His post this past week delved into the au courant yet timeless assimilation vs. segregation debate as it concerns friendly advice he receives urging him to make his work "universal" rather than "too gay". His points are compelling, his argument taut; I encourage you to read the full post, here.
On a rare visit to a Hell's Kitchen nightlife establishment recently, a small party of gays debated the merits of "blending" vs. flamboyance. Homosexuals have traditionally been credited with adeptness at both, depending on context. Our context for this conversation was one where flamboyance would ostensibly be welcomed, yet blending seemed the modus operandi for the surrounding randy horde.
Is this progress? Is it decline? Does it indicate anything other than evolution/adaptation?
While some don't care (or have no reason) to differentiate between the right to same-sex marriage and full equality (in all regards) for homosexuals, many of us do, in keeping with our individual position on the assimilation/segregation continuum. For me, change needs to happen in people's minds and whatever motivates that change deserves my support and participation. Flamboyance, ACT(ing) UP! and "OUT & PROUD", in your face demands for recognition remind people we exist and challenge them to rethink their assumptions concerning what it means to be human (and humane). Blending, while frequently more "blanding" than compelling, may underscore the commonalities we all share as humans. It's only logical that, together, these different approaches stand to create change in more people than either one on their own. The question then becomes, how to support both viewpoints without undermining/creating conflict with either? Can we do it?