Introduction to a Developing Essay

We continue to critically interrogate the cyber world, as we search for visuals that can potentially provide connectivity between the “cyber” and the “real,” furthering our understanding of how this relationship reinforces and transforms inequality.The cyber-world has actively participated in the blueprinting of Queer life;what seemed to be utopia at first, has turned into the producer of misguided digital narratives that provide the fundamental pedagogy on what and who Queer is. The cyber-world has been perceived to be a judge-free community where many closeted and non-closeted Queers explore sexuality with out the gaze of a normative society. With the growing epidemic of cyber hate, and the extreme degradation of Queerness through technological invention, we conclude, that in fact, this is a myth.

Russell K. Robinson, professor of law at UCLA, informs us in his essay, “Structural Dimensions of Romantic Preference” on “the impact of structural conditions on preference regarding intimacy.” He suggests that our “preferences” regarding intimacy are imaginations and not natural or fixed desires. Robinson examines a number of romantic “market” places(dating sites, hook-up sites);one of his claims is that the representation of gay men of color on these sites is for the most part a commodified and racialized imagination. As we translate these representations into “real” life, we see that Queer men are forced to conform: “.. in predominantly white and gay romantic marketplaces, men of color are forced to conform to certain racialized sex roles, such as the “aggressive Black top, and the submissive Asian bottom”

I wish to further extend Robinson’s claim by suggesting that pornography has served as one of the major cyber producers of these racialized images. In my recent research on black male subjectivity, it is impossible to escape the visual of the “aggressive top” in pornographic narratives. I have even began to notice that more often than not, when two men of color are the visual, the darker one is “on top.” I can hear bell hooks saying that this explicitly illustrates that societies’ antipathy for dark men of color is greater than their antipathy of men of color in general.

I define this process through the following language: The Black Male subject in interracial gay pornography is an archetype;he is constructed through a process of dehumanization -- further producing a digital narrative that is replicated in the everyday performance of gay sexuality.

Sites such as Its Gunna' Hurt and Blacks on Boys are not only popular, but consumption of interracial pornography is ever growing. In terms of analysis, I fundamentally rebuke the idea that any analysis of power can emerge from the “top/bottom” invention. That some how, if the man of color is on “top,” some type of overcoming of racism is occurring. I would argue that in fact, the white man remains in power. Through a process of dehumanization, the weapon that administers pain becomes the subject -- the black penis.

After the dehumanization process has been played out by a white supremacist tradition, we begin to see the destructive trends of capitalism suggest the socioeconomic slavery status of men of color. A majority of these disturbing narratives depict a poor black men. The trend of ghettoizing pornographic plots is everywhere; in many instances the black man walks into the room, fucks the white man, and walks out. He is wearing urban-style clothing, and the suggestion of lower-class status is either explicitly or implicitly suggested. One might ask why in a video about “sex,” these types of issues would even be narrated? To me, they are crucial in the context of white-supremacist-capitalist-patriarchy, as they suggest neo-colonial and profoundly imperial implications of the social condition of race.

The slave/master relationship is reinforced though the use of pornographic narrative; colonizing black sexuality is essential for the sustainability of white supremacy and the perpetual destruction of the black male subject.

The most disturbing of all is that this dehumanizing narrative is replicated in the performance of sexuality. We experience Queer dating sites where people are requesting “a black top,” or suggesting that their primary interest is “ethnic men.” Queer men of color are socially forced to conform to these racialized sex roles. While we assume that whiteness is not “ethnic,” and that whiteness only needs to practice sex; Practice sex in the purest of ways – free from implications. Queer men of color are not only forced to practice a political sexuality, but one that is fabricated and fundamentally unauthentic.

ChatRoulette: Years of Torture in Fifty Clicks

Shocking Results

Sam Anderson, a writer for New York, writes in his compelling article, “The Human Shuffle: Is ChatRoulette the future of the Internet or its distant Past,” about his experiences with the famous American site -- ChatRoulette. Anderson reports, “ I entered the fray on a bright Wednesday afternoon, with an open mind and an eager soul, ready to sound my barbaric yawp through the webcams of the world. I left absolutely crushed. It turns out that ChatRoulette, in practice, is brutal.” As a newfound frequenter of the site, I have found myself entering the provocative world of the mystery web-cam with friends, using it as a device of humor. We sometimes sit in my living room, after one-two-many glasses of wine, and explore the realm of cyber-vulgarity with a rather facetious purpose. In order to understand Anderson’s claims, I had to face the infamous ChatRoulette by myself, and establish some type of methodology for my research. Here it is: Fifty clicks, and I did not allow myself to “next” anyone; they would have to “next” me. “Nexting,” if we can call that a verb, is the act of clicking “next” on your screen when you want to be connected to a different webcam; the “nexting” process is random, hence the roulette aspect of this truly unique Cyber realm.

My day was very similar to Anderson’s -- I was in a good mood. I sat down in my room and began my experiment. It is difficult to put into words how bizarre, hateful and dirty this site really is. And, I don’t mean dirty because of nudity, I mean the sexist, misogynist, homophobic, and racist filth I consumed in thirty-two minutes. Some of my web-cam encounters included a person who called me a “fat faggot,” a person who masturbated in front of me for two minutes and ejaculated on his keyboard, a person who engaged me in a chat at first, and after a minute or so asked me if I could, “finger my asshole and let him call me a cum-eating bitch,” a person drawing pictures on a white-board with ketchup, a group of fraternity boys screaming, “we want tits!,” and a person with a motorcycle helmet. With all of that, what seemed to upset me the most was watching people look at me for two seconds and hit “next.” I can not echo Anderson enough, when he says, “If this was the future of the Internet, then the future of the Internet obviously didn’t include me.” It was brutal. It was years of social rejection and ridicule in fifty clicks. My self-conscience body image, Queerness, and basic humanity of being able to seek a connection with another human being was completely brought to shambles, in the cruelest of ways.

Anyone that takes this site seriously is either a masochist, or is at risk. With the recent media coverage of suicide, this site has the potential to be the catalyst of cyber-bullying. The “nexting” process is just a tool for foolish people to remove their agency from the hate they are creating. ChatRoulette is nothing more than a cyber-manifestation of hate. I am also sickened by those who say these images don’t matter, and that it’s just “a joke,” when all of us are a click away from the most violent isms.

Unhopeful Conclusions

When we attempt to theorize on why ChatRoulette exists, and how our experiences are shaped in categories of gender, race, and sexuality, it becomes increasingly difficult to focus on a conclusion. This because, human foolishness, and arbitrary technological inventions used for the dissemination of hate, and objectification, are so prevalent and popular in Cyber culture. In terms of sexuality, I found a very direct linage between homophobia and homoeroticism. Forty-two of my fifty clicks were men, and nearly half of them were penises. I am inclined to ask the following question: If you expose yourself, and expect that the image of your penis will be consumed by female viewers, why would you go on a site that is frequented predominately by men? It also seems interesting to me that out of my fifty clicks, two of them identified themselves as Queer, in casual conversation with Queer communities, it has been brought to my attention that the Queer community frequents the site. When it comes to race, I was surprised by the diversity and internationalism of the users. However, I was quickly reminded of the work of Lisa Nakamura, where she critiques an MCI commercial for claiming that there was no race, gender, or age in the Internet, just minds. Nakamura warms us of the fabrication of diversity by cyber technologies, “ ...the visual images of diversity are displayed and celebrated as spectacles of difference, that the narrative simultaneously attempts to erase by claiming that MCI’s product will reduce the different bodies that we see to “just minds.”


I am unsure if ChatRoulette is the future of the Internet, but I am sure that it will remain relative to Cyber discourse for years to come.

The technological dependency we are suffering from is causing us to strive for an identity that is perpetually public. The satisfaction, even if destructive and ridiculous, that we get from the immediacy of human contact has become solidified in a culture that is inpatient and relies on technological inventions to respond -- respond to human emotion, desire, and yearning for companionship.

Unpacking the Rutgers Tragedy: One Step at a Time

The Tyler Clementi story has brought to light once again the sick world we live in, and the media coverage has reenforced the marketability of gay death. It’s sickening to watch newscasters and main stream conservatives like “Dr.” Phil go on Larry King and say, “ it doesn’t matter that he was gay, someone is dead.” Yes, someone is dead, but it’s not a coincidence -- it’s homophobia.

This passive language dismisses how many of us feel -- vulnerable and frightened.

When will we start a comprehensive discussion? When will we realize that issues of gender and race, at all levels, are crucial components in American politics. Today, in my political column for The New Hampshire, my colleagues suggested that I would “cast the Tea Party as racist, sexist, and homophobic” because it had a good “ring to it.” News-flash: If you are holding a “Lynch Obama” sign, you are a fucking racist and a white supremacist. There is no excuse. And suggesting that I make everything about race? -- well, I do. Because it is about race. I don’t know why I am so surprised that privileged whites don’t want to talk about race. They don’t have a race. They just are.

This same type of hegemonic rhetoric is being used for the Rutgers suicide. “It's about human life, it could have happen to anyone. Stop making everything about being gay”

Well, I am.

It is crucial that Tyler Clementi was having an intimate encounter with a man. Whether he was gay or not we don’t know. But why are we surprised? Isn’t suicide the climax to the tragic Queer narrative? Not to mention that the people responsible for filming Tyler’s encounter are not the only ones at fault. How about the rest of bigots that have driven every Queer person to a breaking point? How many times we have heard the word “faggot?” And even if it was not directed at us, we know we are the faggots? What causes a 13 year-old to shoot himself in the head?

We do.

Our refusal to talk, our refusal to act, and our refusal to acknowledge the privileges we hold. It’s easy for Dan Savage to come out with his “It Gets Better” campaign while many of us watch the disposability of Queer death in horror. Yes, Dan, for you it does get better: your money, your whiteness, your status, and your obsession with assimilation will help you achieve the “better.” Never-mind, your biphobia, transphobia, classism and racism. It does get better, Dan -- for you.

Many of my dear friends and social justice warriors like Joelle Ruby Ryan have started a conversation to unify, and come away from these Gay Inc. mentalities. Join the conversation, and understand that it won’t get better if you don’t get involved.

Justice is not inevitable.

We all must realize that the solution is in education. They have been asking us all week if there are enough resources for us to turn to in crisis. Yes, there are. Trust me, every Queer knows where the counseling center is; it's part of the tragic narrative. My question: Where is the mandatory Multicultural Theory course for every freshman? Where are the pro-active administrations that will commit at an institutional level to teach diversity? Not just for us, we know it, we live it.

It is time for radical change in education. Sustainability will only be possible with a commitment to diversity, not a commitment to “tolerance” and “acceptance.” Many of us have to tolerate ignorance, and we are tired .

We are tired as a community. If all of us would come together as allies, we would see change, but so many of us are saturated with apathy and cynicism.

Ask yourself: who will be next? Try to find an answer, you won’t -- because it might just be one of us.

Avatar: A Sci-Fi-Imperial Thriller

I find it hard to believe that so many of us still refuse to accept that mass media, and movies in particular are the main pedagogical agents of culture. The “magic” of Hollywood continues to approach representation in a motivated way. Racial, gender, and SES stereotypes are constantly reenforced as a result of “effective marketing.” Some Hollywood choices manifest into “funny black people” or the “gay fashionista.” The type of representation that provides either whites or heterosexuals with “humor,” the type of dehumanization that encourages the tokenism and entertainment quality of queerness or blackness.

Through technological advances, and the Hollywood strive towards the ultimate spectacle, movies in the Sci-Fi world want to remove us from our social condition, and have us arrive in the “distant world,” where our social condition is no longer relevant. Ironically enough, this distant world is very close to home.

In Lisa Nakamura’s Digitizing Race, she reports this observation: "However, as the popular Matrix sequels and other millennial science fiction films demonstrate, the massification of the Internet has not damaged the market for traditionally racialized representations of people of color as primitive and sexual if black, and machinic and inherently technological if Asian.  White people are still depicted as the users that matter in these narratives that are so influential among popular audiences, especially young audiences"  (208).

No where can this claim play out more accurately then in the poorly executed, white messiah glorifier, imperial celebrating, nature romantizizer 2010 Sci-Fi thriller -- Avatar. This dirty little film might have cool special effects, but the representation remains very problematic.

To start: The undertones of colonization are disturbing. It is no accident that the plot is the “civilized” person’s interest in the “barbarians’” resources. This organic capital that they posses is the new diamonds the British where so interested in in Africa. Although the Na’ve people were at times portrayed in a good light, they were still portrayed as being noble in terms of nature, not humanity, they are there for the gaze of neo-thoreauians objectifying them as exotic artifacts.

Jake is one of the most problematic characters in this Sci-Fi-Imperial thriller. After he decides to be a covert agent and trick the Na’vi into letting him into their society, he decides that he likes them and does not want anything to do with the corporate fascists that had first encouraged him. David Brooks starts of his stellar Op-ed on Avatar by saying that “every age produces its own sort of fables, and our age seems to have produced The White Messiah fable.” He then continues in his fabulous David Brooks way to highlight how after Jake redeems himself, his messiah status is celebrated: “The white guy notices that the peace-loving natives are much cooler than the greedy corporate tools and the bloodthirsty U.S. military types he came over with. He goes to live with the natives, and, in short order, he’s the most awesome member of their tribe. He has sex with their hottest babe. He learns to jump through the jungle and ride horses. It turns out that he’s even got more guts and athletic prowess than they do. He flies the big red bird that no one in generations has been able to master”

Another popular critique to attack this horrid film was Federick Meade. He brilliantly encapsulates the destructive nature of these films, and calls for a radical defining of a movement to oppose this type of film making. “If such a phenomenon fails to emerge, those transmissions designed to maintain and reinforce existing inequitable social arrangements and attending precepts will continue to flourish. Such is the net effect of the movie industries’ latest instrument--Avatar.”