Bonnie Kaye's Straight Talk (25 page)

SEPTEMBER 2007

THANK YOU SENATOR CRAIG…I GUESS

It’s sad that we have to wait for a public figure to be exposed in order to get some publicity on the topic of straight/gay marriages. It’s really a shame that it takes a controversy such as this for people to realize that we have a plight. But in a lot of these cases, these issues really backfire in our face, especially when these gay men “doth protest much too much” that they are NOT gay. The latest line of men caught in a compromising position is Senator Larry Craig. You know how I always say that if it “looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck,” then it’s a duck. In this case, Craig was not only quacking—he was tapping. So I guess I’ll add that to my thoughts, “If it taps like a duck….”

I say that these issues can backfire because people actually want to believe these men are straight and not guilty of the gay gossip. They can’t conceive that “straight looking and acting” men are those stereotyped images that we conjure up in our minds of the flamboyant gay character that people see in the media. Oh, that’s right—we were married to them. Some of our women tell me that people doubt their discoveries because they hear from family and friends, “There’s no way your husband could be gay. He doesn’t ‘look’ gay or ‘act’ gay.” Yep. We know. If we could have “seen” they were gay, we wouldn’t have married them. They still don’t get it.

The Larry Craigs and Ted Haggards of the world just have to add in a pinch of denial to put everyone’s mind at ease. And their wives stand at the front of the DENIAL line to seal the deal. They are so relieved to hear their husbands say, “What? Me Gay? Don’t be ridiculous!” And regardless of how overwhelming the presenting evidence may be, these wives aren’t looking. And they’re not looking because they just don’t want to find what they should be looking for.

In the end, it only hurts our women more because it fans the fires of self-doubt. And this is a process that gay husbands are so excellent at perpetuating—making you doubt yourself. This is why so many women who come to me feel the need to have concrete proof that their husbands are gay. I have women who can’t accept their husbands are gay no matter how overwhelming the proof appears to be. They have found gay porno on their computers, but their husbands refuse to admit that this is an indication of being gay. It’s just CURIOSITY—and this convinces our women that “curious” doesn’t mean that it will ever actually happen. Trust me, if they are curious, it’s happening. I have other women who find sex toys in their husbands’ briefcases, but when confronted, their husbands claim that these are not for them—it’s for their wives in case they want to “try something different.” Why would the wives want to try something “different” when they don’t even have something “regular”? I have women who find condoms in their husbands’ glove compartments, but that’s just because they forgot to bring them into the house to use with their wives. Of course, they’re not having sex with their wives. None of this is concrete proof enough for some women because their husbands’ constant denials and lies leave them thinking that they are hopefully wrong. For some women, anything less than walking in and finding their husband in the sexual act with another man will never be proof enough. But I suppose that some women, even if they walked in to the room with their husband in a compromising position with another man, would find a reason to believe their husbands’ excuse of, “I was just giving him a massage.”

Denial is a powerful emotion. And it’s even more powerful for the women living with it than the men who are dishing it out. That’s why even though prominent news figures bring the issues to light, they don’t necessarily bring the light to our women in doubt.

OCTOBER 2007

REVISITING AND REVISING THE KINSEY SCALE

Most of you have heard of the Kinsey Scale. Gay men use this as an argument to prove that they are not gay, but rather on some road or continuum that never seems to get to where you know they are going or have landed.

The Kinsey Scale was first devised in 1948 by Dr. Alfred Kinsey.

His research broke sexuality into seven steps starting at “Totally heterosexual” to “Totally Homosexual.” There were a number of other steps in between. According to Kinsey, these are the steps:

0. Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual

1. Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual

2. Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual

3. Equally heterosexual and homosexual

4. Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual

5. Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual

6. Exclusively homosexual

According to Kinsey, “Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects.”

This scale has widely been accepted and utilized by many professionals in the field. I look at this scale as being an excuse for gay men as a way to prove that they are not gay, and I regularly see it being used to that end.

Quite frankly, I don’t understand this whole concept. For instance, what is the difference between the Number 1 and the Number 2 position on the Kinsey scale? Number 1 is: Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual. Number 2 is: Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual. What determines if someone is “incidentally” or “more than “incidentally” homosexual? For that matter, what does “incidentally” mean? An “incident” happened one day or night? And how is a man predominantly heterosexual but more than “incidentally” homosexual? Hmmm, beats me. And quite frankly, let’s skip up to Number 5 on the scale: 5- Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual. What does that mean? Very confusing, isn’t it?

I believe that there are men who are “emotionally” straight. They are unable to come to terms with the gay world. They dread the thought of being “labeled” as gay due to societal or religious pressures. They enjoy the security of living with a woman in a “heterosexual lifestyle” where they don’t have to fear the rejection of their families, religions, and communities. However, this does not deserve a space on the ladder climbing up to homosexuality on the Kinsey Scale.

I think the Kinsey Scale is an excuse for people who can’t accept their sexuality. I believe that some gay men can perform sex with heterosexual women when the emotional need is so great that they can talk themselves into it. And I believe that these men feel much better talking themselves into being a 2 or 3 on that scale rather than a 4, 5, or 6. That scale convinces many a man that he’s okay staying in a marriage because he’s not a “6.”

The Kinsey Scale is a product from 50 years ago. I believe it needs to be updated and simplified. So now, I’ve come up with a “Bonnie Kaye Scale of Sexuality.” The scale has two levels – Number 1 and Number 2. Number 1 is Heterosexual. This is a man who craves sex only with a woman because these are the only sexual feelings that arouse him. Number 2 is for all the other men who desire a penis on any level—”incidentally,” “occasionally,” “every blue moon,” “just out of curiosity,” or “in a fantasy.” Think of all of the anguish this new scale will take away from people who are intellectualizing about where they stand on the Kinsey Scale. Think of all the worry they could avoid as they inch up the ladder and move from a 2 to a 3 or a 4 to a 6. I can’t even imagine the fear a man would have who is on Number 4 and creeping up to Number 5. Does he sit and worry how long it is going to take him to get to number 6? Will he try to convince himself to have sex with a woman so he can downslide to number 3?

I like the idea of my scale so much better. Men don’t have to sit and worry about “how gay” they are or will be. They have nothing to prove if they desire sex more with men. It won’t change their number—they will still be a Number 2. Wow—wouldn’t that take the pressure off of men who are trying so hard to fight their own gay desires and behavior?

And wouldn’t it make things so much easier for our women also? Women wouldn’t have to wonder if their husbands/boyfriends are moving up or down a scale. It would be much more black or white. If you want a heterosexual man, that’s fine. If he’s anything else, well, it’s not fine—at least not fine for a marriage. We could eliminate the fallacy of “Bisexuality,” or Number 3 on the Kinsey Scale which always gives false hope to women. “Bi” implies to women that they have an equal chance to winning their man as a man has-- which we know is not the case. It reinforces false hope that if they “love their men enough or try harder to be better wives/girlfriends,” their men will pick them. It just ain’t happening, is it? The need for a penis is always there. All “bi” men would automatically fall under the Number 2 category. Even men who are “just fantasizing” about other men would be in the Number 2 group. After all, if a man gets “aroused” by a penis, it’s definitely the Number 2 category.

I think the “Bonnie Kaye Scale” will help women make easier decisions. You don’t have to sit and debate anything at all. It all comes down to one question—do you want a man who wants a woman or a man who has a penis on his mind? Why does something this simple have to become so complicated?

DECEMBER 2007

HAPPY HOLIDAYS—TO US

Dear Friends,

This time of the year is so painful to all of you who feel the loss of your marriages. It seems as though we are outsiders looking in— observers rather than participants. We go through the motions of smiling, filling out cards, buying gifts, but there is still something NOT RIGHT. We try to hide it, mask it, numb it, or dull it, but we are still in that dark tunnel that pulls us in closer than ever during this time.

Please know that this is normal. You are suffering from the opposite of Holiday Cheer—namely Holiday Fear. It’s the normal time of the year to be reminded of what you don’t have and what you thought you did have—and would always have—namely a loving marriage with a man you thought was your soul mate. Bah humbug. Instead of enjoying Christmas parties, you are finding yourself immersed in a big old-fashioned pity party.

Guess what? That’s fine. You’re entitled to pity yourself. Don’t feel guilty—indulge. Allow yourself to cry—allow yourself to vent and be angry. You deserve it. One of our problems—universally among straight wives of gay men—is that we have been so emotionally suppressed for so long because of losing ourselves to who we are that we don’t let ourselves go through the emotional steps it takes to recover. We still believe that we have to put up a brave front even when we feel like breaking down—or breaking things around us.

My dear friend Dina in California once wrote something that is so true—anger is an important emotion because it means that you are fighting for yourself. We spent so many years trying to fight for our broken marriages that we forgot that we have entitlements as well. We gave so much of ourselves that we forgot that we have the right to expect something in return. We were always looking to fix what was wrong, hoping if we could try just a little harder, our detached husbands would love us just a little more.

We internalized what should have been external. We believed we were to blame for something that we had no control over. It broke down our self-esteem, our sexual esteem, and our sense of self-worth. We started questioning ourselves wondering what we were doing wrong because our husbands sexually rejected us. Instead of their being honest, they were quick to place the blame on us. “You’re too pushy… demanding… unsupportive…. sexual…. unappealing…. fat…. thin…. you name it, we were accused of it. Anything to place the blame where it didn’t belong.

This week, I did an interesting interview segment with WE (Women’s Entertainment) that will be aired during their new season in the spring. Part of the interview included a counseling phone session with my support system member Shawne in California. I met Shawne last summer when I was making my West Coast visit. Shawne is a beautiful woman inside and out. She had found out about her husband the year before and was devastated. She was still trying to be the “good wife” and do the right thing. By July of last summer, she realized the right thing was to leave him for the sake of her two daughters and herself. She wanted to be a role model to her children and not give them mixed messages for their future.

During our conversation, she mentioned how her husband told her that she should “get over it.” Sound familiar? Many of us hear this not only from our husbands, but also from our families and friends. After all, half of all straight marriages end in divorce, and life does go on. While that is true, most of those marriages don’t come with the baggage that ours do. Our marriages are unique. We all share the same problems that straight divorces have, but we also have added issues that other divorces don’t have.

Other marriages may have ended due to a number of problems including incompatibility, financial problems, growing apart, being married too young and not understanding it, mental health issues, abuse issues, or drugs and alcohol. But at least the women in these marriages knew what the problems were. They weren’t living someone else’s lie and not understanding why they were facing the emotional turmoil and distancing. Our marriages included a number of these common issues, but the worst issue was not the one we could see—but rather the one we couldn’t see, didn’t know, didn’t suspect, or understand. Our marriages were ruined without any ability to get better because they weren’t able to be fixed. Homosexuality is not a problem that can be resolved in a marriage—it’s a problem. PERIOD. It doesn’t belong there lurking, hiding, or rearing its ugly head.

Nothing strips away a woman’s sense of self-worth like being sexually rejected. Sexuality is a major part of who we are. Kill that, and you kill part of what makes us a woman. We weren’t meant to be celibate. We didn’t join the convent to live a life without sex. That takes an extreme kind of commitment. We got married to be part of a couple. Part of a couple means every aspect of being a couple— especially intimacy and love making. No woman should ever have to feel as if she is begging for what should be hers. There is nothing that degrading like being rejected sexually, and most of us are. Some sooner than later, but in time, almost all of us have that rejection and internalize that it is our fault. That hinders many of us for years to come when we want to start new relationships. We feel like damaged goods. All of this could have been avoided if our gay husbands had been honest with us. Sexual recovery is another step we have to make that women in straight marriages don’t usually have on their plate.