BijouBlog

It's always hard to believe when you start thinking about dates and chronologies and discover that 1979 was more than 30 years ago. Stonewall was more than 40 years ago! For me, I remember those years well. From the beginning of video, to all those bar contests, now there is the Internet with its fetish sites, and even Grinder. But International Mr. Leather, which is also known as IML, is still here; it's an event where you still meet like-minded people face to face. 

International Mr. Leather is the world's oldest international leather and fetish event on record. Started in the 1970s as a contest, "Mr. Gold Coast Leather," at a Chicago gay leather bar called the Gold Coast, under the aegis of its owner, Chuck Renslow, who still presides over this great event known as IML. In 1979, the event moved to a larger venue, and became International Mr. Leather, held at the Chicago Radisson Hotel. The first International Mr. Leather was David Kloss, one of twelve contestants.

Since that time period, the contest has mushroomed into an event of massive proportions. IML features a leather/fetish vendor market, the International Mister Bootblack Contest, and a multitude of sex/fetish parties hosted by various organizations, dances and socials, and related sexual, fetish, leather events. The contest reportedly brings in an estimated $10 million dollars to the city of Chicago in tourism revenue. In today's world gay culture has become more accepted and integrated into the larger society, this fetish event in itself has become more diverse with hardcore gay leathermen mix with "bicurious hipsters" and tourists.

But what really makes this year's event historic is the President's pronouncement on gay marriage. Related to this context, given that gay marriage is legal in several states, two of the contestants are married. Even more significantly, according to one source, two civil unions will occur this year at the event. This is exciting! 

Bijou Video and Theater this year once again will have a booth at the Vendor Mart. Stop by and check out our unique collection of vintage gay porn, some of which dates back to the 1960s, as well as to the origins of IML. As part of your Bijou IML experience, take a picture of yourself as a pornstar in one of our four porn scenes. To everyone this IML Memorial Day weekend, be safe and enjoy the party.

So what? What else is new? Many have heard about the lavender seminaries and the ephebophile (NOT pedophile; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebophilia) priests, yes, all those scandals, scurrying out of a musty closet like a swarm of moths in the latter part of the last century (and still today).

But in the early 1960s, right before Vatican II and the sexual revolution and all those massive societal changes, a Catholic priest, of course maintaining anonymity, published an article in the homoerotic publication Grecian Guild Pictorial. 

The article is entitled "The Human Body - God's Work of Art." In some ways, the article is pretty much in line with the magazine's mission statement, "I seek a sound mind in a sound body." Yet the word "Grecian," however, could easily be read as an underground code for "gay." Grecian became a coded word for gay during the time period of this magazine: those who like the male body, the "body beautiful," resembling the "Grecian ideal ideal in its muscularity, symmetry, and grace." The association with the more openly homoerotic and bisexual culture of ancient Greece (and not just the physical aspects, but the emphasis on art and health as well as physical strength) was intentional.

Yet the magazine espoused lofty ideals that were in tune with the Cold War patriotism of that era: "Our goal is the development of a sound mind in a sound body that we may best service our God, our fellow man and our country." The divine in this magazine was usually approached through the principles of the New Thought,"power of positive thinking" movement that began in the nineteenth century: a healthy body can be gained by a sound mind; the right prayer-energy can heal. The editor does make a note before Father Ed's article that "the Guild, embracing as it does members of all religious faiths, has often presented the Protestant viewpoint of the human body and its relationship to God." One might wonder what the Protestant viewpoint was or is; perhaps a more liberal Protestant viewpoint (think United Church of Christ or even Unitarian) that abandoned a puritanical version of Calvinism and emphasized a view of the human body as essentially optimistic and progressive. That is, kind of a feel good, God loves you and everything about you type of attitude, or as William James in his Varieties of Religious Experience put it, "healthy-minded."

Is Father Ed, with his "Catholic point of view," in sync with any of the above ideas? He is aware that many readers will disagree with his article "in some of its aspects." Where does he fit in in this context, which leads to another, more interesting and ultimately speculative question: why did he join the Guild and submit an article for publication?

After acknowledging, respectfully, that others may not agree with him (more on that later), Father Ed proclaims that the "human body is undoubtedly God's most beautiful creation in the physical order." A "Protestant or New Thought" Grecian would certainly agree with him. And he's completely orthodox. God's creation is good. God became incarnate in a human body, and therefore there's nothing evil about our bodies. In fact, he implies that the body is even "further glorified" (but in what way?) because of the Incarnation. St. Augustine, despite his reputation of being "Mr. Sex Is Evil," would agree with him. The physical body itself is not evil; it's what you do with it that can cause problems. (Which problems supposedly started in the Garden of Eden, but we won't go there ... yet.)

Father Ed then makes the move I anticipated above, given his orthodox theology: the Catholic Church does not "consider the human body as something evil." He gives as evidence all those nude Renaissance pictures in the Vatican, both pagan (again, he's in sync with the Grecian ideals here) and Christian (forgetting that prudish Counter-Reformation popes covered them up) and the Church's condemnation of the "Arian heresy." Sorry, Father Ed, your facts are off here. The Docetic heresy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism) denied Christ's physicality; the Manicheans and some of the Gnostic sects also tended toward a flesh/spirit dualism, some more extreme sects even claiming that the Old Testament God, the Demiurge, was evil because he created the physical world.

So far, so good, That is, the body. But sex? Here's where Father Ed, despite joining and contributing the Grecian guild, proclaims the usual position of the Catholic Church. No extramarital heterosexual sex, no masturbation, and no homosexuality. The Fall of Adam has somehow corrupted our passions in these directions. Stay away from temptations and don't expose irrationally passionate youth to them (including those dirty movies).

Father Ed asserts:

Thus, just as fire is kept away from gasoline, so the senses of the young must be kept away from those suggestions which will inflame their passions.

Not much different from the sexuality espoused in Protestant tracts (despite the author's and editor's claim about a unique Catholic perspective) like evangelist Oscar Lowry's The Way of a Man with A Maid:

I would impress upon the mind of the young man, as well as that of the young woman, the necessity of self-control and chastity as the only way to secure those strong mental and physical qualities so necessary for worth-while success in life as well as for future paternal and maternal happiness.

Where does all this theology leave the Grecian reader? Worshipping a body as a sacred work of art, but leaving sex out of the picture, literally? The tension seems too strong to bear. And thus, it's left unresolved in the article. As a conclusion, Father Ed rather lamely opens himself to "further correspondence on this matter" addressed to him "in care of the guild." One wonders what further conversation, if any, occurred as a result of this article.

And thus, one might wonder if Quaintance's picture of a stunning nude with six-pack abs (not full-frontal, but the guy is definitely nude) holding a sword which is also a crucifix (look closely!), the ultimate sacred body, at the top of the article, really works here. The image can be interpreted chastely (or was it intended to be a chaste image in line with Father Ed's argument?), but really, that homoerotic image seems more like a "dangerous gasoline" inflaming the passions of those gay Grecians. He isn't doing anything overtly sexual in the picture, but is the naked Crusader really gazing at that crucifix? Is his head bowed in prayer? Something's really mixed up here. And that something could point to the eternal tension between the religious and the erotic. An either/or dichotomy tries to become a both/and. Still an impasse.

Another impasse, that ultimately speculative question I asked earlier: Did Father Ed like guys? Is it even a relevant question? I might argue it is relevant, because he did write the article for the Guild, which brings up other questions: Why did he join the Guild, with its publications containing a plethora of homoerotic beefcake pictures? In this article, was he trying to honestly sway some the readers to his point of view, even implying he was gay and was managing to keep it under wraps? And thus, as he ultimately a hypocrite, inflaming his passions with "dangerous gasoline" while preaching against said passions? Perhaps he might have found the Church's post-Vatican II, pre-Ratzinger position (before homosexuality was defined as an "objective disorder") on homosexuality with its ambiguous, relentlessly illogical position more to his liking: your nature is good, but if you act on what that nature causes you to do, you end up, somehow, doing something not good.

I would like to think Father Ed ended up coming out after Vatican II, even leaving the priesthood like may did, but I doubt it. Maybe he really lived chastely in accordance with Church teaching, maybe not. Still, he did pen an article that, in hindsight, given what we know now about its context, revealed a revolutionary juxtaposition: "Father Ed, A Catholic Priest and Member of the Grecian Guild."

I remember reading the book by David Leavitt, The Lost Language of Cranes, published in 1997. The closeted father of the gay main character has spent much of his adult life expressing his sexual desires in gay oorn movie theaters. In one strange scene, he evens runs into his wife on a Sunday while walking to one of the gay theaters in New York City. His wife never questions what her husband does every Sunday afternoon.

By the publication date of this book, 1997, the Internet was taking off as a means to hook up, most gay guys owned a VHS player which enabled them to watch porn by themselves, and AIDS had decimated much of the gay population that had experienced sexual encounters in such theaters: was the porn movie theater soon to become an icon of the past? How many guys, married or not, spend Sunday afternoons in gay porn theaters? Recently, in Chicago, the forest preserve has replaced the movie theater as spot of gay sex. Bathrooms are still popular trysting spots (perhaps because they are free, despite the obvious danger). Unlike many of the bathhouses, any of which which closed because of AIDS, the theaters continued their business, perhaps more fitfully, but all these factors seemed to signal an end to that world of endlessly available sex, a world depicted vividly in the classic gay porn film A Night at the Adonis.

The Adonis was New York City's famous gay porn theaters in the 1970s. Other theaters included the Eros, Gaiety, Bijoux, and Elgin. 42nd Street was the spot for XXX activity, both gay and straight. In fact, Any movie theater could end up being a space for gay sex, as depicted so brutally in the film Midnight Cowboy in the scene where the cowboy hustler played by Jon Voigt picks up a young kid who can't pay him for the sex. Even the New York Times accepted ads for gay porn films!

Jack Wrangler and Malo star in A Night at the Adonis, directed by Jack Deveau for Hand-in-Hand Films.

Jack stars as a store owner who has designs on his husky employee, Malo (a.k.a.Roger). Malo turns down a date with his boss and goes to his hairdresser, who promptly fucks him hard on the barber chair. But Jack and Malo do meet later because, as this film demonstrates, throughout the 1970's everybody in New York City wound up at the Adonis Theatre sooner or later.

From the balcony to the boiler room, director Jack Deveau does a good job of showing the wide range of customers (from young to mature, from leather to clean-cut) engaging in all sort of sexual enjoyment.

In a restroom of the theatre, the manager and a leatherman share blowjobs with one another, the latter blowing onto the sucker's face. Meanwhile, as different Hand-in-Hand films are playing on the screen, Jack and the barber have met up with one another and are busy beating each other off, but disturbed by the constant intrusions.

Into another men's room, three men begin to get into one another. Roger is there and has one of the guy's mouth with his big cock while the other watches. The barber goes down on Jack's boner and Roger is shown plowing ass in the bathroom over the sink. Roger soon glides Geraldo's cock into an ass he was sucking, the film here becoming a full-scale orgy. Highlighting this orgy is a dual jackoff session by "two" Big Bill Elds.

The Adonis was a place where, as the title of Brad Gooch's book reads, the “Golden Age of Promiscuity” played out, behind those marquees which are now dimmed. But new kinds of lights flash these days, but on cellphones, as the new generation hooks up via Grinder.

I remember some kind of rumor or urban legend circulating that Lady Gaga is/was really a man. No, she is a woman, not a drag queen, but her extravagant dress and overwhelming public persona (all in the interests of self-expression of course, the byword among her young fan base) can honestly lead one to come to that conclusion.

Drag queens of course always adopt another name, as did Lady Gaga, who is really Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta, as did gay porn director/star Christopher Rage (The infamous sex pig, who plays Mary Jim Stunning in drag) mildly camping (I emphasize mildly) it up as the evil Arachne, a “brilliant, evil madwoman on a crusade to rid the planet of sex” in the early 1970s porn flick Drive. In Drive Ms. Stunning kidnaps scientist Mark Woodward, who developed a drug that can control the human sex drive. Do you the reader knows what that means? It means that evil super villain Arachnein would have the power to control the whole world! In fact, as our porn reviewer argues, cause “the complete castration of humanity.” Oh No!!!.

Is this shades of Zsa Zsa Gabor, Queen of Outer Space, who hates all men? Or, a closer analogy, Faye Dunaway, essentially the drag version of Joan Crawford in Mommie Dearest, taking over the town in that dreadful film Supergirl. The B-movie connection between Ms. Stunning, Zsa Zsa and Dunaway is quite obvious. What's different in Drive as to the other films is the sense of story, a grand outrageous narrative (and not just the big orgies with 50-plus people which the other films don't have). For there's something at stake in Drive: sex, sexual interaction, sexual closeness, sexual outrageousness the celebratory feeling in gay sex before the AIDS crisis and Ms. Stunning.

Back to Lady Gaga and Ms. Stunning. Lady Gaga is very talented who showcases diverse talents (yes, she does a drag routine playing a man) in a very entertaining flamboyant style. But I think one needs to understand that she is indebted to an exciting history of gender-bending that the gay community, one of her biggest fans, started long before the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 70s. Her style without question acknowledges the similarities of the Christopher Rage's aka Mary Jim Stunning's of the world.