This article is already getting savaged on Twitter and elsewhere, but I thought I’d bring it up myself for a good laugh. Nevermind the question of why any straight guys would want to call themselves twinks given its connotations – effete, submissive, airheaded tending toward delusional as the years go on – but speaking as a twink myself (or a former one if you don’t believe that I can still use that label at 29) you shouldn’t get to call yourself one if you’ve not had or wanted to have someone else’s cock in you.
Tag: Twinks
What Comes After The Twink?
The first time someone called me a twink, it was 2003 and I was standing at the urinal in the basement of a laser-and-smoke-filled club in Toronto. I was 19, rail-thin and still in my excitable stage of post-coming out …
My latest anon reminded me of this article I read recently on the nebulous and still-evolving definition of “twink. Anyone who liked my series on gay male labeling should enjoy this perspective.
Getting the Gay Labels Straight – Part 2, cont.
I have no idea why I set myself these huge projects when there’s not much demand, especially as the person who originally took issue with my usage of one of the labels is almost certainly not reading these posts. Oh, well…it’ll be good to have something to refer people to in the future if need be. Anyway, before you continue, definitely read the first part of Part 2 if you haven’t already, and consider reading the Introduction and Part 1 as well. Standard disclaimers involving naughtiness apply as always. I think that particularly applies to this post, because today I’ll be talking extensively about (pseudo)ephebophilia and that may make some people uncomfortable.
It’s funny that Tumblr’s spellchecker doesn’t even recognize ephebophilia as a word, because I think that’s reflective of how little that word sees use. As I was considering different topics of discussion regarding the twink aesthetic, it occurs to me that I’d have to bring up another stereotype of gay men, one considerably more dangerous in its implications than that of the flaming queen – the characterization of gay men as pedophiles. First, distinguishing some terms:
pedophilia ≠ ephebophilia ≠ pederasty
This is one of those instances where I wonder if I’m being too elementary, but given the subject matter I believe it bears mentioning. Pedophilia and ephebophilia are both technical terms designating love for – and, in common usage, sexual attraction to – minors, with the key distinction being the age of the minors under consideration. Pedophiles are attracted to pre-pubescent minors, while ephebophiles are attracted to pubescent ones. Most people are significantly less bothered by (consensual) ephebophlia – the term “jailbait” wouldn’t exist otherwise, complimenting those who are legally off limits for the time being – and for obvious reasons: puberty is a biologically determined event/process, whereas age of consent is socially determined and therefore always somewhat arbitrary. Acting as if it is uniformly set at 18 seems to be a standard of American media, though the actual age of consent even within the US varies by state (It’s 17 in Louisiana where I live, for instance).
Pederasty, on the other hand, is technically a type of ephebophilia, though it’s not a technical term so much as a description of a particular relationship model between (in most cases) a teenage boy and an adult man. Though pederastic traditions have existed in a number of cultures worldwide, pederasty in ancient Greece is undoubtedly the most (in)famous and has been the most influential on contemporary Western gay culture. In brief, Greek pederastic relationships were ideally a form of mentorship, with the older erastes (lover) acting as a secondary father figure and preparing his eromenos (beloved) for military life, civic participation, and/or sexual relations with both men and women. Assorted texts also discuss other elements, including a type of courtship associated with pederasty as well as the sexual behaviors considered acceptable in these relationships (anal sex, incidentally, not being one of them, as it was viewed as abusive and, should a young man continue bottoming into adulthood, emasculating). It should be emphasized above all that Greek pederasty was not pedophilic. However, the similarity of those two words probably contributed to their confusion, and the preeminence of the ancient Greek texts as the primary representations of male homosexuality in the Western world helped along the assumption that all gay/bi men were pederasts (and, via confusion and no small amount of moral indignation, pedophiles. Voilà le stéréotype.)
In any case, though Greek pederasty in its original form doesn’t fare all that well in the presence of the modern conception of sexual orientation – to say nothing of age of consent – a notable number of gay/bi men pursue sexual relationships with a similarly large age disparity. The incentive for older men is really no different from that of their straight counterparts pursuing younger women: they desire young and attractive partners even as they become increasingly less so. For those who recall my conjectures in the first twink post regarding the possible emotional and social forces that encourage young men to adopt the twink aesthetic, their motives shouldn’t be too hard to discern either. Older men (“older” here being incredibly relative – I know men in their mid 20s who profess an attraction to younger twinks) represent a means of social and sexual initiation into a subculture that, thanks to heterosexism and homophobia, can be daunting to enter without some assistance. True to their pederastic forefathers, many of these older men also become – consciously or not – father figures to their regular twink lovers, giving them the love and appreciation denied to many of them by their homophobic biological fathers.
While not all twinks participate in these pseudo-pederastic/ephebophilic relationships, it is a common enough phenomenon to develop its own lingo: older men who prefer twinks are called daddies (insert Oedipus complex-related remark here), older men who would use money to maintain a boy (sometimes called a kept boy or boy toy – I don’t make this stuff up, don’t look at me) are called sugar daddies like their straight counterparts, and these sorts of arrangements are sometimes called dad/lad relationships – hooray for rhyming. In addition, not all such relationships involve the older topping the younger, though that’s common and quite a few non-twinks seem to assume that twinks are automatically bottoms – an assumption that has led to some hilarious misunderstandings among some of my acquaintance.
I think I’ll spare you any anecdotes on that point, as I’ve rambled on about twinks long enough. The next post, which will actually be Part 3 this time, will be addressing a much more rugged and, contrary to popular imagery, more physically diverse group: the hairy assortment of animals collectively referred to as the bear community.
Getting the Gay Labels Straight – Part 2
Now that I’ve spent two posts on introductory information (which you should read if you haven’t already), today, as promised, I’ll be talking about twinks. Twinks are an appropriate place to finally begin this extended discussion of gay male labels, as they are almost without question the most widely-acknowledged, the most heavily stereotyped, and therefore the most misunderstood of gay male labels.
Unlike most of the other labels I’ll be analyzing in later posts, twinks don’t have a very cohesively visible subculture all their own; rather, they seem to exist both at the core of mainstream gay culture and on the fringes of the various subcultures (bears, drag queens, etc.). As such, they also have the dubious distinction of being the most pervasive stereotype associated with gay men: lisping, limp-wristed, fashion-obsessed men who (try to) look like teenage boys and act like the dumbest and sluttiest of college sorority girls. Non-twink gay/bi men recoil from and wholly resent the association, and actual twinks are torn between being offended and recognizing that at the heart of that caricature resides the primary means by which they may appear desirable to potential partners. The narratives of many a young gay man paint their early lives as dominated by disapproving fathers, homophobic bullies, and straight crushes who, at best, were friendly and oblivious; who wouldn’t want to look young and cute and glamorous (and maybe even a little vapid – all the better to hide the emotional problems) and have men lined up waiting to take you to bed?
The etymology of the term isn’t very clear, though I’ve heard assorted anecdotal explanations. The name may come from the same source as “fairy” and “twinkle-toes” when used as insults directed at effeminate men. It may also be a reference to Twinkies, which are (to some people, apparently) delicious but lacking in any lasting value – implying either that the standard twink is stupid and lacking in substance or that they are unsuited for long-term relationships. Despite the less-than-flattering origins of the term, however, I must emphasize that “twink” is not an inherently derogatory term. Many people proudly self-identify as twinks, and some non-twinks are unashamed to talk about their sexual preference for twinks.
Of course, I’ve yet to answer the most important question: What exactly is a twink? At the most basic level, only two criteria are necessary to define a twink.
1) Youth – Twinks are young, ranging from the age of consent (often presented as uniformly 18, though in reality it varies depending on location) up until about the mid-late 20s. The upper boundary is poorly defined, and some truly fortunate twinks can continue looking youthful into their 30s. Being a twink is treated as something of a “starter” label, and after one can no longer reasonably carry off the youthful look one generally has to make the transition to another label. The fate of twinks who can’t do this is a major source of anxiety within the community, because those who’ve outlived their label are often treated in art and sometimes even in real life like the gay equivalent of the 19th century old maid: washed-up, useless, and tragically ridiculous.
2) Lack of body hair – Body hair is Serious Business in the gay male community, and next time I’ll be spending an entire post on hairy men and the many subdivisions thereof. Twinks are naturally smooth and/or shave religiously, though increasingly armpit and pubic hair may be either trimmed or left intact. While it doesn’t exactly fit here, most twinks treat their facial hair similarly, though some do grow small goatees or the like.
Really, that’s it. Twinks are not necessarily effeminate, small, weak, or inclined to bottom, though these assumptions are present and problematic even within the gay male community. Such is the reason for the more recent creation of the label “twunk” designating a conventionally masculine – but still smooth – young gay man. As with similar labels like “masc” and “str8 acting,” crises of masculinity and gender presentation and the fear of emasculation crop up all over the place, which is hardly surprising when homophobic heterosexual men have been imposing the stereotype I mentioned above on any male who might even be perceived to desire sexual intimacy with another male.
That’s why non-twinks have such a love/hate relationship with twinks, though I’m afraid I’ll have to save the “love” part of that for part 2…of part 2. Ugh, there’s just so much to discuss…. Anyway, coming up in “Twinks, Pt.2,” we’ll be looking at the enduring legacy of Greek pederasty, “gay initiation,” and Dad/Lad relationships.
Gascon-en-exil: Gallophilic Cultural Posturing 