To: Dayuhan who wrote (44630 ) 7/9/1999 12:42:00 PM From: Thomas C. White Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 108807
Although strictly on the "het" side of things, having lived for years in San Francisco, and being pretty familiar with the gay milieu (a number of gay acquaintances etc.), I'd like to throw in a few cents. This would first of all presume that homosexuals make up an outsize proportion of the population that creates aesthetic masterpieces. That is, that homosexuals create more art, music, literature and what have you "per capita" than heterosexuals. I have my doubts. They do certainly make up an outsize proportion of patrons of the arts, for example, they go to art museums, the symphony, etc., more often than heterosexuals, but overall I doubt you would find them producing proportionately more symphonies, canvases, and so on. Here, among the male population they do predominate in certain fields that demand a certain developed visual aesthetic sense, particularly graphic arts and decorative arts. Whereas they do not in commercial photography for example. Within the performing arts, they predominate for example in the ballet, or other dance, while not in the opera. Further, gays for the most part have every bit as much drive to succeed in their careers as heterosexual men. They like the finer things that money brings every bit as much, although they may tend to exhibit some redirection of how they deploy wealth -- for example, splurging on expensive furniture versus "hot" cars. Within the gay culture there is certainly a clear line drawn between the professional, educated class and the less educated, working class, just as elsewhere, and within the culture, the pressure for "respectability" is just as much an issue. Many gay professional men end up coming to San Francisco because it is one of the few places where they can work say in a bank and be reasonably assured of not being impeded in their careers by their sexual orientation.