Where Are Queer Men in Fabulis' 2010 Survey of Gay Men's Online Habits?

  
I love my community of queers, freaks, youth workers, and artists. I love the non-conformity, questioning of authority, and out of the box thinking of these folks. They are my brethren and comrades. They are the people I am proud to be among.

Today, a friend posted through Facebook the following Fabulis online survey about gay male online habits.

There was a problem at the outset for me. It came on slide 3 with the statement "The results that follow only include responses from the 94.5% of survey participants who described themselves as gay or bisexual men. All other responses were discarded."

I'm not gay or bisexual. I am queer. I am proud to be queer, and I identify this way partly because I don't believe in a binary gender construct and partly because I want to stand in solidarity with people not of the same gender as me. It is a nuanced identity that doesn't fit neatly into boxes.

I knew by seeing the title of the survey that I would probably not find myself among the respondents. I am used to that. I am used to the a large segment of the LGBT community not understanding the nuance of queer. I am used to being somewhat invisible.

There is no other note as to what the orientations of the 5.5% of the discarded respondents were. There is no mention of why those responses were discarded. They just vanished from the data set leaving me to question where do I fall within the gay and bisexual male community.

I posted this comment on the Fabulis blog "What were the sexual orientations of the 5.5% of the discarded respondents?" bradfordshellhammer, someone I assume to be from Fabulis, responded that those rejected were either straight identified or lesbian. I then asked if queer male was an option. There was a moment of confusion, and bradfordshellhammer posted the categories available during the survey. Queer was not an option.

As mentioned above, this questioning and lack of visibility is nothing new for me. It is why the meta-blog that JW Reports is a part of is called Queerly Complex. Life doesn't fall within black or white or binary codes. It is dynamic, intricate, multi-faceted and -dimensional, and messy. It holds many truths.

I don't derive self-worth from these types of reports, surveys, or news. I don't need it to justify my existence. I am happy doing that myself. What I do need from these types of surveys is an understanding that we live in a much more complicated and interconnected world. We need to stop the reductivism of one versus the other. We need to find ways to build broader based coalitions.

And this can be done simply. It doesn't need to taint a potential data pool. If the survey is concerned only with the opinions from gay men, fine. I don't need to be counted among them because I am not one. But I do need an acknowledgement from that community of my existence. This can include acknowledging queer as a category, writing "we are not including queers in this survey because...",  teasing out queers from the rest of the data pool and showing differences between gay male identified respondents and queer respondents, being completely clear that one only cares about gay men. Any of these solutions at least acknowledge that there is a community out there that is not gay identified and not straight identified.

I appreciate greatly what Fabulis is trying to build: "a social network that connects gay men with amazing experiences down the block and around the world." I also appreciate their openness to the conversation. In that effort for connection and conversation, it is important to not forget those of us who don't fit neatly into the "gay male" label. For we may be married to (or partnered to or dating or having sex with) someone who does.

An Open Letter to Michael Lane

I am at the Des Moines Art Festival helping my best friend Michael with the Interactive Art Station. They have two projects: a "cray-pa-your-own square" of a mural of the city's skyline and a "create your own" skyline silhouette. The Festival is just kicking off today after many months of planning and hard work.

I am honored I get to see my friend at work. You can tell a lot about a person when you sit back and watch. Michael is one of those rare kinds that knows how to achieve a vision, something that lives outside of himself. He has that unique skill set of seeing the whole and the component parts. It is this skill I most admire and respect.

I'm not sure if he knows exactly how much I have learned from him over the years. He has seen me through a lot in the 12 plus years of friendship. He has showed me that hard work pays off, politics are inevitable, and compassion is sometimes wanting to tell someone to fuck off but instead saying "thank you".

What I am observing today reinforces all of this. Michael is nothing if not neurotic. He cares, like me, what people think of him. He obsesses, like me, about the impact of even the tiniest of actions. Earlier today he worried that the direction of the tables (should they run north to south or east to west) might not be the direction his colleague wants them to run. Some may view this as petty or ridiculous even. I completely understand him. I understand that something as simple as the direction of a table has significance. It creates mood, traffic flow, and can either support or hinder an activity. I understand that this decision not only impacts the participants, but the simple decision can impact the relationship between colleagues. It can make or break a friendship. And I appreciate deeply the fact that Michael understands this too.

Before the Festival started, we took a stroll through Des Moines. He showed me the Sol LeWitt paintings he helped paint. He showed the the Tara Donovan instillation he helped construct. He talked lovingly about one particular section of Tara's plastic cup rolling landscape he was responsible for and as such he fussed and fussed to make it perfect. He showed me parts of his life and how it has and continues to intersect the live of others, especially artists. And I am reminded of his humility, leadership, and grace.

Michael has an intrinsic sense of community and connectedness and is rooted in knowing how and when to step up and step back. He makes no claims that the art of Sol LeWitt or Tara Donovan or the mural being created are his. And yet he is a crucial factor in their existence. He picked up the brush and actually painted the Sol LeWitt. He placed the plastic cups one-by-one on the floor to create Tara's landscape. He helped create the system that empowers the community to "paint" a square of the mural. If he had not picked up that brush, placed that cup, or systemetized the mural, they certainly would still have been done. But he did do it. He contributed to their creation and in doing so he left his mark.

Now what matters is the narrative he tells about his involvement. His narrative rarely continues an "I". He understands and has internalized the true nature of community: we.

I am sitting here on the sidelines just watching and transcribing what I see. I hope I have an ounce of his humilty. I hope others learn from his presence. I know that if we all practiced a little less "I" and a little more "we" we would transform this world.

Thanks Michael for this important lesson.