AKA William

Share

Now as the world changes, I see a younger generation with very different attitudes toward gender roles and sexuality and a more fluid approach to individuality, a move away from labels. And, of course, I am far closer in age to those kids than I am to Quentin Crisp. But a lot has changed very quickly since the Sexual Revolution and then AIDS, and I came into the world right in the middle of all that – not on the other side of it. This is what makes me a New Old Gay.

One of the recurring themes in Crisp’s work was the idea of the “great, dark man” who doesn’t exist. The idea was that he, and presumably most gay men, long for a strong, mysterious person to carry them away, like a handsome prince, and that the conundrum was this desire for a masculine man who would cease to be masculine if he actually loved Crisp back – masculine men don’t love other men.

I’ve been wondering how this plays out for me, and for the New Gays. If we are free to be who we are wherever that happens to fall on the Kinsey scale or the scale of masculinity or by any rating at all, then what are we looking for, who are we looking for? Someone with a complementary chart? What does that mean? Does an aggressive bottom need a passive top? Should an effeminate athlete be with a masculine artist? This can descend into the didactic, but in essence, does our modern liberation save us from Crisp’s dilemma or merely complicate its terms?

I’ve often thought of myself as hard to match and seen this as at least a significant reason for why I’ve never had a long-term relationship. For all of my effeminate traits, I can also be very alpha-male, domineering even. What kind of guy is right for me? I don’t think I’ve ever found one. But I’m not turned off by other guys’ femininity. I don’t seek a straight-acting man. I have accepted myself for who I am enough to not recoil at my own qualities reflected in others.

Do I tend to have the hots for guys like me? Not typically, but then again, we’re a dying breed.