As an elaboration of the notion that “gay cultures” are a better model for the social organization of the homo identified than “the gay community”, I present three basic homo cultures.
The central defining feature of each culture I’m presenting is their erotic aesthetic. Each of these crowds tend toward different meeting places (separate bars, frequently), and different attitudes. I’ll be getting into my perceptions of each, including likes and dislikes.
Bear culture eroticizes large, hairy (facial, body, anywhere you can grow it) men, tending at least as much towards fat as it does towards muscle. Another major feature of this group is the “come as you are” mentality. A very egalitarian attitude towards sexual attraction, if not appearance in general, more descriptive than prescriptive. Beyond that it gets harder to say, there are subgroups that tend towards public displays of sexuality, leather (as a fetish unto itself, as well as shorthand for s&m), blue-collar-ness, and a more casual, laid back attitude. Attitudes towards food are similarly casual and open. I like the calmness, the casualness, and the openness of this value system. The leather (in both regards) is a gripe. In general, the anything-goes-ness of the culture makes it hard for me to get riled up by it, though I would say that I’m uncertain a haven of unconditional acceptance is always positive.
Gym culture uses the gym as many religiously oriented people use churches. A social center as well as a guide towards appropriate values and behavior. The major aesthetic is muscle. More of it, and less fat hiding it. Often, hair is removed to better display definition. This is an elitist/hierarchical/meritocratic aesthetic, prescriptive, more than descriptive, and very body focused. Food and behavior are carefully analyzed and chosen in attempts to improve one’s valuation in terms of the aesthetic pecking order. (Ask any gym-goer about their routine and, if you’re not a gym-goer, you may be surprised by the detail).
Fashionista culture, as I somewhat abusively call it, focuses a great deal on appearances, particularly, clothing and hair. Namebrands are prized. Hair bleaching or dying, plucking, careful coordination of outfits, etc. The focus is artistic, working creatively within a medium (the casually visible parts of a person), though whether the result is creative or not varies rather alot (or perhaps not so much, depending on your perspective). This is probably the one of the three mentioned that I have the most difficulty understanding, as I have an automatic mental rejection due to associating it with exclusion and contempt based on financial means, social class, involuntary aspects of appearance, and other such criteria.
Nobody polices these cultures to make sure that people aren’t walking across multiple boundaries, and people do. Gymbears, gymfashionistas, even fashionistabears (gotta be one out there somewhere) exist.
Though, it occurs to me, having written this, that these cultural divisions are far from unique to the gay community, but perhaps some food for thought.