FEATURES HIGH GEAR/FEBRUARY 1977.

IN DEFENSE OF DRAG QUEENS

By John Lauritsen The following is reprinted at the request of the author and is a response to last months article by Karen Lindsay, entitled "Drag: Misogyny in Disguise." ("In Defense of Drag Queens" is an excerpt from a talk I gave at the 4th Gay Academic Union Conference on November 27, 1976 in New York City-the full talk was eentitled: "Dangerous Trends of Feminism." In this talk, I said that although I felt that women'S LIBERATION AND GAY LIBERATION SHOULD BE SEEN

AS COMRADE STRUGGLE, PROBLEMS HAD ARISEN. Reactionary ideas had been advanced under the banner of feminism and actions harmful to gay liberation had been carried out by selfproclaimed feminists. I maintained that these things had gone thus far uncriticized in the gay liberation movement because of an apparent taboo on criticizing "frminists"-that it was urgent we look at these problems, rather than pretending they didn't exist -that it was urgent we look at these problems, rathen than pretending they didn't exist that nobody's ideas and nobody's actions should be exempted from criticism. I went into three areas of contention: the first concerned with "Disruptions and diversions," the second, with "Censorship"; and the third, with "Feminist Bigotry Against Male Homesuxuality". "In Defense of Grag Queens" is taken from the section on "Censorship.")

Queens have been special targets of feminist wrath. We gay men have been forcefully told that if we support women's liberation, we must denounce and repudiate everyone and everything connected with drag. The censorious feminists claim that drag oppresses women -that it is a mockery of women, misogyny, and a form of bigotry. If

anyone feels I am exaggerating the feminist position, then I urge him to read

LOVE TWICE REMOVED.

The beat of my heart surely

filled the room;

it felt magnified

as it raced my breath

(but there was no finish line...)

Thru misting eyes I

betcid the rain of your pleasure splashes upon you

as grass twinkles with dew.

I was touched; my senses

never had it so good!

My wish was to place those moments in a time capsule and go floating with you gently thru space.

an article in High Gear, January, 1977 by Karen Lindsey. Lindsey, who identifies herself as a "straight woman," delivers a vicious attack against drag queens, and in the process engages in some coy bigotry against male homosexuals. She compares wearing drag to "sexual harassment," pimping, rape, and wife-beating.

I am fascinated by one sentence of hers; she writes: "But when men dress in spike heels, rhinestones, sheer stockings, and evening gowns fitted with bustdarts, there is no room for doubt or for tolerance."

I have two questions for Ms. Lindsey. Number one: "You say that there is no room for tolerance. May we know specifically what forms of intolerance you would advocate?" Number two: "Do you believe that Woman, the eternal feminine or whatever, comprises such things as spike heels and rhinestones?"

The time has come to defend transvestities. On the level of personal freedom, I say that if women have the right to dress like drag queens, then dragqueens should have the right to dress like women. Many states and communities still have laws prohibiting "crossdressing," and little enough has been done to get rid of these medieval absurdities. Boyind this, I think we must question whether there be any justification for the current feminist vendetta against drag queens.

Now, the transvestite issue is not a simple one. Superficially it is true that most transvestites are straight; it is also true that the vast majority of homosexual men have no desire to put on women's clothes, and are at least as "virile" as the average, exclusively heterosexual man (though less rigidly "masculine").

On the other hand, it is also true that drag has long been a part of the gay subculture. When gay men get together for a really fun and special oc-

Meanwhile, back to reality, you were again stirring and the look in your eyes told me that

you had just returned to earth...

I see one and

and memory rustles my mind.

I see the other and feeling rushes my body.

DESIGN LIRES

casion now, as in the 19th or 18th centuries costumes and drag may well be a part of the festivities. Drag and drag queens are a part of the gay world, whether one likes it or not. One may believe that the gay world as we know it now is part of our oppression, and I agree up to a point. But I suggest that in drawing up a

blueprint for a liberated future, there is a danger of falling into puritanism in the present.

Why drag? Well, gay men have a sense of humor, a unique sense of humor, known as "camp"; it is part of our heritage. And at the heart of camp is a mockery of the situation we find ourselves in -our

predicament homosexuals. And so camp, among other things, includes a mockery of sex-roles, a mockery

I see them together

and torment rages my soul.

I see myself

a solitary spider

entagled within

a self-spun web

of vulnerability and need.

By Lady O

PRECISION HAIR CUTTING AND DESIGN

2800 MAYFIELD ROAD AT COVENTRY ROOM 206 (ABOVE PET WORLD)

of taboos, a mockery of danger, a mockery of condemnation.

If gay men have survived the worst oppression that Christendom had to offer, I feel we owe something to camp. For most of the Christian era, the Church and State have not recognized our right to live not even our right to exist. And yet the gay men who escaped the

Executioner often

came out strong and far mor creative than the straights. I would like to believe that even in the dungeons of the Inquisition, men are camping. I woule like to believe that even in the death camps at Dachau and Sachsenhausen, the men with the pink triangle gave each other courage by camping.

Drag is considered to be a form of camp and it is. Drag is the most extreme mockery of

Page 22

sex-roles, the most extreme expose' of how arbitrary most of the real-man/real-woman divisions are. To be sure, there, is high as well as low camp, and good as well as bad camp. But at its best, drag is very good camp indeed.

Feminist claims to the contrary, what a drag queen parodies is not men, but culturally dictated sex-roles -sex-roles' which are themselves oppressive to women. If anything, by demonstrating the arbitrariness and absurdity of traditional sex-roles, female impersonators, far from being oppressive to women, may actually I serve as consciousness raisers aiding the liberation of women. I think some of the feminist rage against transvestites can be explained by a denial of the element of self-oppression involved in playing traditional sexroles. So far, gay liberationists have been more willing than feminists to analyze the ways we contribute to our own oppression immediately Carl Wittman's Gay Manifest and Andrew Hodges' and David Hutter's With Downcast Gays come to mind. Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique and the protests at the Miss America Pageant seemed to promise a women's analysis of selfoppression, but lately the feminist movement has opted for a men-are-the-enemy-period sort of pseudo-radicalism.

Karen Lindsey in her GCN article claims that women adopt traditional sex-roles; and dress the way they do, only because they are forced to do so by men; in her words; "it is men who determine what is fit apparel for men and women, reserving to themselves what is functional and assigning to women styles that conform to male fantasy and power needs."

I find this hard to believe.

Continued on Page 24

Club 21

2121 South Ave.

Youngstown's Newest Show Bar VALENTINE PARTY FEB. 12

Mr. & Miss Sweetheart 1977 Trophy to best male, female, or combination

FLU ANN FOLLIES PRESENTS

"A STAR IS BORN" Showtime 11:30 Contest Following