Greg Knotts
Straight acting. What does that mean? Sissyphobia is a mix of academic, anecdotal, and popular research into the world of gay men and effeminate behavior. Bergling comes from the world of television news, and so has a more accessible, popular approach to research than a purely academic one. Sissyphobia reads much more user-friendly to a popular reader, but is steeped with relevant facts, cultural pundits, and anecdotal stories that are echoed in the academic literature of gay studies and queer studies. This work is not groundbreaking, but is extremely comprehensible and relevant for a variety of audiences.
Sissyphobia is broken into chunks of time, settings, and themes: the Internet, school, the military, internal self-hatred, drag, and a look toward the future. It is a quick, easy read. The chapters are short and further broken into smaller themes within the general topics they portend to cover. Throughout the book are the clever and entertaining animated drawings of Joe Phillips (XY Magazine), which lend humor, insight, and visual cues to Bergling's text.
Bergling's discussion of the Internet focuses on gay sites that cater to personal ads. The preponderance of ads that mention the desire for 'straight acting' or 'no femmes' dominates gay personal ads. Bergling discusses the pride many men who advertise here take in keeping the general public 'guessing' about their sexuality; the kind of 'no one even knows I'm gay' mentality seems to be pervasive in many of these ads. In the entire chapter, Bergling provides only one quote from a respondent that speaks to the internal shame and oppressive world he guesses is at the root of this mentality. Bergling does not follow up on this quote, but rather simply portrays the Internet as a social space where this hatred, fear, and disdain for effeminate behavior exists.
Bergling follows this chapter with a brief discussion of the origin of behavior and the basis of the essentialist, social constructionist debate. The chapter uses interviews with gay brothers as the context for many of Berglings' conclusions. One brother is described as acting butch and the other brother is described as acting nellie. Bergling neither defines these terms nor constructs their origins, but relies on popular understandings of the terms and does not account for the possible sliding scale or discrepancy between them. He does not address that what is 'butch' for some may not be 'butch' for all, but simply relies on the assumption that we all unquestioningly agree on these terms. The chapter focuses a great deal on the idea that we all have the ability to 'butch up' or 'act nellie' on command — and depending on context, gay men will veer between these poles depending on who they are with, where they are, and how hard they want to try to hide (or expose) what is their purest or truest selves.
The chapter on the school environment shares horror stories of effeminate acting boys being teased mercilessly, the elementary school as an initial social space where masculinity is constructed, and the lack of involvement — or even denial—on the part of parents who do not want to confront atypical gender behaviors in their sons. Aggressive boys, nurturing girls. Passive girls and boys who dominate. These stereotypical behaviors are held as the gendered constant and never questioned. It is no wonder, Bergling concludes, gay boys grow up depressed and fearful in a world that does not appear to support their atypical behavior. Rather than helping to construct a world where 'atypical' simply becomes more typical behavior on the spectrum, Bergling allows the stereotypes to exist without question, offering little hope to boys who do not follow accepted norms and constructs.
Many of Bergling's participants speak of hating other gay men who they feel 'shove their gayness into the faces' of others; essentially, effeminate men who are 'more visible' as gay make it harder for all the other gays who apparently are so straight acting as to never arouse suspicion about their sexuality. The entire book hints at this notion. That if effeminate men just simply would not act that way, if they would 'butch up,' then being gay would be so much easier for everyone. Just buy into gendered constructs and well-established norms and accepted behaviors, and we will all get along better.
In one brief insightful moment, Bergling does offer an investigation into misogyny theory and a world that supports misogynistic behaviors — especially along gendered lines. In a few paragraphs sandwiched in the middle of the book, in a chapter entitled 'Fear and Loathing,' Bergling discusses the possibility that deeply-rooted self loathing is at the heart of all this hatred of effeminate behavior. In the many surveys Bergling uses throughout his research, participants hint at, explicitly refer to, and both implicitly and articulately describe this hatred of self and desire to be 'normal.' Bergling offers a brief, insightful discussion of the misogynistic, gendered norms and social hierarchy that people accept blindly. He encourages more reading on this subject into books "a lot more learned than this one could ever hope to be."
This chapter is followed by further investigation into the notion and origins of prejudice. Academic studies into homophobia, homonegativism, and prejudice are discussed in the context of Bergling's own research. Ahhhh….we think….now we will gain new understanding and have an enriched, robust discussion on the root of this challenge. But then we are given a chapter on the military and the unquestioned, accepted social norms in that context and effeminate gay men are encouraged, again, simply to act like they know they are supposed to act — or invite the consequences.
In Mark Simpson's foreward to Sissyphobia, he says, "Male homosexuality seems to be inextricably linked to an exaggerated respect and contempt for masculinity — rather like male heterosexuality toward femininity. Of course the unique problem presented by this attitude for modern gay men is that they themselves are supposed to embody masculinity."
Herein lies the problem with Sissyphobia. While it is a relevant, interesting text, it does not attempt to solve this challenge of the social construction of what it means to be masculine and feminine. Bergling simply starts from the assumption that men — gay and straight — do not like other men who exhibit flamboyant and effeminate behavior. Then he finds settings, people, and constructs that support this hypothesis. Rather than investigate the creation of these gender constructs, Bergling simply pats himself on the back for telling everyone what he believes we already believe about 'swishy' behavior in men.What is interesting about this is that Bergling chose to have a picture of himself on the back cover of the book. After reading the text, you discover a self-described lack of outwardly feminine traits and a seven-year history in the U.S. Marine Corps that "served to further instill in me an appreciation for most things masculine." However, prior to reading the text (or even after reading it), it would be easy to characterize the person in the picture as one of those 'swishy' gay men. Frosted tips in his hair. A two-layered leather choker around his neck. Sculpted facial hair in a unique, unorthodox construction. An earring. A purple, button-down, collared shirt. What straight (or 'straight acting!') man would have all of those attributes? Perhaps one of them, maybe, but all of them? I have not met Bergling, so I am unable to speak to how 'straight acting' he actually is (according to whom?). But if a picture is worth a thousand words …or actions… then I wonder how accurate a picture Bergling has of himself.
And this is the greatest challenge with Sisspyphobia. Bergling describes himself as butch. I describe him as nellie. Sissyphobia delves into the world of effeminate behavior in gay men — but never solves, defines, or even problematizes the gendered world that has help to construct those behaviors, or how each individual person can construct those behaviors differently.commenting closed for this article