When we are learning about queer cinema, we are exposed quickly to the concept and word, “queer.” To be different, or to be of the LGBTQ+ community. These two concepts coincide in our modern world, where to be queer is to not be the collectively accepted “norm.” Though strides have been made towards LGBTQ+ rights and spaces, there is still a stigma present in most societies. Because of this, those of us who find ourselves in this category, feel as though we are outcasts, and find solace in those who are like us. We want a place to call home; a place where we are accepted for everything we are. This is a normal human reaction, and there’s no shame to it. However, when a group of outcasts come together after a lifetime of being taught to “fit in,” we find new rules superimposed onto a community that should be a safe space. This is where we find the issue of, “gay culture.” There is something beautiful about a group of like minded people finding happiness and virtue in their own activities and events, but where this poses a problem fro “gay culture” is when there becomes a standard, or an expectation, to be an “authentic queer.” We find this outline in an excerpt from Culture of Queers by Richard Dyer. The author writes, “Being into beauty was also part  and  parcel  of  the  mechanism  of  self-oppression,  because  I  defined  my cultural  sensitivity  as  a  compensatory  product  of  being  queer” (Dyer, The Culture of queers, p. 20). We find that the community that prides themselves on being a safe place of uniqueness and self expression, is directly affected by the heterosexual stereotypes of queer individuals. Gay men are expected to be emotional, have keen and pristine senses of style, and enjoy the finer arts, by their own community. We must consider how the community pressures queer individuals to be a certain way, and that there are endless facets of what it means to be “queer.” 

(Google Images)

A film that directly considers what it means to be a queer-identifying man is Loose Cannons (2010), directed by Ferzan Özpetek. In this film, an openly gay man plans to come out to his family, but his plans are derailed as he must take over his brother’s place in the family company. What was initially a short trip home, became a life sentence. Leaving behind his partner and gay friends, he found himself unable to express himself in the ways his friends are shown to do, reciting show tunes and fashion labels on a whim. He even has a strangely intimate relationship with his female business partner, which perhaps means the film questions self exploration and bisexuality, a concept often considered taboo when one already has roots in a specific identity for many years. Identity is fluid within ourselves, but the outside world prefers we conform to one label for the rest of our lives, because it is easier for them. This idea has no regard for our personal journeys. Though there could be many interpretations of this film, but I think that the film attempts to question what is necessary to be considered gay in our society, and the question of, “What does it mean to be authentically queer?”