Had such and interesting conversation with students the other day about the phenomenon of internalized self loathing. As I explained it, members of an outgroup, women, people of color, gay people, often say "I don't like [members of my group]," thinking they are expressing personal preference rather than reflecting the hateful ideology of the dominant class.

We do this in order to carve out some degree of self-respect, because hearing over and over how horrible, say, women are, for example, hardly causes me as a woman to want to identify with "them." So I do the opposite, identify with men against women, in effect identifying against myself but deriving a modicum of respectability for doing so.

How do I know this? Because I myself often used to say "I don't like women." Heck, I applied to a men's college, and as a 15-year-old girl, it wasn't because I wanted to "go wild." No, I wanted to be where the power and prestige was, and as I had learned and learned well growing up, that was where the men were (and still are).

It wasn't until I read feminist theory that I realized I had internalized a sexist culture's loathing of females and what we represent. Until then I had simply sided with the patriarchy, detesting weakness, vulnerability, and passivity, all of which we connect with women. In order to believe that women are weak, vulnerable, and passive, we must pretend men are not, which is where James Bond fits in. I saw Casino Royale the other night, and watching 007 get his balls repeatedly whacked only to beg for more caused me to snort in derision. Yeah, right. With only one whack to the balls, he'd have balled like, well, a "bitch." Get the idea how we artificially separate out human characteristics, rigidly associate them with either of the two sexes, and then revile those attached to females and femininity?

Which leads me to homosexuality. One of my brilliant students who identifies as a gay man disagreed with me when I said that marginalized groups internalize prejudice, leading to self loathing, which is then expressed as hatred towards the group as a whole. He felt strongly that his dislike of "gays" as he had recently seen them literally on parade during Pride festivities was generated by "their" behavior, which he found stereotypical and damaging to the cause of civil rights.

He explained that he did not act like "they" did, that members of his fraternity wouldn't know that he was gay unless he told them. Another student added that one does not have to be "fabulous" to be gay.

"What," I queried, "is wrong with being fabulous?"

Now of course I understand the point. I am not a "typical" (straight white middle class) female either. Don't lump me in with women. Why I am strong, smart, rational, coordinated, independent, etc etc etc. Those beauty pageant queens, they must be some other brand of woman than I am. They're not strong, smart, rational, coordinated, independent, etc, are they?

Are they???

Why, of course they are, come to think of it. Competition like that requires real grit. So why on earth would they choose to behave in ways that seem so demeaning, parading around trying to get power through male attention, trying to be the Queen of the whole country or even universe?

Hmm. When I put it that way, it seems kinda obvious, doesn't it? Because they are striving to achieve in one of the limited ways that women have been traditionally been allowed to achieve. They are striving for excellence in one of the traditional ways that women have been allowed to strive for excellence: as the objects of male desire.

So why am I mad at them for doing something perfectly logical given the limited circumstances of female existence? So why aren't I pissed at the patriarchy? Why am I not mad at sexism?

I am.

And it's that exact same sexism that forces my wonderful young students to identify against their own group, those fabulous, fey, exuberant men marching in the Gay Pride Parade, and with the very institution, that heteronormative fraternity system, which makes them cringe at the sight of every fairy. Why not be pissed at the Greeks? They are the ones who say that if you don't conform to rigid norms of heterosexual masculinity then you will be stomped.

The answer, as the word "stomped" suggests, is fear. It's a lot easier to stay huddled in the protection of the dominant group's shade, why some white women stay allied with white men rather than our sisters of color; why some men of color align themselves with white men rather than their sisters of color; why some gays align themselves with the straight world rather than with their homosexual brethren. What do the non-privileged peoples have to offer in the way of protection, resources, respectability? Nada.

This is why comprehensive civil rights movements take real courage.

As to what straight white men can get out of joining us in our drive to eliminate oppression, which is another good question that came up in class this week, well let's just say that constructions of masculinity today are so limiting that if I were a straight white man I would be SCREAMING for some fabulousness. (Perhaps this accounts for that bizarre Queer Eye show, but of course it just reinforces that false us/them binary that makes it hard for gay men to construct a self they can be comfortable with. That program is more about mandatory consumption patterns than sexual identity.)

Carl's Jr has a new commercial which shows said straight white male gulping down cocktails and chomping on the fruit that comes in his drink while clearly ogling "babes." The point of the ad is that "real" men cannot, do not, will not, don't, eat "fruit" (funny coincidence this is a derogatory term for gays) unless it comes lassoed to liquor.

If I were a "real" man I would be livid. How dare they try to peddle death, which is what you're asking for if you regularly consume that garbage, under the guise of masculinity? How dare they discourage "real" men from enjoying the foods that real men have been eating for millenia? And it's not just Carl's Jr. that discourages male self-preservation. Mitchum deodorant packaging actually anoints you a Mitchum man "if you don't go to the doctor until it's broken" or "if you consider mowing your lawn as cardio."

So here's my wonderful brilliant gay male students being pressured to identify with that sick world, one that pretends to represent power but actually encourages weakness, denial and death. So here's my wonderful brilliant straight male students being pressured to identify with that sick world, one that pretends to represent power but actually encourages weakness, denial and death.

Given these two options, I'd choose fabulous in a heartbeat. And proudly act to keep that heart healthy, eating fruit and getting lots of true exercise.

It's called self-love. And we could use a whole lot more of it in this supposedly self-centered society where we're all supposed to emulate and pander to this most life-denying, soul-sucking, toxic construction of straight white masculinity. No thanks.