, when both gays and straight men softened up. But the current Thai movie of the same name, sees fags hiding behind the metrosexual image.

As a number of Western writers have suggested, there are three general models for same-sex relationships - age stratified, gendered and egalitarian.

Age-Stratified:
The accounts we have of classical Greece tell of age-stratified relationships. A mature man becomes the mentor, patron, guide for a slight young guy. While not all of these relationships may have been sexual, many certainly were. When the young man matures he assumes his own role as a husband and father - and perhaps, as well, the mentor for a younger man.

Is he "gay"? Is he "bisexual"? The terms, as we understand them, don't work very well.

More recently anthropologists gave us accounts of Melanesian patterns that fit none of our preconceptions. Young men, it was said, needed semen to help them mature. In some tribes they got semen from mature men orally. In other cases, the mature man spread his semen on the body of the younger man.

Was this even "sex"? As in classical Greece, the young man went on to become a husband and father. Probably he assisted a new generation of young men in their development.

The modern image of the 'age-stratified' relationship is the 'sugar daddy' and the 'boy', the latter often smaller, younger and more effeminate - though probably these days, a hunk with muscles. Muscles sell.

Gendered:
In a gendered relationship, one partner is masculine and the other feminine. The 'tom-dee' pattern in Thailand is a familiar example. The tom is the active partner. The dee, she suspects, is really heterosexual, and the tom fears loosing her to a biological man.

The bakla in the Philippines, it is said, wants a "real" man. She must support her lay-about husband, to keep him close to her. She is feminine, but also the breadwinner.

In many places, the macho / top / king is not stigmatised as gay. It is the fem / bottom / queen who bears the label of deviance. The distinction is a big deal.

Egalitarian:
In the West, these days, heterosexual relationships are increasingly egalitarian. You can't easily identify lesbians any more. All women have what used to be lesbian haircuts. They are more practical for wives who work outside the home. Two-income households are now the norm. Pantsuits are acceptable business wear for women. The Dolly Parton big-hair look is a throwback.

Contrast India. Women all have long hair and wear strictly gendered clothing (except for the occasional butch).

In the West heterosexual relationships are much less gendered. The sexual division of labor makes little sense in a modern urban economy, and it is going the way of big hair. These changes are slow to take place - and have begun in Asia.

In the West the model for same-sex relationships now is egalitarian. Images of age-stratified or gendered relationships are somewhat embarrassing - and never show up in magazines like Gay Times or The Advocate. Or on the cover of The Economist.

But make no mistake. I give warm wishes to the couple in Nepal. A gendered same-sex relationship may be much easier for them in contemporary Nepal than other options. Not options, of course. We still largely live within the guidelines set by our own home cultures.

Douglas Sanders is a retired Canadian law professor living in Bangkok. He can be contacted at sanders_gwb@yahoo.ca.

Nepal

讀者回應

1. 2006-08-31 21:22  
if i wear a pink tuxedo, will i be consider as a masculine role in a lesbian wedding? hehe
2. 2006-08-31 22:00  
I think we also need to consider that Western notions of what 'gender' is may differ considerably from that in other countries. Perhaps in Nepal, the idea of what is 'feminine' and what is 'masculine' may well centre around dualistic (yin yang-type) notions - rather than actual male and female characteristics and their derivatives, as we understand in a Western context.

In this sense, although one partner may profess to be the 'feminine' one, it may be more conceptually appropriate to think of one as 'yin' and the other 'yang' with all the variations and signifiers those terms embody.
3. 2006-08-31 22:15  
well i guess these days have a very widened meaning in same-sex relationships. especially on age-Stratified one ... not necessarily the older ones "teach" the young ones (in terms of age) . it's just a matter of how early and how experienced one individual on exploring gay/lesbian world... as i'm sure some of you may experience the part where you are actually younger (in age) but have more experiences than the older, thus makes a whole lot difference... i guess the point is one is not necessary to be labeled ones being. ^^ cheers
4. 2006-08-31 23:16  
if i were top in bed, but is the 'feminine' partner out of bed and in public, should i wear the pink tux or the Victorian-white gown?
inversely, if i were bottom in bed, but is the 'masculine' partner out of bed and in public, should i wear the Nehru-jacket or the red veil&sari?
ha! hehe!
5. 2006-09-01 00:39  
Why think so much?
Just wear whatever you're comfortable in..
=)
6. 2006-09-01 01:17  
gaytop37, I don't think one needs to think too hard about whether to wear a tux or dress. He or she will already know
7. 2006-09-01 01:21  
Feminine and masculine is also not synonymous with female and male although it's a commonly held perception/view. Can men can be feminine without being seen as being female and vice versa?
8. 2006-09-01 01:46  
But what if the separate gender identities were really methods of self-expression?

Its kindda didactic to assume that any culture has the ability to ascribe a specific mode of behviour and then envelope everyone into them.

I mean look at Austin from project run-way... is he a drag queen? a fag? a 70's inspired glam doll (with the peroxide blonde do) or a very fussy fashionista? In a sense, 17th century French Aristocrats were a lot more fag then he was... till today some people still regard the latter as poster boys for some romantic notion of masculinity.

Individuality and rebellion is what counts... even in a society of invisible purdahs wer can still choose to wear our disguises with a little mascara...
9. 2006-09-01 08:01  
Boxes, categories, labels...are they necessary, just to give some order to our world?

I don't tell you what to wear, girlfriend, why should you presume to tell the wedding couple how they should dress?

Good enough for me that 2 individuals chose to express their love in such a public way, regardless of public opinion, and in spite of obvious social and cultural pressures. No need to start dissecting what the bride wore to the wedding (be that in your nature it might be)!
回應#10於被作者刪除。
11. 2006-09-01 11:38  
shame on you!

We celebrate the possibility ofgay couples being able to prounounce their love through the institution of marriage -

What they wear is highly irrelevant to you or anybody bothers to snide remark a joyous occasion - unless you're a bitter old man?

If what they wear describes their feelings for such a wonderful day - what's it to you?

Back then there are a lot of stereotypes because - people aren't educated. I can tell you what the stereotypes are these days, especially when the straight women points it out -

aiyaaa why are all the beautiful men, gay?

because the straight men are trying very hard to prove that they are straight?
kehkeh

serve you all right for over-using the word 'metrosexual'
12. 2006-09-01 11:45  
The question here is that the "bride" is a "meti" which is defined by the Human Rights Watch as "men by birth who identify as women, and might in different cultural circumstances be called transgender people."

It is very non-progessive to insist that a pre-op trans (FTM) is still a man, and esp so for LGB people to not be able (or to not bother) to tell the difference.

Transgenders also do not have to undergo Sex Reassignment Surgery to be recognised as the gender they identify with.

I'm also confused with the statement by the gay group about Nepalese laws not recognising same-sex unions when this is really not a same-sex marriage.

Such mainstream reporting will also confuse readers, how many times have we explained to straight people that gay people are not transgendered... and we do not want to change sex.
13. 2006-09-02 05:44  
why do we have to categorise , segregate and identify ? arent everyone unique in their own ways ? whatever they want to wear for " that " day ..is something personal ...perhaps they just wanna have fun and wears something unique , funny or special ...to make a point etc ...thus that should not be construed as a ultimatum ....

metrosexual, lady boys, muscle mary etc etc ...or whoever feels the need to conform ...should ask themselves why ? why they need to be the in the same boring category ? arent we supposed to be unique ? those who does not appreciate that..is it worth to be our friend ?

what I will wear ? white tuxedo with 888 pearls , diamonds and rubies ...lol

14. 2006-09-02 13:12  
Dont you think sometimes some cultures are luckier than others?
Happy are those marrying couples who might wear sarongs or malongs to their wedding,
they can wear their skirts and laugh all the way to the altar too,
while being politically-correctly(much abused words these) dressed, with some measure of nationalism thrown in at that.

The brain is still our largest sexual and gender organ.
Being top or bottom, masculine or feminine, butch or lipstick, is a role choice of a mind-set(yes, count in the groin),
be it for the moment, in or out of bed,
or in public, for the day or as a long-term at-peace-with-oneself's frame of mind.
Someone said it is a 'being' acting-school of thought thing. Maybe.

These mind-set roles would evolve as one progresses through life.
And I should know wherefrom I speak, witness my age.
I have a university friend of 20+yrs standing who has evolved from a '70s cowboy-boot tached butch
to his current hi-heeled tranny versatile apparitions(no pun), goes to work in a steelworks-plant office.
My other college friend on the other hand metamorphosed from a '70s dico dragqueen
into a new millenium goateed gym-buff gay daddy.

As a happy single gay person, actively looking,
I am afraid I am not quite the 'bitter old man'.
How can one be, if you had friends like mine? ha!

Attraction to/Acceptance of/Affirmation of any, or all, or none
of those mind-sets and expressions of sexuality and gender
within the perimeters of a relationship is a pre-requisite to a commitment.
Any form of a declaration, a rite or a celebration of a commitment is first and foremost a kith&kin private affair.
Whether the marrying couple chooses to 'open it to the public', media included, is yet another choice.

In the end, whether it is a gay or straight wedding,
whatever you wear,
gown or pants, pink, black or white
(all western-mind stereotypes, by the way, even the pink),
the important thing is the approval, love, support and respect of all attending guests.
They shall be the most cherished lasting gifts and wishes the marrying couple shall treasure as these help them anchor work for a happy marriage.
Long after the wedding outfits shall have faded and shall have been dated, or worse forgotten,
it is the enduring gift of love and commitment of the couple that their family and friends best wishes for is what matters.

As for me, when I get married, I shall think twice
if I shall open my wedding to the 'public', much more to the media.
I wouldnt want to be another statistic victim of the network rating-games and the media market-share lists.
Afterall, its not like the Natl Geographic covering.

My most sincere best wishes to the newly-married couple in Nepal. :-)
15. 2006-09-03 22:12  
Gee Gay top, that was long...
16. 2006-09-04 17:28  
I agree totally with post #12, what these couples decided to wear or do is non of anybody's concern, They are in love and they decided to express it in their own right ways. I really respect their courage and why cant the writer write these instead. What a waste of a good column space. Cheers :)
17. 2006-09-17 02:08  
Interesting article you got here. Perhaps you could a sub-type to the gendered relationship and age-stratified types you mentioned above.

I have lived here in Paris for about three years and have met many bi-cultural couples. While it is not the case all the time, most bi-cultural couple seems to take on a 'gendered relationship' ( Asian - femme, European - masculine) and/or age-stratified (Asian - younger, European - older) nature.

Egalitarian types in bi-cultural relationships do exist here in Paris but they are quite rare. I guess it probably has to do with the economic and physical inequality between Asians and Europeans. As Asia catches economically and as her boys start eating more proteins, we would perhaps see more equal type relationships in the future.

請先登入再使用此功能。

Social


This article was recently read by

請選擇新聞及專欄版本

精選個人檔案

Now ALL members can view unlimited profiles!

Languages

View this page in a different language:

讚好

合作夥伴

 ILGA Asia - Fridae partner for LGBT rights in Asia IGLHRC - Fridae Partner for LGBT rights in Asia

Advertisement