The Role Dichotomization Mentality

This article is dedicated to several close GLBTQ friends I have and Malcolm Gladwell, of whom I stole some ideas for (hopefully) greater good.

Article comes with game and comic. (So much for subtle motivation).

What is Role Dichotomization?


I agree that operational definitions can be tiresome, but they are required for a more solid understanding of the entire article, so bear with me. Role Dichotomization is simply labeling both sides of the relationship with mutually exclusive traits and responsibilities which are expected of them (Husband-Wife, Top-Bottom, Dominant-Submissive). Mutually exclusivity means that the roles (usually) do not overlap and does not transfer from one person to the other. Of course, there are many gaps to fill (which is the primary reason for writing this article). Later, I'll be discussing two problems with this paradigm: 1. How Different Dichotomies Fail to Correlate, and 2. Role Overlaps. Okay, let's move on.

Of course, most of the dichotomies which we will be discussing derivate from heterosexual relationships, where the gender roles and sexual roles are almost always defaulted to a point. However, in today's complex society, even heterosexual individuals are breaking apart these general stereotypes, what with the feminist movement and all. There are many instances of the wife being the dominant partner, sole breadwinner, and vetoing decision-maker. How about us? Where do we stand on this paradigm?

My Take on the "Implicit-Association Test" (IAT)


The IAT is a psychological test developed by Anthony G. Greenwald, Mahrazin Banaji and Brian Nosek to examine how we form associations between differing concepts, or in other words, how we stereotype. It's a simple test, really, ingenious almost, and it has been used to examine gender stereotypes and racism to an astounding effect. I'll attempt to use it to examine the gay role dichotomization.

Below are a list of words. Assign each word to either category by tapping your finger on the space next to it or making a mental note. Do it as quickly as you can, do not skip over any words, and do not be worried if you make any mistakes.

Possible Gay Partner................Impossible Partner

............................................................................

.................................Jack....................................

.................................Tom....................................

.................................Mary..................................

.................................John...................................

..............................Elizabeth...............................

................................Peter...................................

................................Daniel.................................

................................Susan.................................

.................................Jane..................................

That should be easy, no? If you are gay, you'd immediately associate every male name as a potential partner and every female partner as an impossible one. If you are not gay, you might take a little more time, but still make it pretty quickly. Now, that was just a warm-up, the real IAT should look like this:

Husband Or Dominant...........Wife Or Submissive

............................................................................

.................................Cooks.................................

.........................Tops During Sex..........................

.........................Makes Decisions.........................

..............................Cleans Up..............................

.........................More Effeminate..........................

.............................More Cute...............................

...................Takes Control During Sex..................

.......................Receiving End Of BJ......................

...........................More Hunky..............................

You should have taken slightly longer than compared to the first test, but still should have done it pretty quickly. Now for the killer:

Husband Or Submissive...........Wife Or Dominant

............................................................................

.............................Housework.............................

............................Automobiles.............................

.......................Bottoms During Sex.......................

..........................More Masculine..........................

..........................Career Minded...........................

...............................Laundry.................................

.....................Orders Food For Both....................

.......................Higher Pitch Voice........................

.......................Giving End Of BJ...........................

If you do subscribe to the general dichotomization, you should have taken much, much longer to finish this test. Although some parts of the difficulty should be factored to the slightly more confusing items, most of it comes from the difficulty for our minds to associate the categories (Husband-Submissive vs. Wife-Dominant). (A thousand apologies to you if the test did not give you the same effect it should have with better constructed and tested versions; I created this almost on the spot and do not guarantee any sort of validity.)

The reason this test is so popular is because the duration difference between the first two tests above and the third one should be quite massive (at least for psychology research). It comes to show how our mind already has preformed concepts which affects how we make decisions, label people, and stereotype our own relationships with others. The reason that the general dichotomy fail to correlate is because we have learnt not to do so. It is possible that we have picked up some semblance of this paradigm in our childhood (where homosexuality is less salient) and its easier to just reapply old principles to our new experiences than to make new ones or accommodate with circumstances all the time. Can we learn to allow overlaps? Definitely! Do we want to? Now, that's another question.

So, lets ask the bigger question: Why in the world did we subscribe to the heterosexual dichotomy to start with? Because it works. (Again, I'll cover more gaps later on.)

How Does It Affect Relationships?


A study led by Trevor Hart with a group of scientists on 205 gay men, which was published in The Journal of Sex Research in 2003, had several findings:

1. Self-labels are significantly correlated with actual behavior. Those who identified with being a top are more likely to be the insertive partner, bottom as the receptive partner, whereas versatiles occupy an intermediate status on sex behavior.
2. Compared to bottoms and versatiles, tops are more likely to be more engaged in other insertive sex behaviors (receiving end of BJs, sex-toy play, verbal abuse and several other fetishes).
3. Tops are more likely than bottoms or versatiles to reject their gay self-identity and have sex with women. They also manifested higher internalized homophobia - which is self-loathing due to their own homosexual desires.
4. Versatiles seem to enjoy better psychological health, possibly due to a greater range of sexual sensation seeking, lower fear of sex, and greater comfort with a wider variety of activities and roles. 

Why versatiles rock. No offense.

As you can see, point 1 above gives the simplest reason why it works: because it simplifies things. When things becomes simple, you can focus more time and energy on intensifying other experiences and emotions.

Where Do We Go From Here?

So, does that mean that everyone should subscribe to the role dichotomization mentality? Absolutely not. It really depends on what you really want, and finding another person who match your needs and whom you can match his.

A dear friend told me that for practicality sake, pure tops should always be with pure bottoms. On the other hand, versatiles should be with other versatiles, but both of them should have a slight preference towards opposite roles for stability issues. Of course this doesn't apply to some other paradigms like "service tops" (submissive tops), "power bottoms" (dominant bottoms) and other individuals who prefer to go unlabelled. In fact, the role dichotomization will make it more difficult for them to find optimal partners. Again, relationships are about give and takes, and none are absolutely perfect (and I'm talking total perfection). If both partners are willing to work things out, they may even be able to sustain a top-top relationship (although the math is not on their side).

I hope this article has given you some things to think about. I haven't even talked about different levels of identities, other aspects of sexual tension and etc., but I hope that you do subscribe to a certain paradigm, not because you have always, but because you chose to, knowing exactly what it means.

Meh.

Edit: If only I was this diligent when I did my thesis...

The Math Doesn't Add Up

Fact: In critical thinking skills class, I fought with my lecturer that 1 + 1 = 4 can be true. I won.

Since I don't have a job (yet), and I'm ever always trying to be productive, I decided to go swimming on a daily basis. I have already done so for a week, and I think I'm getting addicted to the exercise for two reasons: 1. that I cannot feel myself sweat in the water (unlike in the gym/parks where I hate it when my attire sticks to my body) and 2. there's just this sense of freedom that you get as your body glides through the calm, unperturbed water (there's always relatively less people because I frequent the pool in the middle of the afternoon). In addition, I'm getting leaner, more tanned, and more confident about my body. Pasti saham naik, muahahaha. So, exactly which pool do I visit? The fabled KJ Municipal Pool.

Before you start doing the thinking for me, I chose the pool because it happened to be the closest one to my house, not because of its notoriously fabled reputation. In retrospect, the place is relatively cheap, clean during the hours that I'm there, and has acceptable facilities. Most of the time, the place is frequented by middle-aged uncles, who to no offense, is not exactly eye candy. However, there are indeed rare moments where some fit dudes will move suggestively through the water, and it is definitely not the figment of my imagination (Can anyone be any more conspicuous?).

The math starts to have issues once you enter the men's showers. You suddenly notice a whole new crowd, who suspiciously, was never seen at the pool at all (No prizes given for successful speculation of intent.) (It seems to be more noticeable when there's less people in the pool.). You see people leaving completely changed without going to the pool, others hanging around the changing area staring at every guy passing by, and even people lounging around the lobby giving each other desperate glances. To be fair, some of them might be genuinely resting, but what are the chances?

Need to get new G-Tec refills. Lines not appearing clear enough.

Most people in the circle probably already know about this whole situation, and if this whole sub-culture floats your boat, go ahead and rock it. But for the rest of us, stick to the shower cubicles and be wary of bold ass-slappers.

Meh.

Defining Promiscuity

Side Observation: With other psychology majors, I am able to use "anal" as a short form for "anal retentive" without much issue, but with the general public, they think of "anal sex". Till now, I will syok sendiri inside my mind whenever I hear that.

To most people, defining promiscuity would be an easy task. Most dictionaries define it somewhere along the lines of "acts of indiscriminate and casual sexual relations". I can safely presume that almost everyone dictates the existence of a sexual relation only if it involves sexual intercourse, and I can hardly blame them because it is indeed semantically (and even socio-culturally) correct. They also only label a person as being promiscuous if he/she/it has multiple partners at the same time without being serious in any one. But I beg to differ.

You may call me idealistic, surreal or even monastic, but I have a very conscientious view of promiscuity. I think it is indeed promiscuous to kiss everyone and anyone you like. I think it is indeed promiscuous to give/receive random blow jobs and jerk offs even to consenting guys you know. I think that it is promiscuous to perform sexual acts to each other using webcams. I think that it is indeed promiscuous to sexually lead people on when you are not serious to commit or if you weren't even close to being interested in trying if it will work. (Okay, maybe not the fourth one, that's just being a big jerk.) Yes, I might be a little close-minded, but I take pride in having such fidelity and high standards in the relationships I'm planning to make.

Some of the people I know claim that once I delve deeper into this side of the circle, all my conscience will slowly be broken down piece by piece until I become one of them. I don't know how true is this, but I seriously hope that I can confidently give myself the will to be true to my convictions.

I'm not preaching anything, and I believe that you have the right to live the life you want to live. If you want to do all of the above, it is your choice to make, and your responsibility to handle the consequences they come with. But please, practice safe sex, and be honest about your HIV status. Many people only start regretting what they have done when they are older, but the older ones have already done that for us.

I might not be the best person to write about this, I haven't been in any relationships, and haven't been sexually involved with anyone. As the saying goes, we should write what we know, not what we think we know. However, I am writing what I believe in and I hope that you do not let anything stupid or anyone who didn't matter to you, affect your faith.

Meh.

Edit: Finally got my Photoshop running, so I was able to draw, scan and format my banner. Sorry if it looks a little suggestive.

I Can't Think Of A Suitable Title For No. 1

Writing the first ever post took me longer than the time used to create, design and optimize the blog, combined. Much of it was spent deciding on exactly what sort of content should I publish here. Of course, I've already decided that this will be more of a personal journal/diary, and I should write what I want to write, not what I think people will want to read. What about adult content? The gay blogosphere contains a mix of blogs full of sexual innuendos, to personal journals, to smart and intellectually stimulating ones, all catered to a different audience. I do pride myself for a reasonable sense of prudence, so if you're looking for effective stimulus, Google is your best friend. However I do not guarantee that this is an office-friendly blog; experiment at your own discretion.

I believe that everyone is a born artist, each having their own preferences influenced over the many years of conformity to peers, and nonconformity to self-actualization. My blog will contain art pieces ranging from personal music recordings, to scanned artworks, to photographs of inspirations and installations. Some of them might not be up your alley, but please practice a modicum of acceptance.

I also just noticed that the level of English I used in the first two paragraphs seemed a little technical, so forgive me for my jargon usage. I'll try to use layman terms as much as I can in future posts, but if you do understand the semantics of language, the exact words communicate a more accurate meaning than the lay versions. English is, after all, one of the most dumbfounding languages in the world. However, I am Malaysian, and sometimes I try to take pride in our broken Manglish, okay mar?

So, there you go, my first post. I promise future ones will be much more of a good read, this one is more for myself than for all you readers (To be honest, I don't think anyone will find this that fast anyway.). Till then.

Meh.