You are right Charlene. It is totally inappopriate to label people as gay if they take on non-traditional roles or activities. It's wrong to use "gay" to describe anything other than sexual orientation. I obviously didn't have my filter on when I posted that and I do my gay friends a total diservice when I'm that much of a dumba**.Charlene wrote:It's amazing how many people say that male cheerleaders are gay...way to be close-minded people.
Last time i checked, this was 2006....you'd think by now men and women would be free to do things that are traditionally only done by the opposite sex and not be seen as "gay"
Why is it more acceptable for women to pursue male roles than men to pursue female roles? First, men have traditionally held most of the power in our society and have controlled most of the resources. Being male meant having power. Being female, not so much. So any kind of role or behaviour associated with being male is going to be more attractive, just out of its association with power. When a man embraces a female role, it is seen as de-masculinizing or disempowering because female roles are generally seen as more subordinate or supportive. Cheerleaders are there to support the team or facilitate the fans supporting the team (and other supportive functions!). That?s okay for women, because we accept women in a supportive role, we?re used to it. But men who do the same stand out. However, when a female breaks into a traditionally male role, she seems to become more empowered. Second, it's politically incorrect to chastise a female for pursuing non-traditional roles. If you speak out against it nowadays, there are implications ranging from losing face to being sued. These same expectations don't exist for men who pursue non-traditional gender roles, at least not to the same extent.Robbie wrote:Of the responses that I have received so far, it seems like the stereotype of male cheerleaders being looked down upon as gay, weak, and sissies is confirmed.
I guess that is just one of society's many double standards. If a woman engages in a traditionally male activity such as Danica Patrick in auto racing, she is positively looked up upon as breaking the gender barrier. But if men engage in a traditionally female activity such as cheerleading, they are negatively looked down upon as gay.
I suppose the all-time classic of a double standard is the "studs vs. sluts" model. A man who sleeps around with many women is positively labeled as a strong, macho, and sexy stud. But a woman who sleeps around with many men is negatively labeled as a slutty whore, bimbo, and skank. But I've noticed that this image has changed somewhat in recent years with celebrities like Paris Hilton and TV shows like Sex and the City. Now, all that needs to happen to balance everything is for Hollywood to produce a male version of Bring It On.
I don't think the whole "*beep*" and "whore" stigma is gone. Yes, women are portrayed more as sexual agents than they used to be and there isn?t the same tendency to paint all sexually active women as sluts, but people still pull it out to use as ammunition because it still has some stigma attached to it.
