Welcome to Jestertunes! If you’re new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Feel free to leave a comment, read through the archives, and enjoy yourself. See you again real soon!
My post(s) about the Gay Blogger Summit and the Gay Blogger Clique seems to have made me a bit unpopular.
I’ve actually been accused of secretly talking about people behind their backs.
On my blog.
Which is read by an average of over 400 people per day.
If I want to keep something a secret, I try to avoid posting it here.
So I’m going to use this post to put the whole thing to bed. I was going to respond directly to Chad’s comments on Another Update for The Week via email, but since I’ve received a couple of emails from other parties, and since I’ve been oh-so-subtly called out by Nathan, I decided that a post on my own site is less likely to be misquoted or missed.
You can call it whatever you like, a group of friends, a collection of bloggers who know and like each other… paint the picture how you like, it’s a clique.
From Merriam-Webster: clique: a narrow exclusive circle or group of persons; especially : one held together by common interests, views, or purposes.
As I said in my original post, No Fatties Allowed, about stumbling into the midst of the clique, I tried over a period of weeks to engage members of this group. I commented on posts. I sent email to some. I added blogs to my blogroll.
I got no response.
How could I have stumbled into a group of anywhere from 7-12 bloggers all of whom know each other, all of whom share the same exact policy of non-response to comments or contact from outsiders and not thought that it was some exclusive group?
How many contact attempts should I make before coming to the conclusion that the bloggers in question have no desire to respond, interact, or otherwise communicate with me?
A single comment, email, or visit to my blog by any of the clique members might have given me a different outlook.
However, don’t get me wrong, when it really comes down to it, I don’t care. I found the experience to be interesting from a social view point… that people who were presumably discriminated against, or were excluded as youth (as I would posit most gay people were) would grow up to become people who would exclude others. It was interesting in that I could make a parallel between the blog world and the world of gay clubs and even the high school cafeteria.
I wasn’t intentionally calling anyone out. Not Dan, not Chad, not Chris, or anyone else that lives in that circular blogroll. If I had meant to name names, I would have made it quite clear who I was talking about. And until now, I’d say that none of my readers had any idea who I was referring to. The who wasn’t important.
I made no statements about their characters, or writing abilities. Actually, that’s not true. I said that I enjoyed the blogs, I enjoyed Chad’s artistry and sense of humor. I found Dan’s stories about experiences in and around the city entertaining. If I didn’t enjoy the personality or characters, I wouldn’t have bothered trying to engage the bloggers in conversation.
As far as my take on the one and only podcast I listened to, I realize the distinction between saying that the featured clique members “came across as vapid, screeching queens” and “the clique members are vapid, screeching queens” is subtle, there is a distinction nonetheless.
Having met Dan and Jimmi, I can assure everyone that neither of them are vapid or screechy.
I stand by my assessment of the clique as being exclusive, whether intentional or not. And that brings me to
“The Gay Blogger Summit.”
Lest anyone get the wrong idea, my friends and I had a great time at the party on Friday night. Read my recap. Look at the pictures. Do you see the smiles? Do you see dancing, and nudity, and alcoholic beverages galore? Do you see nipple licking, hugging, and groups of people making silly faces and otherwise engaging in frivolity?
Yes you do.
That’s because it was a good party.
I’m sure that it took a bit of finesse and effort to put the event together. I don’t doubt that.
Here’s where it gets a bit icky for me… it’s obvious to me that the expectation was that all (or nearly all) of the participants knew each other already. I don’t think anyone can argue that the core group were friends. There was little thought or attention paid to people who did not fit into that group.
Several weeks ago I asked Dan if it would be possible to get a list of all the participant’s blog addresses so that I could become familiar with the blogs and the writers before meeting them. I didn’t want to spend the whole evening saying, “Gosh, I’m sorry I haven’t read your blog, I’ll check it out when I get home.”
Dan responded that he had been thinking about that, that he thought it was a good idea, and he would put it together but that a good place to start would be his blogroll.
Dan has a large blogroll, and the names on the Evite don’t match up with it. And many of the bloggers who had RSVP’d the Evite aren’t on his blogroll, including UMB, my friend Dan, or myself. (That’s not a blogroll beg, just an observation.)
A week before the event Dan published the list and I spent as much time as I could reading everyone’s site and commenting.
When the day arrived, parking was indeed a bitch. Yes, I know it is San Francisco. I’m well aware of the parking situation in San Francisco. It was a particularly hard day to find a spot, as a ballgame was scheduled and the bar was within walking distance to the ballpark.
Being a typical sports-hating homo, I know nothing of major league baseball’s schedule. And really, I didn’t even give a single thought to the fact that there might be a game. A heads up would have been greatly appreciated.
It wasn’t anything that ruined the evening. It was a minor frustration that was alleviated immediately upon the purchase of my first Grey Goose martini. I even walked in and loudly asked the question, “Ok, who the hell scheduled a ball game at the same time as our party?” Funny, right?
And then there’s the lack of nametags. I realize it’s a really silly thing when you think about it, however, I have a tendency to try very hard to accommodate people who might feel a bit nervous in social situations. I realize that not everyone has the ability to strike up a conversation with a stranger. I’ve been to several gatherings of people who have met through online forums, and I know that there are many of us geek-types are shy or somewhat socially awkward. Approaching someone who has a nametag on with their blog listed is a little touch that could have made others feel included and identifiable.
Did it ruin the party? Nope. Not at all. At least not for me.
I don’t harbor any ill feelings toward anyone. I didn’t before the event. I truly enjoyed meeting everyone. It was a bit frustrating in that I didn’t know a single person there, despite making a sincere effort to befriend many of the people in attendance prior to the party.
So I hope that this horse can now be considered exhaustively beaten. I think I do a fine job of speaking my mind without others having to put words into my mouth or read between the lines to get at some hidden message that isn’t intended.
If you’re still not convinced, then ask yourself if you really give a shit what *I* think anyway. You all have a great group of friends that love and support you and I invite you all to tell me to go to hell.
I’m sure there’s ample parking.*
January 1st, 1970 at 1:00 am
I love CSI Las Vegas and i think Catherine is a hot woman (for her age she looks stunning).
Now see, Warrick from SCI , should make it as third most beautiful man on Earth on my list.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:00 am
I’d leave a comment Carol but i can’t see the pictures for some reason.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:55 am
How about now,Dave?Can you see them?
I could see them with no problem.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:10 am
Yes i can see them now Carol.Don’t ever come to Chesterfield,all us blokes look like that,you would’nt know what to do with yourself.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:39 am
Ehehe!So there are more than 2 beautiful men,heh?
Is actually simple,Dave.
I will pick the one who looks like Wentworth or Josh.
November 13th, 2006 at 5:03 pm
I’ve gone all hot and weak at the knees.
November 13th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
Helen,get some soup down you,get your strength back.
November 13th, 2006 at 9:04 pm
Dave, leave her alone. Don’t be jealous. Lol!
November 14th, 2006 at 6:56 am
Who are they anyway,are they on Tv or something.
November 14th, 2006 at 9:04 am
First one, Wentworth,plays as Michael Scofield in Prison Break.
The second, Josh,plays as Sawyer in Lost.
November 14th, 2006 at 10:36 am
That explains it,I never watched either.
November 14th, 2006 at 10:39 am
I do.Both series and they are sooooo good. You should watch them.
November 14th, 2006 at 2:31 pm
No,I’m a C.S.I. person,can’t miss seing Marg Helgenberger as Catherine.I did watch the first four episodes of Lost but got bored with it.
November 14th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I love CSI Las Vegas and i think Catherine is a hot woman (for her age she looks stunning).
Now see, Warrick ), should make it as third most beautiful man on Earth on my list.
November 14th, 2006 at 5:51 pm
Have you seen Nick from CSI in the hair shampoo commercials for L’Oreal,and Catherine is stunning for her age,she must only be in her early 40’s if that.
November 14th, 2006 at 6:25 pm
Yes,i have seen him? He looks good .
And Catherine is a bit over her 40.She is a beautiful woman.She looks like my aunt.
November 14th, 2006 at 7:00 pm
Your’e right Carol,she’ll be 48 on Thursday,and I haven’t bought her a birthday card.Must admit she’s wearing well though.
November 14th, 2006 at 8:04 pm
She stays in shape.Funny how life turns.
Women who are drop dead gorgeous in their 20’s-30’s end up looking bad after 40 or 50. And the other ones are blooming after their 40’s.
I now know one of your weaknesses and your taste.
November 15th, 2006 at 9:14 am
I have many weaknesses and very strange tastes.I must admit i’ve always been attracted to the older woman,even when i was in my teens.
November 15th, 2006 at 9:59 am
Why strange taste,Dave? Define what is strange? Is that what others are telling you?
I never asked you,but are you married?
November 15th, 2006 at 4:51 pm
No,i’m quite happily single at the moment and i won’t disclose what got me to leave her,but let me just say she was very lucky that I am not a violent person,because she wouldn’t be walking around Chesterfield now,enough said.
As for the strange tastes I meant being attracted to older women,an 18 year old going out with a women of 29 would be regarded as strange in Chesterfield,but by God I learnt a lot.And that is why I’ve always been attracted to older women,especially when I was younger.
November 15th, 2006 at 5:32 pm
I won’t be asking you about her.And good think you are not violent. I hate men like that.
It isn’t strange at all liking someone older.It’s just different.
But you know, that says a lot about a person.
November 15th, 2006 at 6:22 pm
People really thought I was strange liking women older than me until one of my best mates started going out with a women older than himself,then he saw my reasons,that they are not just experienced but mature as well.
November 15th, 2006 at 7:45 pm
…and very carrying.
They show much more affection than a young woman.
They say that before 20,us,women, try to find love only to find out that we actually fall in love with the though of being in love.
Between the age of 20 and 25 (28), a woman feels the need to receive lots of love and feel protected.
After her 30’s , a woman will feel the need to give love and protect.You know…very maternal.
I didn’t made that up.
It comes from a study from few years back.
Maybe that is why some young man are attracted to older women.He seeks affection and a older woman will usually offer unconditional love and warmth, while a young woman always has something to ask back.
It has also something to do with the man’s mother.
November 19th, 2006 at 7:34 pm
I wish some girl would post my photograph like this.
Just kidding… 
November 19th, 2006 at 9:13 pm
Eheheh!Very funny.Try taking some.