Search Box

Sunday, July 12, 2015

Gay voices

Two days ago the NY Times ran a review of Do I Sound Gay, a movie by David Thorpe, who examines how his voice betrays his sexuality. (He also interviews various well known gays like David Sedaris, George Takei, Dan Savage, Don Lemon, and Tim Gunn about their voices.)

I've always found the voice to be the surest giveaway of male sexuality. I've certainly been fooled by appearance, gait, and mannerisms. Sometimes I'll see a guy, and wonder. But then I hear his voice, with all its intonations and inflections, and think, oh, okay.

Some gay men, and some lesbians, essentially advertise their gayness with their dress and (in the case of lesbians, their haircuts). And some stay in the closet. But even from the closet, the voice is usually a giveaway.

Lesbians tend to talk in a sort of hollow-sounding, monotonic alto.

With gay men, it's not just a matter of pitch (though I can't think of many gays I've known with rumbling basses.) Gay men tend to have a certain vocal vivaciousness, a heightened expressiveness, a certain singsong emphatic quality. And even when they have deeper voices, as with George Takei, they often have a certainly overly enunciated actor-ish quality which gives them away.

According to the Times, when Thorpe went to a speech therapist to try to sound less gay, he was given "exercises to reduce his nasality and elongation of vowels. Liberace and Paul Lynde are cited as embodiments of the flamboyant gay stereotype."

The Times article starts out by saying:

David Thorpe’s engaging personal documentary, "Do I Sound Gay?," tiptoes into treacherous waters, where it stirs up a few ripples before gracefully backing out. Not so long ago, mockery of the sissy queen stereotype, with a limp wrist, a mincing gait and a lisp was a surefire laugh getter for comedians like Bob Hope, who made cruel sport of perceived effeminacy.

Okay, individual gays ought not to be mocked for an effeminacy they can't help. But as I recall, Hope didn't name names, he merely play-acted at being a sissy himself, which was more self mockery than cruelty.

And why, exactly, does the Times deem the waters that Thorpe wades into so "treacherous?" Because he dares to talk about some of the characteristics that tend to differentiate gays from straights?

This is evidently an intolerable thought crime. Stereotypes, no matter how accurate, are, according to liberals, intrinsically evil. In fact, it seems the more accurate they are, the more evil they are.

It's one thing to criticize mean-spirited mockery (of the type this blog often indulges in). It's another to insist that all stereotypes are misleading. That's just dishonest. Nobody says that all gay men speak as described above. But to say they're more likely to is simply being realistic.

The prudish, neo-Victorian sensibilities of the NY Times can't countenance that sort of honesty. And they continually demonize those who point out the obvious.

Anyway, Thorpe himself sounds realistic, honest, and likable. And his movie likely reflects his character. If I'm going to spend an hour and a half watching a movie, I'd prefer brutal honesty to propaganda.

16 comments:

Steven said...

My friend linked me to this guys workout website. He looks masculine in his pictures but I was pretty sure he was gay when I heard him speak. Then I found out he had a husband. He's a body building engineer who has built an aeroplane but you can tell his sexuality from his voice and face.

http://scoobysworkshop.com/Pullups-For-Total-Beginners/


He seems like a level headed, intelligent and nice guy actually.

John Craig said...

Steven --
(I copied and pasted your comment to this post, where I think you meant to put it, rather than the Thomas Sowell/Walter Williams post.)

Yes, you're exactly right, he's a masculine-looking guy with a giveaway voice. But keep in mind, part of his "masculinity" i store bought. His traps and the definition between his pecs are steroid signatures. He does seem pleasant enough, but I was a little put off by the fact that he's going on about how anybody can do a pull up, man or woman, 8 to 80, when he himself took steroids to enhance his own pull up ability.

Anonymous said...

It is interesting that gays can have tell-tale signs of their sexual orientation. Why that is, who knows.

-birdie

John Craig said...

Birdie --
Yes, and the fact that many of them can't seem to help their intonations etc. (and want to change them) is actually one more piece of proof that they don't choose their orientation.

Rifleman said...

...tiptoes into treacherous waters, where it stirs up a few ripples before gracefully backing out.

OMG, issth that a shark? Thsqueeee!

LOL. NY Times actually wrote "tiptoes" in a story about gays.

Anyway, I scanned Thorpe before detail reading and thought Ian Thorpe. As a fellow swimmer what's your opinion about Ian?

And why, exactly, does the Times deem the waters that Thorpe wades into so "treacherous?"

Because the NY Times is a religious cult newspaper. They have a fundamentalist ideology and all must submit or be excommunicated and vilified.

So anything not doctrinally correct on race, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship and a few others is verboten and makes anyone as a lesser being.

John Craig said...

Rifleman --
Ha, "tiptoes," that hadn't even occurred to me.

Yes, "religious cult" and "fundamentalist Ideology" are good ways to put it.

My opinion of Thorpe? The greatest middle distance freestyler of all time. The current world record holder, hadn't been able to come close to Thorpe's records without a tech suit.

That wasn't what you were asking? Okay, it's been obvious for a long time that Thorpe was gay, and the longer he denied it, the sillier he looked. (It was almost as ludicrous as Liberace saying he just hadn't "met the right girl yet.") But, I was actually happy for Thorpe's sake when he came out, figured it might give him some peace of mind. I wrote about him here:

http://justnotsaid.blogspot.com/2014/07/ian-thorpe.html

Rifleman said...

Okay, it's been obvious for a long time that Thorpe was gay, and the longer he denied it, the sillier he looked.

Really, why? What was it about him that made YOU think he was obviously gay, I mean other than other people suggesting it.

And how does he compare to gay Greg Louganis? Or the not gay legends like Mark Spitz, Matt Biondi?

John Craig said...

Rifleman --
Thorpe had an effeminate way of talking and a lot of his gestures were sort of effeminate too. (Certainly not his freestyle stroke, which was powerful and masterful.) But when he would celebrate after victories he would make gestures that seemed an attempt to look manly that failed somehow. He was an Australian national hero at age 17, and could have had any woman he wanted, but was never seen with any women. He said that his ambition was to be a clothing designer; I saw one o this designs, a shirt for men with a row of pearls around the neck. When he was asked if he was gay, he wold deny it, but say something like, "I'm flattered that you would ask, because I think it takes incredible courage to be gay, but no, I"m not." (an awfully gay-sounding reply.( In his early 20's he had a male roommate who was very good-looking. And when he tried to make a comeback in 2005 and 2006 his comeback kept getting derailed by a "mystery virus" which would act up whenever he trained too hard. My guess, it was THR mystery virus, which is why it kept reappearing. And there was a mini-doping scandal swirling around him at one point when l'Equipe reported that the testers had found an exogamous source of testosterone in his body. then Thorpe went to speak to the testers, and all of a sudden the scandal just disappeared, and WADA never leveled charges. My guess, the "exogamous" source was either another man's sperm in him, or it was the testosterone which is part of the cocktail of drugs that are given to AIDS patients. Now, let me emphasize, much of what I said above is pure speculation, but when viewed as a whole, it all makes sense. And, the fact is, he did eventually come out.

I wouldn't know how to compare a swimmer to a diver, they're two completely different sports. I'm lifelong swimming fan, but even now, know next to nothing about diving. Mark Spitz now ranks as the second greatest swimmer of all time, and was the greatest until Phelps came along. I put him ahead of Thorpe. Biondi and Thorpe are at roughly the same level. Biondi dominated the 50 and 100 freestyles, and was a world class 100 flyer and 200 freestyler. He ended up with a little more Olympic hardware than Thorpe, but he also had the benefit of being American, which meant that many of those medals were on relays, which isn't quite the same thing when comparing individual glory. Thorpe won three individual golds, one more than Biondi, but set a lot more world records. And he set WR's in three separate individual events, as opposed to Biondi's two. Both were unquestionable great, but personally, I'd put Thorpe slightly ahead of Biondi.

Steven said...

"He does seem pleasant enough, but I was a little put off by the fact that he's going on about how anybody can do a pull up, man or woman, 8 to 80, when he himself took steroids to enhance his own pull up ability."


He addresses this question here. What do you think?

http://scoobysworkshop.com/2015/04/21/does-scooby-use-steroids/

John Craig said...

Steven --
I think he's lying. His build just screams steroids. And basically, steroids are the new plastic surgery: everybody who uses them lies about it. I can't be 100% sure, of course, since I've never seen him shoot up or take pills, but steroids are also the new gluttony in a sense: you can't hide its effects.

Steven said...

wow that would be a bit shocking if true. He even details the signs of steroid use. He seems honest to me but I think I do tend to believe people.


So what's the biggest natural build you can get?

John Craig said...

Steven --
I could be wrong, who knows. He sure looks as if has the typical steroid signatures though.

It's hard to answer that question, it all depends on our genetic limitations. There are guys like Mike Tyson who are just naturally really thickly muscled. And if you look at some of the old time strongmen like Eugene Sandow they look awfully strong too. The strongest guy I've ever known as the guy I wrote about in the post of that name. He is 6' 6" and 245 pounds of solid muscle. He's over 50 now, not quite as fit as he used to be, but in his day he was unnaturally strong.

Anonymous said...

How you look doesn't always translate to how strong you are. You can have a bodybuilder and a rugby athlete, both can bench 400 but the athlete doesn't look like an apollo, he looks like a caveman (in a good way), naturally strong, basic amounts of fat, muscle isn't puffy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8FqG5DBM_o

Rugby player with autism (or SSS as I coined it before, selfshutting sickness) and Tourettes.

It's just kinda funny, a big buff masculine guy with a deep voice, but is such a wimpy awkward geek who can't stop twitching. This interview looks like a British sitcom episode.

He looks calmer and better tempered (at least in this video) than many other autistics I've met, maybe its the exercise.

-Ga

John Craig said...

Ga --
True, appearances can be deceiving, otherwise Arnold Schwarzenegger would have been able to lift more than Vasily Alexeyev.

That rugby player is remarkably good-looking. I think his twitching is a result of his Tourette's, not his Aspergers, no? I've known several people with Aspergers, and none of them twitched. And he does seem like a nice guy, just incredibly shy.

Anonymous said...

I think his physique helps him stay calm. His muscles can store huge amounts of amino acids and neurotransmitter catalysts. If he gets stressed, the muscles release a steady stream of these substances to calm him down preventing meltdowns or agitation. He probably also uses creatine as a supplement which increases blood flow in his brain.

-Ga

John Craig said...

Ga --
I'd never heard that before -- is that the way it works? It does seem that musclemen throw tizzy fits much less than other people.