Think Queerly

We demonstrate individual integrity with honesty and strong moral principles to guide our choices and actions. What happens when you make a decision based on strong moral principles but you have to conceal part of the reason for your decision? Is that wrong? Is that dishonest? Or is that one of the many challenges that make leadership fluid and diverse?

Rarely are any of our choices perfect, but in leadership, misunderstandings happen only when there isn’t complete and honest disclosure. Sometimes withholding information is a necessary part of leadership, if the choice was well-intentioned and not morally unjustified.

In this episode, I share a story about a time I had to make a tough decision that I thought was right, but others perceived as wrong. I share my ideas on what I consider to be the foundational qualities of evolutionary, humanitarian leadership. Finally, I suggest that as LGBTQ people, because of our deep introspection and insights, we can think queerly and lead the status quo in thinking outside the narrow confines of how they think they’re supposed to think.

Support The Way of Queer Leadership.

This episode is part of, “The Way of Living OUT Leadership: A Queer Path Forward”, and builds upon the ideas discussed in LOP099, “How can we work together as a collective of queer thinkers to embrace, demonstrate, and advocate a humanitarian leadership of belonging?”

https://darrenstehle.com/otherness-empowers-queer-leadership-lop099/

Image credit: “Humanity” by zalgon

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I had no idea at that time what the show might become. Certainly, I have expanded the breadth of what I talk about since episode 001. Currently, I am focused on sharing The Way of Living OUT Leadership: a new way forward for LGBTQ people – while I’m creating it. Putting that in writing scares me a bit, which is a good sign. This is not a bad or an irrational fear, instead it’s the healthy trepidation that I am creating something new and willing to be open with my process as I develop my “method”.

On today’s show, I speak about why and how the show has become a place for me to share queer thought leadership, and why your difference as an LGBTQ person in this world makes a valuable difference. I also talk briefly about some of my favourite and most downloaded episodes, namely:

• Are You A Top Or A Bottom? – LOP003
• How Gay Shame Limits Self-Worth and Personal Growth – LOP008
• Is Forgiveness of Homophobia a Gay Male Gift? LOP030
• Forgiveness and Acceptance of Internalized Homophobia – LOP039
• The Challenge to Lead as Out Gay Men – LOP063
• Being At Ease With Yourself – LOP067
• Were Religions Invented to Control the Ego’s Fear of the Other? LOP075
• Jeffry Iovannone: Deconstructing the Ideal Gay Male Body – LOP077
• Remaking Manhood and #MeToo with Mark Greene – LOP082
• The Prejudice of PrEP: You’re Fucked if You Don’t Bareback – LOP093
• My Interview on Gay Radio Show, Rainbow Country – LOP097

I am immensely grateful to you as a listener, as someone who may have shared my podcast, left me a comment, or sent me an email. Let’s keep an open dialogue and here’s to 100 episodes more! 🙂

Support The Way of Queer Leadership.

Image credit: kittykatfish

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How can we – collectively as queer people – lead from the margins to metaphorically corral the disparate fractions of humanity, so that divisiveness between peoples may become less in proximity to create and foster a genuine diversity.

There doesn’t yet exist a so-called “queer leadership” per se, or that I know of, but I am working on developing this new style of leadership that our world desperately needs. That starts here, with this “Living Document”, which I will continually add to, modify, and come back to as the foundations for what I hope to co-create with many other like-minded, queer thinkers. (If you would like to receive a copy of this document as soon as it’s available, subscribe to my newsletter so that I can send it to you.)

• Why “Gay leadership” is not enough.
• Building upon the 14 distinct gifts that are unique to many gay men as discussed in Ray Rigoglioso’s book, “Gay Men And The New Way Forward.”
• What do we need to create evolutionary change in the world?
• What does “queer” mean and why is it vital that we embrace and reclaim the word.
• Embracing and honouring all the letters that make up our fluid “LGBTQ+” acronym.
• Making the pronouns, they/them the linguistic default.
• Moving from a politics of division to a politics of belonging.

If you’re a creative person – a scholar, writer, or an artist – but you’re stuck trying to start or complete a project, maybe because you think that you don’t know enough, that you’re an imposter pretending to be an expert, then we should talk.

Let’s discover how to use your insights, talents, and uniqueness to make a difference in the world and to Live OUT your mission. Find out more at DarrenStehle.com/coaching.

Support The Way of Queer Leadership.

More Queer Thought Leadership:

• Writing a New Narrative. The Power of Story to Save Humanity – LOP098
• If There Is No Binary, Where Does Gender Exist? LOP096
• What’s in a name? The Importance of Being Queer – LOP088
• How Can You Use Your Difference to Make a Difference? LOP072

More about the Distinct Gay Male Gifts:

• Vulnerability: How Gay Men Teach the Cleansing of Shame – LOP080
• Ray Rigoglioso, Gay Man of Wisdom – LOP048
• How Gay Men Imbue Culture With Beauty and Creativity – LOP042
• Forgiveness and Acceptance of Internalized Homophobia – LOP039
• From Sissy Boys to Straight-Acting Gay Men
• Is Forgiveness of Homophobia a Gay Male Gift? LOP030

Image credit: “Day 179: God Hates Fags, But I Love You” by Juli

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Recently I listened to The TED Interview, Yuval Noah Harari reveals the real dangers ahead in which Harari explains why it might feel like there’s no future for humanity. Serendipity led me to read, George Monbiot: how do we get out of this mess? and to watch his TED Talk, “The new political story that could change everything”.

https://www.ted.com/talks/george_monbiot_the_new_political_story_that_could_change_everything#t-714

Both Harari and Monbiot explain that humanity is missing the next “narrative” – or as Monbiot calls it, a“Restoration Story” – one that follows the classic hero’s journey, provides us with a story of who we are, and a vision of the future in which we see ourselves living a better life.

What I’m currently creating is a “living document” titled, “How to Use Your Difference to Make a Difference”. You’ve heard me use this expression on previous episodes if you’re a regular listener. If you would like to receive a copy of this document as soon as it’s available, subscribe to my newsletter so that I can send it to you.

For reference, here are the quotations from Monbiot’s article below, that I speak to in today’s episode.

“Political renewal depends on a new political story. Without a new story that is positive and propositional, rather than reactive and oppositional, nothing changes.”

“The narrative we build has to be simple and intelligible. If it is to transform our politics, it should appeal to as many people as possible, crossing traditional political lines. It should resonate with deep needs and desires. It should explain the mess we are in and the means by which we might escape it. And, because there is nothing to be gained from spreading falsehoods, it must be firmly grounded in reality.

This might sound like a tall order. But there is, I believe, a clear and compelling Restoration Story to be told that fits this description.”

We human beings “…possess an unparalleled sensitivity to the needs of others, a unique level of concern about their welfare, and a peerless ability to create moral norms that generalise and enforce these tendencies. We are also, among mammals, the supreme cooperators.”

“We have been induced by politicians, economists and journalists to accept a vicious ideology of extreme competition and individualism that pits us against each other, encourages us to fear and mistrust each other and weakens the social bonds that make our lives worth living.”

“We have lost our common purpose (…) to find common ground in confronting our predicaments, and to unite to overcome them.”

Support The Way of Queer Leadership.

More Reading

• Neoliberalism – the ideology at the root of all our problems

Image credit: Catherine Cronin

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Mark Tara is an LGBT Content Creator, Recording Artist, and the Creator & Host of the Gay radio show, Rainbow Country 🌈, heard every Tuesday from 11pm-1am on CIUT 89.5FM in Toronto.

Mark invited me on the show to talk about coaching, how I became a coach, and why I choose to offer my Life Coaching primarily to GBT men. We also talk about my publication, Th-Ink Queerly on Medium, and of course my show, The Living OUT Podcast – how it all began, and my plans for the future.

Mark asked me some interesting and challenging questions about gender, my coming out story, gay male body image, gay marriage, the “14 distinct gay male gifts”, drag kids, drag queens, and so much more. It was a wonderful experience and opportunity for someone else to ask me the questions for a change! I hope you enjoy the show as much as I did.

• MarkTara.com
• Rainbow Country LGBT Radio Show
• Twitter @MarkTaraMusic
• Instagram @marktaramusic

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this week I was quickly browsing my Facebook feed and read a post that was purposefully provocative and included a text meme of the following: “There are only two genders – Science“.

Leaving aside how categorically incorrect, ignorant, and inconsiderate that statement is, it prompted me to question why we so often think in binaries. Why have we created a world that is limited by a way of thinking that is so contentious?

When we understand that the gender binary is a conceptual construct, that it’s not real, that gender is not a physical thing, we can open up into the space or the possibility of understanding that gender is nebulous. Gender doesn’t exist on a straight line, being (only) a man on the one far side and (only) a woman on the other far side. Such a description begs the ontological question: “If man exists on one side and woman on the other, what exists in-between?" What exists within the space between the two polarities? Even that question is problematic, namely, “Why are there polarities in the first place?”

What if there is no binary, for anything? Instead, this is how we have seen and understood the world for so long that it seems AS IF there are only binaries to explain almost any extreme and it’s opposing side of the equation. Yet there is nothing but space between these concepts because there can never be agreement what creates the limitations that define the polarities of a binary.

When we experience the space in the gap as the true nature of the universe, we will no longer see duality.

Tweet

Support The Way of Queer Leadership.

Resources supporting this episode

• A Conscious Meditation on the Gap
• There Is No Space Between Us In The Gap – LOP053
• Fear of “The Other” is Defence of the Ego – LOP059

Image: Marco Verch

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Have you ever felt like you left the best parts of who you are in the closet?

Think about that question for a moment. When we come out of the closet as LGBTQ people, most often we experience coming out several times (each time we have to reveal who we are to a new person). Sometimes we regress, fearful of having revealed too much of who we are, and we put some parts of who we are back in the closet.

In this episode, I share two times in my life when I was living fully out, gay and proud, and freely expressing who I was (other than how I live my life, now). What I learned is that GBTQ men are unique and valuable contributors to society, with insights that are different from our heterosexual counterparts. If we hide any parts of who we are, if we don’t live fully out, we are hurting ourselves and the rest of the world misses out on our contributions.

This doesn’t mean that we need to assimilate and become part of the status quo in order to fit in. Deep, truthful, profound happiness requires being and expressing all of who you are without apology to anyone else. Acceptance for who we are requires vigilance and visibility, for our “otherness” to be seen as uniqueness.

Read the original post here, Have You Left The Best Parts Of You In The Closet?

Support The Way of Queer Leadership.

Photo by Brandi Ibrao on Unsplash.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Recently, someone I follow and highly respect on Facebook, whose training programs I have paid to take part in, posted praise for an author and so-called intellectual for whom I have no respect – Jordan Peterson.

In the post, my colleague praised both Peterson’s character and his book, “12 Rules for Life.” I wrote a comment to suggest that Peterson’s moral ethics were questionable, and that just because he’s published a popular book doesn’t he’s an expert in that genre, or that he’s someone that others should emulate.

In the case of Peterson, he refuses to respect the rights of trans individuals to be called by their name and pronouns of choice. He’s gone so far as to call for the abolishment of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. Given the work I do – my LGBTQ advocacy and the fact that I am an out gay man – it behooves me to stand up to this kind of intellectual bully. Peterson is a white, cis male who refuses to give up an iota of power (that he falsely believes is being threatened) when it comes to respecting human rights. In all seriousness, why is it so difficult for Peterson to call a person by their preferred pronoun? This goes beyond human rights, landing squarely in the realm of personal arrogance.

He makes this general statement in his classroom citing unnamed lawyers (clearly he picked points that he wanted to hear without a shred of opposition). This alone should cause one to be concerned about the man’s intellect and ethical fortitude. The Human Rights Tribunal operates effectively and fairly because it is, in fact, a real quasi-judicial body operating under clear and defined rules and procedures – quite the opposite of a kangaroo court. Peterson has a clear agenda to undercut the authority of the Tribunal and the desire to do away with the Human Rights Act itself because he doesn’t want to be “forced” to call another human being by their preferred pronoun.

Canada is not a militaristic country. Canada is not an oligarchy. Canada is not a communist state. Canada is not ruled by a dictator. To compare the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal to a kangaroo court does a disservice to what it means to be a Canadian. If anything, Peterson has taken a page from the capitalist, American approach to power and is acting in a very unpatriotic, un-Canadian way. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech but everything to do with respecting the rights of the individual to be treated fairly and equally in the county of Canada.

But I digress…

The first step is to know the medium. Where did this happen? In this case, the correspondence took place on Facebook. Social media presents significant challenges when trying to make a specific point. The medium itself restricts and constricts how you can get your point across. People leave comments, memes, or icons, and then comment upon comments. At some point in the thread, the original line of thought is no longer the intention of the message. The medium serves the purpose to distract from learning something new or thinking differently. Each comment potentiates serving the ego by making a point to defend your point of view. This presents a serious problem for effective communication.

This is what I attempted to do. I offered the suggestion that we need to understand that our mentors are just as human as we are. I shared a link to my podcast, The Hateful Prejudice and Elitism that is Jordan Peterson – LOP056, in which I criticize Peterson because it was clear my colleague didn’t know this information. That doesn’t make my colleague a bad person, nor did it make me think any less of him. There is so much information available to us that it’s easy to be ignorant. This ignorance is not neglect or bad behaviour, it’s a fact of life. Thankfully, my colleague was willing to look at the information I shared. What became problematic were the other people who decided to jump in with their opinions.

I did not want to start a fight, which is why I made some statements and backed it up with a link to my podcast, and a link to an in-depth article by someone else who backed up their research with references. What I soon discovered was that trying to change minds on Facebook (which is even harder to do on Twitter) is exceptionally difficult. One person made reference to how people on the left get upset when they don’t feel included around issues of equality and that they then act like snowflakes.

I’ve heard it said elsewhere that people on social media who use general and undefined terms like neoliberalism, the left, or snowflakes want to appear intellectual. Essentially they don’t have to do the hard work of thinking for themselves. They want to have one creed, or one leader, that allows them to prejudge the world and everything easily.

It only took me a moment to click on this person’s profile page to see that he was a white male. I cannot assume his privilege, but let’s just start with that first fact: white male. How easy is it for someone to call other people weak – a snowflake – when they have never suffered prejudice, racism, sexism, etc. for wanting to be an equally respected human being? This is a careless and thoughtless reaction which results in indirect bullying.

I chose not to participate any further in the discussion and turned off notifications to the post. I could have created a steel-man argument, summarizing the other people’s arguments to help them see that I understood their point of view. From there I could’ve suggested how they could use empathy to understand my viewpoint. What I decided is that, as the comments on the Facebook post became more deeply nested, the more difficult and unlikely it was becoming to change hearts and minds. There was only one solution: use a different medium (this article and a podcast).

Changing hearts and minds requires patience, time, and either face-to-face interaction, or a longer form medium like a podcast episode or an article that someone can read and reread to dissect the ideas presented, and to understand and evolve their own thoughts and ideas.

In the first instance, this means getting off platforms like Facebook or Twitter. I don’t mean deleting your profile, rather step away from the discussion or argument and take some time to reflect. If there’s something you don’t understand, do your research and look for both supporters and detractors on the subject. If there’s something you’re telling yourself that you refuse to believe (because you think you’re right), ask yourself, “Is this true? Could I be wrong?” Or, “Is there something I don’t know that might change my mind?”

A growth mindset requires both the time to evolve, but more importantly, the willingness to seek out new and possibly uncomfortable information along with the willingness to contemplate what that means to you. Notice how your body feels as you challenge your thinking. Is your heart racing? Are you getting upset? Are you furrowing your brow not wanting to accept this new information or different points of view? The more emotionally attached you are to an idea, the more difficult it will be to change your thoughts and beliefs.

A belief in something, which can also be called faith, has no factual reasoning. There’s no proof that God exists in a comparable way to how we substantiate things with scientific reasoning and discovery. If you simply believe something to be true that does not make it so. The more your beliefs are built upon faith or emotions, the more easily you will get sucked into believing what other people tell you, groupthink, and other potentially dangerous patterns of behaviour.

Evolving how we think and modifying our behaviours and opinions is challenging yet rewarding work. The more you can substantiate your point of view, the more of a critical thinker you will become. But beware the lack of empathy for others, and the social media default to immediately defend your point of view, before doing your homework to determine the source or the origin of the message in question.

• How to Let Go of Being Right to Be Who You Are – LOP018
• How We Treat Each Other Reflects Who We Are
• What Are We Striving For — As Individuals and as a Human Collective?
• Why We Need to Engage Critics and Defuse Outrage – LOP051
• Do Actions Speak Louder Than Words? – LOP057
• Jordan Peterson Is Divisive Because of His Weaknesses, Not His Strengths

Header image: magro_kr

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Bareback Privilege and the Demise of Risk-Aversion

There's a new kind of gay male sexual privilege, one that’s entering dangerous areas of health, disease control, and prejudice: gay men who are on PrEP and only have bareback sex.

There Is Risk in Everything We Do

“As renowned PrEP educator and marriage and family therapist, Damon Jacobs, thoughtfully pointed out in a piece for The Advocate titled, “Sex With PrEP, Like Life, Is Never Without Risk,” 133 pedestrians are killed in New York City each year by cars. Just walking out on the street is dangerous. There’s risk in everything we do.”Source

This period in history – the use of PrEP – reminds me of HIV shaming that happened in the 80s and 90s. Gay men who were negative (or thought they were) would shame HIV+ men by shunning them, which was most visible in online dating profile. You could read ads that said, “HIV- only”, or “Only safe and clean”, etc.. The truth is that anyone could lie and say they were HIV- or simply not disclose if not asked.

I remember having sex with a guy I met sometime early 2000s. I was fucking him with a condom and I noticed he had a tattoo of an AIDS ribbon. It was in an innocuous place that I only saw because of the position of his legs in sex. It took me out of the moment and confronted me with my own prejudice, but we keep playing and the sex ended well. It was a reminder to me that if I was protecting myself, I could relax. I hadn’t asked him prior to meeting about his status, probably because HIV had been around for over 20 years and the routine of asking, or being freaked out about someone having HIV had diminished – but clearly my fears and prejudice had not.

Human Behaviour and Unconscious Choices

We often make choices that are not in alignment with our best judgement, let alone our values, when we are denied something we want. In this case, the denial of affection and sex based on prejudice can lead to unhealthy choices and behaviours. In the late 90’s I witnessed the rise of so-called “bug-chasers”; individuals who actively sought HIV+ partners to agree to fuck them raw in the hope of seroconversion. Their desire was to have what they felt was denied them, the freedom to have sex “the way nature intended”.

Basic Human Needs

These choices – that of the bug-chaser to seek seroconversion – were psychological, based in human need and self-worth. Add onto these choices the social fabric of exclusion, being “othered”, not feeling accepted for who you are as a gay or trans man, and so on. Many of us took a self-righteous approach, assuming a higher moral ground, when in fact, there were many of us who secretly longed to ditch condoms and just “get it over with.” This is part of what lead to the term, “condom fatigue”, which sadly misses the real and deeper human truth entirely. As an already oppressed and marginalized group, now you’ve taken away our freedom to have sex however, and with whomever we want. The golden age of free, uninhibited gay sex was over. We had lost, what felt like, our only privilege.

What is this universe we live in now?

For the longest time you were taught to ask about your partner’s status, and many HIV- men had to face rejection on an all-too-regular basis. Then dating apps allowed users to select HIV status, sexual preferences, last testing date, and options like “negative on PrEP”, etc.

While those options are useful for making choices – having too many choices is problematic. Psychologically, when we are faced with too many choices, we have a hard time making a decision. We see this in supermarket research on consumers buying behaviours. If you have a shelf for jams and you have 10 flavours, with five companies offering the same 10 flavours, how do you choose? What if three of the brands are all on sale? Now make the comparison to the list of labels on a profile on Grindr or Scruff. Sometimes there are so many variables, not including the personal description that may be see...

Support the Think Queerly Podcast!

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

If there was no prejudice against LGBTQ people, we wouldn’t need to hold Pride parades all over the world during Pride month in June.

We would be part of every day “straight pride”, which is the freedom to walk out and about without ever having the concern about your gender or sexual identity coming into question.

Protests change in size, meaning, and voracity.

To celebrate Pride – to revel openly as who we are, in public out on the streets, holding hands with the person we love, kissing our same-sex partner, making out with our trans lover, dancing in the ecstasy of the freedom of a single day surrounded by our “people” – is not only an act of celebration, but a public display and affirmation that we are here, we are queer, and we require/desire the same rights and freedoms as everyone else.

That in itself is a powerful statement, and while most large North American Pride celebrations might not look like a protest, I argue that they are – albeit for the most part peaceful and celebratory. Pride make a statement about the state of LGBTQ people because of its very existence.

How do we reclaim what Pride originally stood for?

The Reclaim Pride Coalition answered that vital question with an alternative march to this year’s Stonewall50 and World Pride Parade in New York City, June 2019. According to their “Why We March” statement,

“We March in our communities’ tradition of resistance against police, state, and societal oppression, a tradition that is epitomized and symbolized by the 1969 Stonewall Rebellion.”

In episode 89, I shared Why Black Lives Matters was right, that uniformed police have no place at Pride, because of the history of violence and oppression by police forces against our community that is visually represented and triggered by the uniform.

On the question of the commercialization of Pride – something I discussed with Jeffry Iovannone in, “Deconstructing the Myth of Stonewall and its Influence on Mainstream Society – LOP091” – the Reclaim Pride Coalition continues with,

“We March against the exploitation of our communities for profit and against corporate and state pinkwashing, as displayed in Pride celebrations worldwide, including the NYC Pride Parade.”

“Denial of equality is immoral.”

As queer people we need to work together for the rights of all – against ideologies, restrictive and fundamentalist religions, racism, sexism, and all forms of prejudice. What hurts us, hurts other, and vice versa. Equality for some is not equality at all.

When we celebrate, we marginalize.

There will always be someone left our of our Pride celebrations. When we celebrate, without historical memory of where Pride came from, we risk marginalizing members of our LGTBQ collective. As much freedom as we feel we may have gained, we still don’t have humane rights for all – we only have human rights, which can be taken away by whoever is in power.

“When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.”Wayne dyer

Know your history. Know why you chose to celebrate or party. Is it time for you to stand up and reclaim your pride?

Resources

Pride parade brings 'electric' vibe to Toronto's streets SundayChief says police would have deployed differently if they were welcome at PrideCommunity over hate: We must all stand up for our shared valuesStonewall 50: The Revolution, a four-episode documentary centred on the historic 1969 Stonewall uprising, which explores the past, present and future of the LGBTQ rights movement. I Don’t Need Your Queer Litmus TestFinding God in Pride50 Years of Stonewall: Pride and VigilanceAn American Blueprint or How to Achieve Flying Pride in Your CityWhat is a “Pride Body”?

Image credit: Mary Crandall

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.