My friend and I often discuss the relationships between twitter folk – I find it an endless enthralling soap opera watching how these people will let us into every aspect of their lives, it actually feels like a real life Game of Thrones / Dynasty / Family Guy – all rolled into one. With some of the tribes and cabals I get the impression that this is purely an e-fantasy world… like Second Life, where people explore relationships that they would never or be unlikely have in the real world. However to me the much more interesting tribes (to observe) are those that actually live out their life using Twitter as a portal. This is a dangerous game because obviously we know everything about them, and they don’t know us at all, which leads to confusion when interacting because the social boundaries are blurred. However, where my friend and I differ is that there are certain groups I wont get involved with as much (having been burnt once by it all) and yet he optimistically see’s the best in everyone and therefore gets more stuck in.
In our discussions around the topic, we have agreed that much like in gay tribes you can see trawling Soho, Brighton, or wherever we tend to congregate, there is a hierarchy within the tribes, and the politics is rife. I find the Twitter Tribe will often feature:
- A Leader / Lord – Almost exclusively they will have the largest number of followers, and generally well liked by a broader group than just their “friends”. Oddly in my most fascinating group case, the leader in question doesn’t tweet very much, but when he does there is frenzy around it. And to get a tweet from them is truly a blessing from god – also he isn’t very social and rarely if ever goes out (that he tweets about anyway). I find the leaders of the tribe will generally always be very attractive, have good bodies (and oddly work in the media) in gay tribes, polite to everyone, and be fairly intelligent to get that mass appeal. The problem with Twitter is that once you become a “leader” on a social media website you fall under scrutiny unlike in the real world, where you can lead your gang of friends in any way – showing both dark and light – on Twitter that will not sit so well. So therefore to me they become a little sanitised and one dimensional, and they self-edit far too much for me to appreciate them and to fall into line.
- The Deputies or Dukes – These will have a large amount of followers, generally tweet a lot more, and interact a lot more. These characters seem to play a fairly crucial role, because they almost exclusively live their lives in twitter, even going abroad won’t stop them, being on a date, being at a funeral, these guys will tweet no matter what. End of the world… they are tweeting. To gain this appeal they are generally also attractive and fairly intelligent, but as they are not the leader they can show a bit more light and shade and be a bit more human (which has its appeals to me) but means they cant be the leader as some people wont like them, and we cant have that. In the group that interest me all of the Dukes tend to be close friends with their Leader and almost always there is some simmering sexual tension underling it – which they always strongly deny with mock outrage and clutching of pearls – but come now you are fooling no-one.
- The Deputies Consort or Ladies – These people are just the other halves of the Duke or their close friends – their main role is to look good, tweet inane rubbish, and never be controversial. These people often have a nasty whiff of being desperate to be accepted and for any scraps the leader will give them.
- The Ambassadors – Those associated to the leader but located in a different country or at least county – this makes it extremely difficult to meet the leader regularly or socially, but they often interact quite closely and likely to be extremely attractive. I tend to think in the group I observe these Ambassadors are the people the Leader fancies… they are often super fit, but not based in London, so they are no threat, but they help give kudos to the Leader.
- The Foot Soldiers – These form the mass of the hysteria around the leader… they will defend them to the death, #FF them every week without fail, probably will never meet the leader, but might get a chance to meet the Deputies (and if they are lucky talk to them) but they will tweet them extensively and likely get responses.
- And The Masses – this is everyone else that follows the gang – they wont interact but you will be expected to take note of what is said, and woe betide you if you dare to question the leader or their deputies because the full focus of the Tribe will destroy you.
However, wider than there are lots of personality types on twitter that fit into this tribe dynamic:
- the Lone wolves – independents that float in and out of the Tribe, they might be aligned to them at some point, but they generally move alone, quite independent and wont cast their allegiance, most likely to be fairly intelligent, and can offer a lot of validation to a Leader if he can snare them. (Don’t all go thinking you’re lone wolf now!)
- Mercenary – sell their love to anyone and everyone - whoever is the current flavour of the month.
- The show man - The jester – the illusionist – these are my favourite characters on twitter because they are clearly a façade for someone’s comical outlet, or extremely flirty side, but some people take them very seriously, or are outraged by their duplicitous nature. These guys are clearly there to entertain so I am not sure the issue.
- The whore – these are also surprisingly (?) my favourite individuals or members of tribes because there is a pure honesty to what they offer and why there are there, but they are likely to appear vacuous if they don’t provide something more.
- The Crazy – there is a whole lot of crazy on twitter but some of them are truly epic – they love a good long rant, they love to start random fights, but then they like to be all nice and soft – their schizophrenia is amazing to watch but tiresome if you get involved.
But more importantly to me than the roles, is the politics. The Dukes flirting, undermining each other, vying for opportunities to grow their fan base… sometimes I think it is sub-conscious, but sometimes I think their intent is clear – they want to be Leader or be in the Leader’s bed and officially be the Lady of the Tribe. The foot-soldiers fighting for acknowledgement, the Consorts parading their wears for all to approve of! It really is like Game of Thrones. I whole heartedly approve, but step foot in that arena – no thanks – I don’t want to lead, I don’t want to bow to spend my time massaging someone’s ego over twitter. I think these games, politics and the roles transmit into the real world in our social groups… I always aim to be a Duke (it’s the safest place) – but oddly on twitter we almost invite people to watch it. I can’t wait for the rise of the next generation of Twitterati and because I think a challenge to the Leadership could have me fetching the popcorn and sitting in for a couple of weeks.
Showing posts with label tribes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tribes. Show all posts
Wednesday, 6 July 2011
Tuesday, 7 June 2011
Twinks, Bears and Muscle Marys eh?!
I have been inspired to write this following some comments on my last blog. I wasn’t exactly sure if they weren’t appreciated or whether people agreed with them, so I will go into greater depth on my thoughts. I will add the caveat I am not a psychologist and this is based on purely my observations, so I would welcome any feedback.
I think we as gay men tend to become quite tribal. This isn’t an unusual concept, it is quite basic theory that we form groups, and people are either in-group or out-group. It helps people bond, share similar interest, and a way of perceiving others in relation to oneself. But one of the basic things is that people derive self-esteem from being part of the in-group and proving you are better than others in the out-group. This is all very basic and I am probably not doing it justice but there are plenty of places to read up about it if you are interested.
I think (I highlight it’s my opinion please feel free to disagree and argue against me) that we as gay men tend to form tribes, or groups, evenly more heavily because we feel like an out-group of wider society. This sounds very negative, but I don’t mean it as a negative, forming groups and sub-groups is useful, but the issue arises for me when it isn’t useful and for instance they become adversarial or become absurd. The best two examples of this I can think of are Twinks as having an adversarial relation with the community and the Bear community (which I would put myself in) as becoming absurd – please don’t lynch me and cover me in veet and strip me of all membership.
The twink community is a very important one, often maligned by others and frankly it’s because we are all jealous. I know this will lead to arched eyebrows and pursed lips, but I think when we look at them we think the age old saying, “youth is wasted on the young” – we think they have had it easy, they didn’t suffer the same way we did, they don’t know they are born, they don’t know their own community history and yet there they are mincing around in their XXS tshirts, skinny jeans, and high top boots – all of which we would look ridiculous in. But actually these boys (as normally they are) probably are going through the same rubbish we did, except they get bashed on twitter, on facebook, in their village, at their job, by other twinks and by the whole community who refer to them with a voice of disdain. But lest we forget we were all young once and I am sure more than one of us used our youth as a tool to get what we wanted so let us not resent them for using it as their shield.
Our own contempt at the tangoed, overplucked eyebrow gay-faced youth (gay face is that overly pouty dead-eye look they give) causes them to be hostile… and boy can these be hostile. They sneer, they b*tch, they seem to mock pretty much everyone, the feeling of enmity rolling off them makes them pretty much unapproachable and you feel old, fat and not welcome. But actually I am pretty sure under all the make-up, the AllSaints fashion and the designer underwear are young boys protecting themselves and their group. But I can’t help feel a bit sorry for them, because in ten years max they will have to hang-up their sparkly tshirts, get a proper haircut, go to the gym just to stay average and the horror of horrors decide which group they are going to try to belong to, or face the ultimate evil of being an old wannabe twink – the most maligned of them all. So my suggestion with them is try not to be so unsympathetic to them, and maybe just maybe they will crack a smile (with you, not at you).
*deep breath* *deep breath*
Ok, this is probably my most controversial part of the post – so bear with me (pun intended) whilst I speak about the Bears. I have a lot of love for Bearish community although I often find them to be slightly pessimistic, cynical, defensive and self imposed loners (of course this is a complete generalisation but it is based on my experiences).
I would technically describe myself as a cub (I think) but this is partly where the problem comes. When I was but a young hairy man there seemed to be 3 categories: Bears, Cubs, Chasers. That I could understand, and normally they were fairly easily spotted: Bear – Older, larger, generally top (although not always), hairy, possibly bearded or some facial hair; Cub – younger, smaller but above average, generally btm (although again not always), hairy, and generally some facial hair; Chasers – everyone else that fancied bears or cubs. Got it, easy peasy, makes sense, and I can follow it. But as I have got older it seems that these three sub-groups are no longer enough we have pups, otters, wolves, tigers, seals, muscle varieties of all of them – and this to me seems a step too far.
Ok we get it, you may not be a classical bear – you might not be large (fat), you might not be hairy, but is there a need to start forming sub-groups on our sub-groups? I personally think this is because the bears love a badge – I think they have found quite a sense of belonging under the Bear flag, which is particularly hard in a wider community that mainly promotes slim, defined, young men as the ideal. However for those that don’t fit neatly into the Bear category they have had to branch out into the animal kingdom however there is nonsense to this when the various sub-groups start to become adversarial because the whole idea of the Bear flag is to be inclusive. Oddly when you pour a lot of alcohol and bears, cubs, otters, the whole farmyard into a club (XXL) and stir well you get possibly the friendliest and most welcoming group I have ever encountered. However, in my youth I found especially online, hidden in their dens, I would get a lot of “you’re not a bear” or “you’re not a cub” from the classic bears to my advances, and anyone with the word muscle in their name would outright ignore me…! Of course they don’t have to fancy me, they don’t have want to be my best friend but don’t push me out of the group. This over the years (and the fact I find them very pessimistic) has led me to feel completely outside the bear community – I don’t feel any hostility towards them, but I don’t feel like I belong with them either, which is a shame as when I was growing up they were meant to be my refuge.
So now you’re thinking I am a bitter little hairy fat boy that was included in the gang – and maybe yeah I am – but I think we have all been the outsider so I think maybe we shouldn’t do it to each other. *Vom* Cheesefest! More importantly the bears or their kin can make it to me by sending naked self-pics to…
P.S. In relation to twitter I think these groups still exist, there are lots of various hashtags to show affiliation and new groups pop up all the time. But in the ever fluid world of twitter the boundaries seem to blur and it gets ever more complicated, but this chaos leads to a bit more openness – which I quite like - that is unless you’re #teamgaga against #teammadonna then there is no reconciliation.
P.P.S This isn’t an underhand dig at those with animal usernames on twitter or that are part of any of the communities… call yourself whatever you want.
I think we as gay men tend to become quite tribal. This isn’t an unusual concept, it is quite basic theory that we form groups, and people are either in-group or out-group. It helps people bond, share similar interest, and a way of perceiving others in relation to oneself. But one of the basic things is that people derive self-esteem from being part of the in-group and proving you are better than others in the out-group. This is all very basic and I am probably not doing it justice but there are plenty of places to read up about it if you are interested.
I think (I highlight it’s my opinion please feel free to disagree and argue against me) that we as gay men tend to form tribes, or groups, evenly more heavily because we feel like an out-group of wider society. This sounds very negative, but I don’t mean it as a negative, forming groups and sub-groups is useful, but the issue arises for me when it isn’t useful and for instance they become adversarial or become absurd. The best two examples of this I can think of are Twinks as having an adversarial relation with the community and the Bear community (which I would put myself in) as becoming absurd – please don’t lynch me and cover me in veet and strip me of all membership.
The twink community is a very important one, often maligned by others and frankly it’s because we are all jealous. I know this will lead to arched eyebrows and pursed lips, but I think when we look at them we think the age old saying, “youth is wasted on the young” – we think they have had it easy, they didn’t suffer the same way we did, they don’t know they are born, they don’t know their own community history and yet there they are mincing around in their XXS tshirts, skinny jeans, and high top boots – all of which we would look ridiculous in. But actually these boys (as normally they are) probably are going through the same rubbish we did, except they get bashed on twitter, on facebook, in their village, at their job, by other twinks and by the whole community who refer to them with a voice of disdain. But lest we forget we were all young once and I am sure more than one of us used our youth as a tool to get what we wanted so let us not resent them for using it as their shield.
Our own contempt at the tangoed, overplucked eyebrow gay-faced youth (gay face is that overly pouty dead-eye look they give) causes them to be hostile… and boy can these be hostile. They sneer, they b*tch, they seem to mock pretty much everyone, the feeling of enmity rolling off them makes them pretty much unapproachable and you feel old, fat and not welcome. But actually I am pretty sure under all the make-up, the AllSaints fashion and the designer underwear are young boys protecting themselves and their group. But I can’t help feel a bit sorry for them, because in ten years max they will have to hang-up their sparkly tshirts, get a proper haircut, go to the gym just to stay average and the horror of horrors decide which group they are going to try to belong to, or face the ultimate evil of being an old wannabe twink – the most maligned of them all. So my suggestion with them is try not to be so unsympathetic to them, and maybe just maybe they will crack a smile (with you, not at you).
*deep breath* *deep breath*
Ok, this is probably my most controversial part of the post – so bear with me (pun intended) whilst I speak about the Bears. I have a lot of love for Bearish community although I often find them to be slightly pessimistic, cynical, defensive and self imposed loners (of course this is a complete generalisation but it is based on my experiences).
I would technically describe myself as a cub (I think) but this is partly where the problem comes. When I was but a young hairy man there seemed to be 3 categories: Bears, Cubs, Chasers. That I could understand, and normally they were fairly easily spotted: Bear – Older, larger, generally top (although not always), hairy, possibly bearded or some facial hair; Cub – younger, smaller but above average, generally btm (although again not always), hairy, and generally some facial hair; Chasers – everyone else that fancied bears or cubs. Got it, easy peasy, makes sense, and I can follow it. But as I have got older it seems that these three sub-groups are no longer enough we have pups, otters, wolves, tigers, seals, muscle varieties of all of them – and this to me seems a step too far.
Ok we get it, you may not be a classical bear – you might not be large (fat), you might not be hairy, but is there a need to start forming sub-groups on our sub-groups? I personally think this is because the bears love a badge – I think they have found quite a sense of belonging under the Bear flag, which is particularly hard in a wider community that mainly promotes slim, defined, young men as the ideal. However for those that don’t fit neatly into the Bear category they have had to branch out into the animal kingdom however there is nonsense to this when the various sub-groups start to become adversarial because the whole idea of the Bear flag is to be inclusive. Oddly when you pour a lot of alcohol and bears, cubs, otters, the whole farmyard into a club (XXL) and stir well you get possibly the friendliest and most welcoming group I have ever encountered. However, in my youth I found especially online, hidden in their dens, I would get a lot of “you’re not a bear” or “you’re not a cub” from the classic bears to my advances, and anyone with the word muscle in their name would outright ignore me…! Of course they don’t have to fancy me, they don’t have want to be my best friend but don’t push me out of the group. This over the years (and the fact I find them very pessimistic) has led me to feel completely outside the bear community – I don’t feel any hostility towards them, but I don’t feel like I belong with them either, which is a shame as when I was growing up they were meant to be my refuge.
So now you’re thinking I am a bitter little hairy fat boy that was included in the gang – and maybe yeah I am – but I think we have all been the outsider so I think maybe we shouldn’t do it to each other. *Vom* Cheesefest! More importantly the bears or their kin can make it to me by sending naked self-pics to…
P.S. In relation to twitter I think these groups still exist, there are lots of various hashtags to show affiliation and new groups pop up all the time. But in the ever fluid world of twitter the boundaries seem to blur and it gets ever more complicated, but this chaos leads to a bit more openness – which I quite like - that is unless you’re #teamgaga against #teammadonna then there is no reconciliation.
P.P.S This isn’t an underhand dig at those with animal usernames on twitter or that are part of any of the communities… call yourself whatever you want.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)