Matthew Rodriguez @ Huffpost: Grindr was created, according to its inventors, to make socializing easier. If you didn’t know the man across the bar, you’d simply hop onto the app and find out just enough about him to start a conversation. However, as any movie about science or technology tells us, what is a simple genius invention often runs afoul of the maker’s intent in the hands of mere mortals — and especially horny mortals.
As a queer Latino gay man of size, logging on to Grindr is a casual masochistic reminder that, in the mainstream gay male community, my body is not welcome. Messages like “NO ASIANS,” “NEG U B 2,” and “MASC ONLY” invalidate gay men like me daily. How did a tool that was meant to facilitate conversation become the prime example of the gay community’s — like the rest of humanity’s — worst tendencies, like racism, sexism, misogyny, ageism, ableism, fat shaming, elitism, transphobia, homophobia and serophobia?
What does someone in the 1 percent of Grindr’s sexual economy look like? He has white skin, he has a weight that begins with “1,” he is cisgender, in his 20s, completely able-bodied, has a full head of hair, has either slightly defined or very defined abs, has a dusting of body hair, is masculine and is HIV-negative. These men are what you might call “sexual gatekeepers.” Just as the 1 percent of America’s economy has unlimited access to the services and privileges they need, Grindr’s 1 percent has the privilege of determining who has access to them and when and where they will get serviced.
READ THE REST OF THE STORY HERE @ HUFFPOST
Photo illustrations by Peter De Potter
Bravo….Well said
Gosh… Cisgender.. NO twinky NO!!! 20something.. GOD NO!!! hairless type…. NO!!
Man, regular man … YES!!!!
Try growlR
“Is ‘discrimination’ on Grindr killing gay sex?”
Please. The Nazi regime didn’t kill gay sex (though they tried mightily), and I doubt Grindr will even come close.
And print ads of the 1960s and 1970s, which were far more graphic and emphatic about the type of men other men did and did not want to have sex with, were far more “discriminatory” than anything you see on social media sites today. And those misguided expressions didn’t kill gay sex either. Quite the opposite has proven to be true. Gay sex triumphed over the imperfections of man — as it always has, and always will.
This is one of those “have you stopped beating your wife?” questions. Those who decry what’s going on on Grindr (and other similar venues) as “discrimination” make the mistake of confusing some men’s less-than-considerate attempts at expressing their preferences with true discrimination. Granted, there are things posters just should not say, but that doesn’t condemn an entire site — or generation — to a charge they neither intend nor condone.
Just because I, personally, prefer not to have sex with men who are morbidly obese, or who haven’t showered in a month or who are HIV+ and will not disclose that information, does NOT mean I harbor any hatred toward men who are overweight, don’t know how to wash themselves or are HIV+. All it means is that I prefer not to have sex with men who are in these aforementioned categories. I am not “discriminating” against them.
I agree with Mr. Rodriguez in that there are better ways to express one’s preferences. I prefer positives rather than negatives. Instead of saying what you don’t want, say what you do. That way, no one is offended. As this Daily Squirt site has proven over and over again, each and every one of us has a wide variety of preferences — not just those Mr. Rodriguez seems to think Grindr exclusively endorses — and none of us seems shy in expressing them. But — with a few notable exceptions which thankfully seem to be a thing of the past — Daily Squirt and the men who post here manage to convey those preferences without hatred or animosity.
I also take exception to his statement: “… preferences are always socially constructed.” No, they are not. Just as we have no control or “choice” over whether or not we are gay, I don’t believe we have any control or choice over our preferences for sexual contact.
A great deal of the problem, in my view, is this near-religious devotional reliance on electronic media to validate our behavior. Turn off the damn device and get out there and meet people, for heaven’s sake. If your argument is that you’re unfairly rejected by others on social media because they don’t know and appreciate your inner beauty, then get off your ass and show ’em what you’ve got. Don’t let the phenomenon of technology reduce your magnificence to a screen presence, then complain that no one appreciates you because of it. Whose fault is that?
I am truly sorry there are men out there who are rejected by their fellow men for sexual partnership. And I am truly sorry that there are men out there who may lack the skills necessary to express themselves without others taking offense. But these two realities don’t change a third: That we ALL have sexual preferences. Those preferences are natural and instinctive, not foisted upon us by society (though that makes a convenient — and incorrect — object of blame). Those preferences are not going to change. And gay sex will continue on in all of its imperfect glory and maybe — just maybe — those who not fit Grindr’s ideal of the perfect sexual partner will continue to get laid.
Why doesn’t Mr. Rodriguez just ignore the “1-percenters” and move on? There are plenty of ways to find men in his category, instead of sulking and accusing people of being discriminatory.
I was first exposed to grinder by an aquaintence who was,, in fact,,, a stalker. Perfect format.
As I see it, Mr Rodriguez is mixing up an awful lot of half-baked ideas and his own feelings of rejection. In short, muddled thinking.
Trunzo has it about right, and those (both here and in the discussion on Huff) who say “Don’t use the app, then” are giving sound advice.
The comments on Huff are well worth reading.
I think for the most part All of the people that feel like they are being discriminated against on hook up sites need to stop and take a step back and say… “Hey! This isn’t discrimination, this is a list of what they are sexually attracted to!”.
Cry me a fricking river. Everyone wants what they can’t have. So I’m discriminatory because I happen to be sexually attracted to generally white men around my age? I guess we should just fuck everyone and everything. However, what I find really unattractive in a guy is a whiner. Who won’t take no for an answer. Who automatically assumes because I say no I”m rascist. No, I am not attracted to asian men; but I will have a great conversation with asian men. But because I won’t whip out my dick, I’m racist? Does that make the Latino man who rejects me rascist against whites? Grow up. Be proud of yourself, and respect people’s differences – even sexually. What I find really amusing, however, are those guys who write NEG U B 2 and yet say they practise safe sex usually. Newsflash mental midgets – no one can say for 100% certainty they are negative – especially if they “usually” engage in safe sex or not at all. PS – also had a few guys who claim they have safe sex “all the time” but went from zero to bareback in about 3 seconds. But I digress. Be proud of who you are, be confident in yourself and quit your whining. It’s a REAL turnoff.
What a stupid article plain and simple
Man, how far are we going to take political correctness? So, if my dick doesn’t get hard because I’m not sexually attracted to someone is because I’m a racist??? Gimme’ a frigging break!!