i'm here, i'm queer -- but not like you think i am . . .
so, i just spent about two hours trying to change the layout of this crazy green monster with the supposedly new and improved blogger layout options, and i couldn't get it to do a single thing i wanted, so i hope you liked us the way we were. luckylumpia in seattle does . . . kind of . . . maybe . . . here's what she had to say about us in her list of web-site reviews:
really? really? i not only read male, i read gay male? well, c'est la vie--there are plenty of things that sound a hell of a lot worse--but if anyone else is confused, i assure you that i'm chromosomally xx all the way. some of my parts are, admittedly, squirmy and dirty, but all of those parts are female, and always have been. of course, the fact that i am not traditionally feminine is something i've been aware of for, well, pretty much since i've been aware, and some of my gay-boy friends have suggested that i may have missed my calling. i just didn't know it was coming across so strongly in print.
now that i've been thinking about it for a while, i'm actually quite curious as to what exactly it is about my tone that suggests gay male, or at least fails to suggest female. what would suggest gay male in any tone? is it my frequent use of the word "hon"? is it my tendency to steer clear of "girly" topics? is it my tendency to steer clear of girly topics while maintaining a relatively girly demeanor? or is it nothing more complex than my having referred to someone as "the grace to my will" in the sidebar? i do hope it isn't that; delve deeper, luckylumpia--the world is crawling with ironic references, and you're likely to run into some problems if you take them all at face value.
that bit about it being nicely written, though, i am 100 percent on board with.
Apr 20, 11:56am blogs
i am a pretentious hack. [weloveyouplatonically.blogspot.com]
I presume he is a gay male. It is nicely written and has dirty squirmy parts.
really? really? i not only read male, i read gay male? well, c'est la vie--there are plenty of things that sound a hell of a lot worse--but if anyone else is confused, i assure you that i'm chromosomally xx all the way. some of my parts are, admittedly, squirmy and dirty, but all of those parts are female, and always have been. of course, the fact that i am not traditionally feminine is something i've been aware of for, well, pretty much since i've been aware, and some of my gay-boy friends have suggested that i may have missed my calling. i just didn't know it was coming across so strongly in print.
now that i've been thinking about it for a while, i'm actually quite curious as to what exactly it is about my tone that suggests gay male, or at least fails to suggest female. what would suggest gay male in any tone? is it my frequent use of the word "hon"? is it my tendency to steer clear of "girly" topics? is it my tendency to steer clear of girly topics while maintaining a relatively girly demeanor? or is it nothing more complex than my having referred to someone as "the grace to my will" in the sidebar? i do hope it isn't that; delve deeper, luckylumpia--the world is crawling with ironic references, and you're likely to run into some problems if you take them all at face value.
that bit about it being nicely written, though, i am 100 percent on board with.
posted by juniper pearl @ 11:57 PM
9 Comments:
At 9:53 AM,
zoe p. said…
This happened to me a lot too. I chalk it up to language is gendered, language is learned, and the language I learned was gendered gay male.
At 6:42 PM,
Anonymous said…
Hmm. Is it taking this business too seriously to suggest that there could there be some inadvertent sexism in luckylumpia's erroneous presumption? Is it possible that the formidable intellect that's always on display here at IAAPH was read as "maleness" for some reason, while the caffeinated tone (and occasional batted eyelash at the likes of Malcolm Gladwell) came off as somehow too fabulous for a straight dude?
At 6:42 PM,
Anonymous said…
That was me.
At 2:28 PM,
juniper pearl said…
smart enough for a man, but flighty enough for a woman . . . ? i don't think that's taking it too seriously at all. in fact, it's almost exactly what i was getting at. if it's actually the case, as sad as it might be, it could explain my ability to attract teenage girls, gay men, and no one else (in real life, i mean; here in the intertunnels i am the flame to which moths of all shapes and colors swarm).
my intellect may be consistently formidable, but i'm pretty sure it isn't always on display. thank you just the same, though. and what does that mean, "the likes of malcolm gladwell"? if you just slighted my boyfriend, spine, you'd best brace yourself for my formidable nunchaku assault.
At 1:27 PM,
zoe p. said…
Meant to say, I like the re-do.
But you know what? And I am not saying this to be a bitch. You're not really supposed to end sentences with a preposition. As in "on board with" - I'm no stickler grammarian (you know that), I'd do it for emphasis now and then, but I wouldn't do it in that sentence.
At 1:50 PM,
juniper pearl said…
i appreciate your opinion, zp, as always, and i don't necessarily disagree. but this is my blog, and i will yoda it up all i please. with.
At 10:27 AM,
Brian said…
It is okay to end a sentence with a preposition:
http://www.grammartips.homestead.com/prepositions2.html
Go for it!
At 10:35 AM,
Brian said…
On the main topic here, I ran the last three paragraphs of Juniper's post on the Gender Genie, and it claims fairly strongly that our author is a man. Gender Genie is here:
http://bookblog.net/gender/genie.php
FWIW, JP's nicely-written style has always seemed quite female to me.
At 12:23 PM,
juniper pearl said…
hear that, zp? now you are brian's crotchety nemesis, as well. and brian, that's an interesting little tool you've found there. go ahead and pat yourself on the back for reading between the lines better than it can, but remember that you've read about my weepy despair over the sad plight of squirrels residing near main roads, which probably gave you an advantage in all this.
zp, it thinks you're a dude, too. based on the analysis it brings up, our problem is that we don't refer to ourselves frequently enough and make too many definite statements, instead of vague inquiries like good (or at least average) women. if those are the measures, i guess i'll accept my manliness with pride. sheesh.
Post a Comment
<< Home