The Slate published the following article:

Gay aging: Study says internalized gay ageism affects gay men as they get older.

Frankly, I fail to see any significant difference between aging when it comes to str8 and gay men, despite the frequently touted (in UK terms) gay guys' obsession with the ideals of youth.

Say, you are in your late 50's, early 60's. You want to date in your peer group. Str8 or gay, no one will find this particularly difficult, traumatic, or even worth mentioning.

Now, the same person of any sex in their 50's or 60's wants to date someone in their 20's? Well, this is may get a bit complicated, costly, and, yeah, people will talk... Gay or str8. It is pretty naive to believe that a gorgeous looking 23 year old girl/boy will go for someone in his late 50's or early 60's without ANY reason. At times, the reason is financial security, much better lifestyle, expensive gifts, and foreign travel, to mention the few. At times, the younger person is looking for a daddy figure, regardless of the sexual orientation of the players involved.

And, more often than not, life does not bend itself to please these pigeon-hole kinds of classifications: it is a mix of many things, including money, privilege, networks, daddy-syndrome, breaking the glass ceiling, etc.

KD

Quote |

It is true - you will see it for gay or for straight. I think it may get noticed more in the gay situation because of the growth of online hook up sites.

Now you see it in print and it makes it more dramatic.

I love the ads on CL "60 years old, 300 pounds, missing most of my teeth and have tuberculous looking for 20 year old gym fanatic with large cock" (OK - well maybe that is a slight exaggeration).

But it is funny how you will see guys whose ads basically exclude anyone who is like they are. Sure everyone would love to get the hot college guy - but unless you have something special to offer (money mostly) it is not going to happen when you are in your 50's.

When I watch porn do I want to see a bunch of middle age guys with a bit of a paunch? Hell no. But if I am looking to actually hookup I have no problem with someone who is showing he has been around the track a few times - because I know when I look in the mirror I am no longer 20 myself.

Quote |

The notion of exceptionalism has been gaining ground in many aspects of life. Sometimes, there is something good about it. And, at times, not so

Gay folks around here seem to be believe that much of their 'suffering' at later stages of their lives has to do with the fact that they are NOT straight. See, the gay guys are obsessed with youth, looks, and buffed bodies, etc.

Few of them will ever admit that a str8 50+y.o. who wishes to date a str8 20 y.o. needs to dig deep in his/her pockets and have his/her Ferrari waxed pretty often, too.

Youth is at a premium these days, and so are ripped bodies among men, and very svelte bodies among women.

Whatever your sexual orientation may be, if you go for the top and premium, there is always a top, premium price to be paid.

So, frankly, I see no discrimination here.

It is what it is, and it hits pretty much everyone in the same way.

KD

Quote |

"Youth is wasted on the young" is attributed to George Bernard Shaw although some people think it came from Oscar Wilde. It's an interesting thought.

I didn't have much interest in youth even when I was young. Someone told me once in my teen years I was "Fourteen going on forty."

In my twenties, young, attractive, contacts instead of thick glasses, big basket and my 501s showed it, I preferred older guys, 30s, 40s, 50s, because many of them had intelligence and wit and were able to treat me as an equal, "not just another piece of meat" to use the cliche. I was well-educated and in grad school and I had a lot more important things going on than what was on the surface. The ones who saw only a handsome twink edging into the leather scene never interested me and sometimes repulsed me. There was a guy I tricked with several times who got annoyed that I couldn't meet him because I was studying for an exam; he never called me again. That was the same one who'd said, "You look great but if you worked out you'd be really hot!" That was a clue if I ever heard one.

Basically, I did not just want to get off, I wanted a sense of connection. That could be just for a short time, a few hours, a night, a few weeks, or longer, but there had to be something personal in it. The exception was going to the sexclubs or parties where one abandoned self and entered the bacchanalia with few or no restraints.

Now at 54, the same thing applies except that I'm much more constrained by time, energy, work, being a full-time caregiver, and so much more. The apps are not a place for me, I want the look in the eyes and the body language and the tone of voice to make a connection. So, in those very rare times that I can and do go out looking I'd be looking for a "real person," reasonably close to my age within 10 or 15 years or so (but who knows, I don't really care) and where that sense of connection exists, however temporary. Quality time, especially in my current situation, is most important.

Of course, I've also always accepted that I'm an eccentric outlier. Maybe that's a different type of "exceptionalism" but it's a class of one that people have placed me in from childhood that I've lived with all my life. I'm speaking only of my experience, not anything general.

~ Bob

Quote |

I always thought that what described here was the most general default.

I went cruising for sex, and wanted to hook up with a guy for sex. This would only work if we found each other attractive, AND if we managed to establish a sense of trust and connection that would make it worth our while to go through the notions of going to his place or mine, chatting along, and generally developing the feeling of being at least, comfortable in each other's company. There had to be quite a bit of basically harmonious interaction.

Now, if you went to the spa, saw a hot dude on his knees waiting, and a multitude of naked men walking around, you dispensed with everything else, had sex there and then, and moved on. You probably never exchanged a word, since such places and such contexts were really not meant for socializing.

What made you a bit of an outlier here is probably your frankness to admit that even as a college guy, you sought contacts with 'older men'. The default is the peer group.

Most of the younger, usually college guys who seek contacts with more mature men, claim that their m2m (s)experience within their peer group was only partially satisfying. The sex may have been good, but all the other exchange stalled. Once the deed was done, both guys moved on to their next targets, making their previous experience somewhat meaningless. The 'more of the same' cliche comes to mind here.

KD

Quote |

Honestly, there were a few guys my age who I was attracted to and one I dated for a couple months. He was in law school, I was studying International Relations, and we were both in Dignity. a large community of gay and lesbian Catholics in DC.

I think a lot of the young guys like me who were just exploring our sexuality and also so focused on education and career were naive: We knew who we wanted but other than seeing some porn magazines or whatever, didn't always know what to do or the actual "mechanics" and protocol involved. We had reached the gay scene through a different entrance than the guys who started out in the bars, the streets, in undergrad, or whatever. Being that intellectually focused plus the religious component, guys like us found a way to put all the pieces together in this group, the Espiscopalian Integrity group, and so on. (Although some of what I heard about what went on in seminaries could fill a book...)

Sidebar: I can add that at that time, early- to mid-1980s, there were quite a few gay priests either assigned to DC-based organizations or studying in DC who found it a place of refuge away from the oversight and eyes of the local bishop wherever they had come from. The had more freedom, weren't "being watched" as closely as they would have been in their home diocese, and were able to behave differently, speak more freely, and so on. They were in the baths, the dance clubs, the leather bars, etc., and were living private and sexual lives just like other gay men. Whether lay or cleric, we told each other, "The Church changes in centuries, not in years" and simply lived our lives while we waited. That all changed with a late-1980s crackdown by then Cardinal Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict. After that, some started a sort of "faithful dissent," still intellectual and sort of political, even as the priests and professors were disciplined or disavowed by the Church and our groups across the US were expelled from Catholic facilities. In time, I left the Church and so did many others. I might call myself a "pious agnostic" now (borrowing that phrase from a lesbian theologian) though I'd rather not have a label. Many of my old friends are either similar, became Episcopalian, or joined some other denomination.

Back to the mid-1980s story: Having "arrived," we younger guys could sort of fumble around with each other or we could hook up with some really attractive older guys, both physically and on the points of personality and character, who also were well experienced, sensitive, and knew exactly what to do. They taught us by example. Choosing the older guys was often a better choice, although I certainly do regret some opportunities both with guys my age and with older ones that I passed up. Sometimes I look back and think "what if?" but that's water under the bridge.

~ Bob

Quote |

None of my college friends had any active relationship with the church in the 80's. Yup, people got buried, and the priest was saying his prayers. And people got married in the church, too. The kids were baptized. But that was it. No one attended any service, prayed or indicated in any other way any religious affiliation whatsoever. Church was part of the identity and belonged to the catalogue of our customs, but virtually all dudes fessed up to being the hardcore agnostics.

Some of this attitude must have come from the fact that we saw the teachings of the church as fully incompatible with the lifestyle we were very much enjoying in those years.

True, the biggest single stumbling block in those days used to be the what Bob called here 'the mechanics' or 'the protocol'.

It is one thing to chat up a dude or not in an openly gay bar/spa/club and follow him or have him follow you to the more private space (backroom or darkroom) or wherever, and it is, indeed, a very different thing to connect with someone in your college class, swim team, university library, etc. so that you proceed to have sex with him.

Having no gay groups of any kind whatsoever AND having no gayborhoods of any kind, we resorted to what was available at hand.

We cruised the nude beach in summer. You saw if the guy you were interested in was checking you, too or not. If he was checking you out, too, the protocol would call for one of you (usually the top dude) to ask for the lighter, or offer to exchange his magazine/newspaper for yours. This would start a short convo..., and few minutes later you would be swimming away from the prying eyes and ears, and preferably arranging a hook-up date later in the day.

A cute dude in your college class/library/sports team was checking you out, too. So, a casual small talk ensued. Wow, he was interested in your kind of music, and you had a nice LP collection/set of questions for a very difficult exam/valuable notes or whatever. And, yeah, he was more than welcome to come to your place and see it. (And, preferably a few other things, too.)

A few local Playboy style magazines used to have a classified section. This is where you would be running your ad, and responding to other ads of the men who were quoting their stats and were looking for friends. Snail mail correspondence with SASEs and Xeroxed pix ensued, and you met a few interesting guys from that source, too.

Finally, there was some gay cruising at some public parks after midnight or so. Most college kids thought that this was a bit too risky, and mostly meant for the 'older' guys, etc. Yet, some of us ventured there, too, now and then, and met like-minded guys occasionally.

Yet, the single most significant supply line remained the once established coterie. You met other like-minded guys through your friends, and they did meet the guys you 'discovered' through you. This worked like an intelligent introduction service. (You were introducing tops to the bottoms as a rule...) And the guys had to pick it up from there or not. But no one was going to receive many intros at a zero rate, so each and every one of us had to do all the footwork needed to stay in the game.

Sure, some guys were always better at playing the acquisition game than the others. That's why they got to mess with the supposedly hot,new dudes first, and the others got the proverbial 'sloppy seconds'. The not-so-good players were supposed to balance the books by doing something else for the guys who were helping them meet other dudes: write their school papers, buy them meals now and then, etc.. Most of it really had symbolical rather than practical character but being a total leach was not an option.

KD

Quote |

Very different from what I went through. We were young and had no idea what we were doing - there was no one with experience to teach us. We stumbled through - experimenting and figuring it out from what felt good and sometimes from comments we heard about. But it was not like one of us knew what to do or was comfortable enough to get rid of that awkward feeling.








That was my situation - mostly dealing with it all alone with the door locked by resorting to "what was available at hand"

There were no gay organizations at school and if there were I would not have had the courage to join one. I was still waiting to "out grow" the phase like some of my buddies had.

But there was no place where is was accepted to be out and cruising - it was mostly getting to know someone as a friend and then stumbling through advances and retreats as you tried to figure out if he wanted more as well.

And if he did usually the sex was sort of separate from the friendship - it was something you did but it was not romantic - it was physical.

Quote |

This is an interesting observation, indeed. True, within the peer group, the levels of experience were rather similar but not the same. A dude who has already topped, say two other dudes knew much more about topping than a total newbie, at least in our eyes.

It was through the exchange of this incrementally growing group knowledge that we all entered a steep but very efficient learning curve. Sure, some dudes were more keen on learning the 'tricks of trade' than the others but that was to be expected anyway.

I doubt that anyone among us in those days has ever thought that there would ever be anything like the gay lib, gay organizations, gay neighborhoods and gay marriage. We actually never envisioned the notion of separate gay identity at all. Mostly, because we did not see any merit in it at all. Life used to be pretty good as it was. Most of us sensed that underground m2m sex was societally acceptable for as long as it was kept private, and was not threatening to challenge the existing order of things. None of us felt like being the outliers.

With the doubtless benefit of the hindsight, I now see that the whole 'underground' context has been very beneficial for most of my buddies and me, too.

We all learnt that little should be expected from the outer sources in our lives. If you wanted to have something for yourself, well, you had to go and get it. The government, school, business or anyone else for that matter would get involved only if they saw such involvement as conducive to furthering their own agendas.

Most fortunately, history has proved us all wrong. The businesses saw a great earning potential in tapping into the pink dollar/euro/pound pools, and together with the businesses the political nations got involved, too...

But the lesson we learnt in our late teens and early 20's was very valuable. You did not wait. You did not rely on others to do anything for you. You did not develop any sense of self-entitlement.

If you lacked your mechanics and your protocols, you looked for the dudes out there who may have been a bit more conversant with the subject at hand, and you tried to gather all the knowledge and information available. You learnt by trial and error, too, and you were moving on quickly. Being patient meant a bad case of blue balls, and no one cherished that prospect too much.

The 'can do' and 'let's give it a try' attitude turned out to be invaluable in the lives of the few of us. What was originally a hormone fuelled enterprise soon turned out to be a very good MO in the world of education and business, too.

KD

Quote |

One of the things I have truly mixed feelings about is the "normalization" of being gay in today's world.

On the one hand, it's great that in many places same-sex couples can marry and have anti-discrimination protections to one degree or another. Maybe not so much here in Texas, although I find most folks to be tolerant and pleasant one-on-one. Sexuality isn't really an everyday topic of conversation, after all, but the kids of the lesbian couple next door to me seem to be treated exactly the same as the kids of the straight families on our suburban cul-de-sac.

And sure, it's great to see more portrayals of LGBTetc. people in different types of media. We represent, at least if we're also in a group that has income and demographic characteristics that marketers want. If you're poor or a person of color or in poor health or older than the desired demographic, you may be an object of the media instead of the subject.

On the other hand, I miss being countercultural. I miss being part of a group "on the outside" with both the freedom and the danger that came with it. Many of our old-school gay bars and other gathering places were truly "places of our own" where we could be ourselves and explore (or at least watch the options) how to express sexuality and identity beyond the limits. So many of these places are disappearing now, their denizens aging, the cultural mindset changing.

I saw this article over the weekend and was going to post it as a separate topic, but it illustrates some of what I'm feeling:

Gay Leather Scene Tones Down From Hard-Core to Dress-Up

It's odd for me to feel this way since I was, even here, an outlier concentrating on my career and my larger life. I never centered on the leather scene like a lot of guys did, only joined one or two clubs with rather loose membership based on fetish activities, not on club solidarity, and generally went in and out of the scene as circumstances, feelings, and time allowed.

I guess I took for granted it would be there for me when I wanted it and now I'm sad that it's changed.

Yet I acknowledge everything changes over generations and decades, and everyone faces change within their own life. Why should different parts of the gay scene be different?

As far as "mattering" goes, I think we make ourselves matter, much more than relying on someone else's opinion or their idea of whether we're attractive. Here we are, here we stand -- or sit, if that makes us feel more comfortable.

~ Bob

Quote |

I am largely very happy about the "normalization".

First off, very few people can now be possibly held hostage to their sexual orientation. Outing someone used to be a major disaster for a few folks in those days. Much of this is now clearly simply a history.

Second off, no one really wishes to be discriminated against. I admit to being an 'old school' guy. I am not going to get married, and frankly, the real benefits of the antidiscrimination laws do not do that much for me. But the very notion that everyone out there (including me) has all of these options is indeed, a very good thing. Having the options to choose is the essence of freedom. As such, this is an irreplaceable value in our lives.

Last but not least, I imagine that most people wish to achieve a degree of normalization, fit in, and lead their usual normal lives. I am truly happy for them.

On a very personal level, I continue to choose to view my sexuality as a very private matter. I am out to a few people, but I do not wear my sexuality on my sleeve. I have never developed any inclination to adhere to any notion of gay identity as such. Building a sense of community (beyond the purely political context of the struggle for recognition and against discrimination), based on the notion of sexual orientation ONLY, always seemed utterly artificial to me.

I moved to one of the major European capitals once I postgraduated. I started enjoying the commercial gay scene of bars, baths, clubs and other venues. A few of the like-minded guys and I would go cruising for sex in public areas, too. One of them remarked once: 'We all enter this park as very different people. Once we cross this line here, we are only gay men, tops, bottoms, suckers and suckees. We are all the same. Couple of hours later, we walk through the mirror again, and the magic is over. We are back to our real lives being as different and as diverse as we can possibly be.'

KD

Quote |

This is a major change and improvement for young people. When I was a kid getting caught or outed would have been a life changing event. You hear about guys whose families disowned them or sent them into therapy when they found out.

Although getting forced out would still be embarrassing it would no longer be the "end all" it was to many younger guys in the past.





That is much the same for me. Sex, gay sex is something I do - it is not who I am. I don't feel a "gay identity" - I am me. Take it or leave it.

Quote |

Very few people in Europe are considering forcing anyone out. The exception may be a guy with a militant anti-gay attitude, or someone who represents an anti-gay institution. Other than that, you virtually cannot force anyone out. The scandal, the stigma, all the negativity associated with it are gone. Breaking the news that Jose down the road is gay would be paramount to telling us that he also has brown eyes. We probably know this, and frankly couldn't care less.

The key to understanding this change is the fact that the anti-discrimination laws have been doing a very good job. No one is poised to either win or lose anything by 'outing' anyone. Besides so many folks are either openly gay or are gladly associating with openly gay guys that any form of social ostracism is out of the window, too.

The normalization may still have to go a very long way in some of the 3rd world countries but here, in a number of the old European democracies, it has completely succeeded.


I doubt that the normalization could have ever been achieved unless so many people subscribed to the notion of the gay identity.

Strange as it may be, millions of men around the world agreed to belonging to an identity that was based on a single most basic, lowest common denominator - their sexual orientation. No doubt, the economic impact of this newly created identity must have been very significant on local and regional levels. Huge political gains were made in a number of countries. The normalization as we know it today would have never been achieved unless quite a few people around the world decided to drink a specific brand of beer, wear a specific brand of underwear or even drive a specific kind of car. The incessant demonstration of the purchasing power of the newly established group identity moved the majority of the most conservative business leaders to bow to the almighty power of the pink dollar, euro or pound. This is where and when the battle for normalization was really won. Few people ever have any difficulty in choosing between their annual bonuses or their beliefs and personal convictions. Money seems to always win!

---
None of the aforementioned was in the cards in my time and day. Whereas I did not see myself as a gay man in our contemporary sense, I knew from my early youth that I felt too strong sexual attraction to men to be one of the guys who was playing around with other men simply because no girls were readily available. The other dudes may have hoped to 'outgrow' this phase. I was not one of them. My interest in getting married and raising a family was virtually non-existent.

The only way to protect myself from discrimination, possible stigmatization, etc., in those days, was to achieve professional and material success far above the average.

Needless to say, there I got my fight cut out for me.

When the going got really tough, and the macroeconomic changes started badly affecting the life of the vast layers of the middle class, I was far ahead of the game to be adversely affected.
No doubt, the paranoid survive.

When all's said and done, of all the things I thought I had to learn as a gay man in order to be successful, the ability to turn the tables on practically anyone or anything was the most significant ability I have ever acquired.

KD

Quote |

Another interesting thread. I see the original study as sort of mushy social science that doesn't really tell us a whole lot. We would be best served by a study that did a more thorough comparison by relationship status, SES, and lots of other factors with a cohort of similar non-gay men and women. I know lots of older non-gays who are sorely affected by ageism, and I'm not sure that the society as a whole hasn't internalized ageism.

The concept of "I matter" is what determines healthy aging in all segments of society, so I'm not exactly sure what we'e learned from this particular study.

I do feel bad for the 60 year old who want to get it on with "35 or younger men only". But I guess I'm just lucky that men around my own age were attractive to me as I aged myself (plus or minus several years). I do think that older men who want younger women generally have an easier time finding relationships with them, based on social norms, women's attitudes about sex and love, etc.

As much of a struggle as it was for me to come to grips with my sexuality (in my sixties, it sometimes still is), I do look at it as a central feature to my growth as a person. It just wasn't going to fly to be a "pay, pray and obey" kind of church-goer, and it set me on a path to what has been a very satisfying life of personal growth. I get the impression that many of us had a similar opportunity. Minority/outcast status fueled that to some extent. But how I played it out as a sexual being (thorough enjoyment of sexual adventure, playing on the edge, anonymous sex, etc) was a choice. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to other people, and so I am very glad that there is much more acceptance for gays and lesbians who want to get married and live family lives. More choices is always a good thing, and will probably result in more people with a sense of "I matter" and less internalized ageism.

Quote |