Like many of the other commenters; I thought it was you originally, so this tinted me with female and that was my assumption until massive confusion and clarification at the end.
Upon re-reading I'm willing to say this is a cisfemale (this is the first time I've used that term, I'll assume my small reading on it has served me well enough). On consideration and in support of my theory I offer the following (since you've asked):
Author starts with "thinking about females" with an assumption of male attraction. In our heteronormative culture this follows, especially with the much debated "inherenet female bisexuality" stuff... Most importantly, though -- we're, most of us, brought up in our culture to assume heterosexual. Only stopping to consider females at a later date points towards a female author.
The comment towards "trendy hobbies" strikes me as another stereotypically hetero-female thing to say. I'm not the hepest cat, but guys don't get that cyclical hobby thing that women do, by and large. Other than resurgences of traditional hobbies, I can't think of anything that is marketed to men as a new hobby. We are, to a one, assumed to be into sports and who needs hobbies beyond that, right? Women are constantly marketed pottery, the newest excercise fad, yoga, etc,etc...
The euphemism of "love life" as a synonym for "sex life" is something we're conditioned to expect females to use more often. Men in our culture are more often allowed to have an indpendent sex life and would more often not think about mixing these two terms. Especially in gay culture the two seem to be night and day, which steers me further from thinking a male author.
Mention of an "impossible ideal" in media is a huge clincher, though -- there is no impossible male ideal that's marketed to us. Men have been given John Goodman's Dan Connor, Johnny Depp's various roles, what's-his-face in King of Queens, and Vin Diesel all as valid male ideals. The idea of a SINGULAR impossible ideal speaks strongly to a female author. Again, in stark contrast to gay culture, even smooth twinks and chubby bears are given as possible male physical archetypes. For a male in American culture to speak this way would truly shock me.
Sadly, the objectification of women as sex objects makes me think the tone of the last several lines/paragraphs strikes me as especially likely to be female, too. "Who you're fucking", even when not talked about is too much of what both men and women in our country assume of women. Men don't get defined in that manner. I'm happy for my priviledge and am painfully aware of it. I am not defined by any particular partners I may have at any given point. Similarly, in Ameri-hetero-centric World, a man is also assumed to be a completely seperate person from his sex life. Who this man may or may not be fucking at the time may come up in conversation, but isn't focused on.
Another huge indicator, here, is stating that there's no sign over the author's head that says "I fuck dudes!!!". If the author were openly gay and flagging this way, this could almost be considered a sign over his head. If he were not, the assumption would be the opposite "he looks straight, he must be fucking chicks". The automatic assumption of the author's sex with men points strongly to a female. We are coming to terms with female sexuality at this point and as it enters the zeitgeist the assumption of us all as sexual beings happens even with the most sexist of us. Frustration at other's casual assumption of sex with men without any outward indicator screams female author.
And as hopeful and forthinking as I am, I still don't think the average gay man assumes that he will be able to marry in the future, yet. I think most of us who give thought to this subject are expecting it to happen, but fear it won't for a long while... the casual statement of marriage points to straight female again.
So -- keep in mind, I didn't think any of this originally, I thought it was you, Sor -- until about 2/3 through, at least... Then I was just really confused. But after being asked to analyze the voice of the author, these are the indicators that have me willing to put money on a female author.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ninetydegrees
Hope this isn't more than you wanted. :)
on 2011-12-08 03:08 am (UTC)Upon re-reading I'm willing to say this is a cisfemale (this is the first time I've used that term, I'll assume my small reading on it has served me well enough). On consideration and in support of my theory I offer the following (since you've asked):
Author starts with "thinking about females" with an assumption of male attraction. In our heteronormative culture this follows, especially with the much debated "inherenet female bisexuality" stuff... Most importantly, though -- we're, most of us, brought up in our culture to assume heterosexual. Only stopping to consider females at a later date points towards a female author.
The comment towards "trendy hobbies" strikes me as another stereotypically hetero-female thing to say. I'm not the hepest cat, but guys don't get that cyclical hobby thing that women do, by and large. Other than resurgences of traditional hobbies, I can't think of anything that is marketed to men as a new hobby. We are, to a one, assumed to be into sports and who needs hobbies beyond that, right? Women are constantly marketed pottery, the newest excercise fad, yoga, etc,etc...
The euphemism of "love life" as a synonym for "sex life" is something we're conditioned to expect females to use more often. Men in our culture are more often allowed to have an indpendent sex life and would more often not think about mixing these two terms. Especially in gay culture the two seem to be night and day, which steers me further from thinking a male author.
Mention of an "impossible ideal" in media is a huge clincher, though -- there is no impossible male ideal that's marketed to us. Men have been given John Goodman's Dan Connor, Johnny Depp's various roles, what's-his-face in King of Queens, and Vin Diesel all as valid male ideals. The idea of a SINGULAR impossible ideal speaks strongly to a female author. Again, in stark contrast to gay culture, even smooth twinks and chubby bears are given as possible male physical archetypes. For a male in American culture to speak this way would truly shock me.
Sadly, the objectification of women as sex objects makes me think the tone of the last several lines/paragraphs strikes me as especially likely to be female, too. "Who you're fucking", even when not talked about is too much of what both men and women in our country assume of women. Men don't get defined in that manner. I'm happy for my priviledge and am painfully aware of it. I am not defined by any particular partners I may have at any given point. Similarly, in Ameri-hetero-centric World, a man is also assumed to be a completely seperate person from his sex life. Who this man may or may not be fucking at the time may come up in conversation, but isn't focused on.
Another huge indicator, here, is stating that there's no sign over the author's head that says "I fuck dudes!!!". If the author were openly gay and flagging this way, this could almost be considered a sign over his head. If he were not, the assumption would be the opposite "he looks straight, he must be fucking chicks". The automatic assumption of the author's sex with men points strongly to a female. We are coming to terms with female sexuality at this point and as it enters the zeitgeist the assumption of us all as sexual beings happens even with the most sexist of us. Frustration at other's casual assumption of sex with men without any outward indicator screams female author.
And as hopeful and forthinking as I am, I still don't think the average gay man assumes that he will be able to marry in the future, yet. I think most of us who give thought to this subject are expecting it to happen, but fear it won't for a long while... the casual statement of marriage points to straight female again.
So -- keep in mind, I didn't think any of this originally, I thought it was you, Sor -- until about 2/3 through, at least... Then I was just really confused. But after being asked to analyze the voice of the author, these are the indicators that have me willing to put money on a female author.