Click On Me

Introduction.

Cruising is an old tradition among the male homosexual culture. Parks, public toilets, side streets of the underground districts are the most common and as well as the most acknowledged places among the gay people. Cruising is an act. Cruising is a sexual performativity where the places have been particularly located or chose by the participants whom are prominently homosexual gay males. Cruising is a one of the most important sexual activity among gays, is one of the most prominent surviving sexul medium for the gays that the history have witnessed over and over through the time. The male participants of this act are after, most of the time,merely the sex. Young and mature homosexual males wonder around the particular places such as public parks, public toilets and so forth. We gaze, we whisper, we feel the temper of the each other. Sometimes we just pass by the bodies. By the certain act of bodily speeches such as blinks, gestures or may be just the transcendence of the feelings are sufficient for alluring the sexual enactments, and so forth.

As Burton (1995) said;
 “Cruising and cottaging—that is to say the seeking of sexual pleasure in public places and public lavatories   respectively—are forms of homosexual expression that seem to have an imprecise history   appearing to have  existed for as long as men have sought sex.”

     Cruising has enabled an opportunity to experience homosexual enactments and to express their sexuality for individuals (Asford,2006) Many gay people have had certain experiences on the cruising issue. However, as much as pleasant attractiveness of the very act of cruising, it has certain unwanted parts as well, so to speak. Namely, robbery, verbal and physical attacks by some homophobic people, or most considerable unwanted situation is most probably the police intervention. In his ostensible article, Ashford(2007) depicts the other sides of this cruising activity. Due to the fact that cruising is held in particular places such as lavatories and public spaces, certain negative labeling and marginalizing might be inevitable. Yet, also for the most of the people, commentators, the most “harmful and the wrong possible situation is the police intervention,” he quotes to state

In Turkey, especially in Istanbul there is a considerable cruising activity and as well as a possibility to emerge. Gays and the men who have sex with men(MSM) but do not identify themselves as gay or homosexual, they are aware of the very facts that I mentioned above. Within all the possible sides, the homosexual enactments has been brought into the another ostensible space called “cyberspace.” Hence, for the time being, what I want to highlight is not the public cruising, rather I would like to address my inquiry to the another ostensible issue, that is to say, online dating web-site or online cruising issue.

Within the explosion of the internet, especially lesbians and gays found another space to close the gaps, to embody into/onto the new discursive space, to express their sexuality, or to fulfill their sexuality, so to speak. The internet become one of the most prominent and ostensible medium particularly among gays. In the information age, the internet provides considerable medium in the course of fulfillment of sexual desires or dating issues with gays and lesbians. Many male homosexual individuals have experienced this unique opportunity to find sex partners, one-night stand lovers and so forth. As Ashford, Walker and Dimalcro suggest ; “Within the dawn of the information age, it was perhaps unsurprising that sex too would quickly dominate cyberspace alongside e-commerce, information and general communication. Aside from pornography,the internet has also become the beacon for minority sexual interests incorporating a cornucopia and of fetishes and fixication.(Ashford,2006, Dimalcro,2003, Walker,2000) Understandably, to put in another word, the traditional cruising activity jumped into/onto the cyberspace indeed.

One of the most common and old way of internet dating medium is the Internet Relay Chat (IRC) system. Most of the individuals , especially MSM and gays, are still using the IRC to find sex dates. However, nowadays IRC is not that much popular especially among the middle and upper class of Turkish gays. Because IRC has some particular lacks, and as well as it is considered risky comparing the online dating web-sites. The very reason of these ostensible facts why IRC is less popular among the mentioned group, is as the following. Lack of visual cues(Shaw,1997), namely body or face images, are the most considerable issue that causes the IRC is less popular nowadays.

Besides most of the online dating web-sites provide more options such as uploading photographs, wide-range search system according the member's interests and preferences, as well as relatively more privacy. According to the certain users this type of communication is safer.

Yet, I believe the very brief definition of the cruising activity and the new medium that I mentioned above, enabled relatively sufficient frame about the issue which I will draw. However, within this chapter I will try to focus on another issue, that is, the textual identity construction in the course of online dating,or online cruising web-sites.

There are several web-sites which provides online sex-dating facilities. These web-sites are the followings: Gayromeo, PlanetRomeo,Manjam, HadiGayri, Gabile. SheMaleTurk, HairyTurks, Gaydar,BearWWW.

Gaydar, Gayromeo,PlanetRomeo,HairyTurks,BearWWW and Manjam, these are foreign based/origin web-sites, and Hadigayri, SheMaleTurk, Gabile these are local based web-sites.

There are of course more web-sites, however I chose to classify the aforementioned ones,

because the mentioned ones are the most acknowledged ones among of all within the Turkish users.

Owing to the recent censorship regulations on the internet, most of the LBGTQ web-sites have been banned by the reason of public morality. Before the regulation launch, internet users were able to access to the certain banned web-sites by changing the DNS settings. However now users can have access the particular web-sites among the classified ones,such as PlanetRomeo, Gabile, Manjam, BearWWW, Hadigayri. Yet, Gayromeo, Gaydar and ShemaleTurk are the banned ones owing to the internet regulations. Gayromeo and PlanetRomeo have same providers, as a matter of fact these two web-sites are the same indeed.

HairyTurks and BearWWW, these web-sites address to the “bears” (Ayılar)

Bear, is a type of sexual identity or becoming and is a subculture community among the LGBTQ. In his remarkable ethnographic work, Peter Henen(2008) tries to shed lights on the issue, by conducting the interviews with the participant of this considerable community. Each of the participants illustrate what the bear is for them. According to me their narratives frame significant understanding on the issue. Hence, I will try to explicate the issue by quoting their narratives, which I believe it will be much more comprehensible.

“A Bear to me is somebody who, quote unquote, has a poty.” (Don)

“I would say, physically I would say at least facial hair—beard, moustache. And personalitywise—natural, down to earth.” (Larry)

“I would say stockier, definitely hairy—either facial hair, hairy chest, probably a little bit

older.” (Grant)

“This is my personal opinion, the majority of people base what a Bear is based on, I think,

more physical looks than anything else, obviously.” (Travis)”

Bear traits is masculinity, a trait for which we are obviously known. The emergence

of a true Bear actually takes years, a culmination of experiences, attitudes

and self-discovery.(Hill)

SheMaleTurk address mostly to cross-dressers, transsexuals and transvestite users.

Owing to the fact that HadiGayri and Gabile have Turkish language option in use, HadiGayri and Gabile have wide-range users, such as gays, MSM, cross-dressers, transvestites. The other reason why these two web-sites have more wide-range users comparing the other ones that these two web-sites address to certain type of users where they can find easily reciprocal communication on.

Those Which Gayromeo and Manjam are comparatively more mainstream and address to the members who are middle or upper class, know at least English, relatively “well-educated¹”

Besides, among these two mentioned web-sites, Gayromeo is the most popular one among the Turkish gays, because Gayromeo has multiple language using options, and Turkish is one of all.

Hence, it makes Gayromeo comparatively much more reachable particularly among İstanbulite gays. By the members, Gayromeo creates own territorial space in the course of gender and sexuality. Gayromeo has 919185 members around Europe, has 19481 members around Turkey .

According to the current datas on the web-sites, there are 11442 users from Istanbul of all.

There is also another and actually the most prominent reason why I selected Gayromeo is that I have been actively member of the aforementioned web-site. Accordingly I have observed certain ostensible issues on the web-sites. Some issues are very familiar with the public sphere , and some issues are very dissimilar. All of the observations and experiences that I have been through brought me into this very ostensible topic, so to speak.

Click On Me

“Cyberspace is divided by interest rather than geography” David F.Shaw

On some Friday afternoon, 677 gay men are online on Gayromeo. They are cruising for the “right person”, for “just coffee”, may be just for a “small chat”, yet most probably for merely “the sex” what they are hopefully, enthusiastically or desperately seeking after.

In contradistinction to the public cruising, in cyberspace we encounter with the text which is composed of certain information about the online profile that we click on, or that we just glance.

Although in the offline world all the identities have been considered as texts as well. According to the post-structuralists, cultural and social theorists identities composed of “particular discourses within the interactive relationship of certain unities and institutions ” and of “particular process” (Foucault,1981.Hall,1996) Namely, in his remarkable oeuvre Foucault, highlights the invention of homosexual being and shows how the homosexual identity came into the stages, or came into the being within the particular discursive construction such as psychiatry, medicine and so on.(1981)

speaking of which, yet it will be very effective to highlight an issue, that is, according to my reading of Foucault, he does not refer an identity in his remarkable ouevres, rather he seeks after the very constitutive "subjects." He queries the subjectification process by doing the genealogical reading. Besides, according to Hall, “Faoucault, of course would not commit anything so vulgar as actually to deploy the term identity, however, with the relation to self and the constitution and recognition of himself qua subject we are approaching something of the territory which, in terms established earlier, belongs to the problematic” (Hall,1996)

In addition to this, Hall(1996) in Question of Cultural Identity, queries the very fictive and textuality of the identities regarding with the constitution process of the issue. While he particularly cites the ostensible social and cultural theorists, he emphasizes the constructed unities of the identification process, such as “history, language , culture, sexuality” and so on.

Within the information age and the huge impact of the internet, of course, the issue of identity or subjectivity has been taken into consideration. Accordingly, regarding with the issue particular arguments within the communication studies and cultural studies as well.

Namely, according to Bell (2001) “by this new medium, The fluid, fragmented late-modern or postmodern self has a new capacity to make itself over, to reshape and restyle elements of identity – or at least to make choices about which aspects of its self to privilege at any point. Again, this might be taken to imply freedom of choice or to given another example on the issue"

In addition to this, according to the some other communication and cultural theorists, cyberspace enables more possibilities concerning with the corporeality. Creating hybrid avatars, passing between the genders are the issues that mostly discussed on, so to speak.

Alongside with the possibilities, certain issues has been discussed on the topic of the dis/embodiment. How the new discourses will shape our bodies or to what extent they affect the embodiment process, these considerations have been taken into account for a while.

Since it is the new medium and in progress we will witness the certain set of literature developments and ongoing discussions regarding within the cyberculture reality.

However, considering the all those mentioned discussions above, I found advantageous to address my inquiry, that is, construction online textual identity on Gayromeo.

All those profiles are actually texts, images, narratives, or binary digits, data that we interact, that we develop certain communication system through this space and through the particular data which makes us enable to comprehend specific identification cues, such as masculine, feminine, top, bottom and so forth. What makes us to think so, of course, the self and the other' own identification process and engagements with particular identification of social and cultural entities.

Concerning the aforementioned respect, the one goes through the certain identification process interactively with a set of indicative elements, such as defining of the body parts, narration of the preferences , photo selection according to his tentative self presentation and so forth.

On Gayromeo, one should constitute the online profile, if he wants to participate in this cyberspace, or if he wants to cruise online. There are three different membership options. One can register as a regular member. One can register as guide and one can register as an escort. If the one register as an escort, his profile will appear on the escort's page. Registering as escort means, according to the web-site' term and regulation, (The following text are extracted out of escort profile registration page of aforementioned web-site)“Escort profiles are for guys who want to advertise erotic services for money. This also includes massage, pay dates, webcam shows etc. In addition to this web-sites warns the attendance as escort as followings. "You must be over 18, you can have only one escort profile and the profile must be for yourself."

Registering as guide requires the followings. (The following texts are extracted out of the on guide profile registeration page of aforementioned web-site) A Guide profile works in a similar way to a standard GayRomeo User profile. You manage your own profile, can upload photos, contact other users and save their profiles. Registering and administering a Guide profile is really easy and requires no special computing knowledge. Guide Profiles are listed in the Guide. Other members can find you there according to the category and location where you're listed or the keywords you have entered. Registration is permitted for companies, the self-employed (if officially registered), and associations or groups based in the Gay and Lesbian Community.

However, what I would like to highlight is the regular member profile, and what kind of identification process are required to have certain online profile in the course of gender and sexual identity construction in cyberspace/on Gayromeo.

When you click on the standard member user, first thing you encounter is definition of your location. However owing to the privacy regulation, the stated address/location is not displayed to the others on map. However, there is an option which is called "radar" on the web-site, so that by the permission of the user, your location is displayed on the users profile. If the user wants to benefit of this option, he can make his location information visible within the certain settings on his Gayromeo profile. After completing this section, the user's country, region and city informations are filled automatically and appeared on the section of “where you come from”

After this regional activation, the user is required to complete the “body stats and general information part.” In this section the user is required to fill birthday information. And then the user is expected to choose appropriate data about his general body appearances, such as body type, weight, height, body hair, eyes, beards, hair, hair color, tattoos and piercing.

In this part the user can choose slim, average, athletic, muscular, belly, stocky as the body type, and

can choose his ethnic identification among the following ones. Namely, Caucasian, Asian, Arab, Black, Latin, Hybrid, Mediterranean and mixed. After the ostensible bodily and ethnic identifications, here comes the sexual orientation part. According to the web-site's interface, sexual identification is considered as an orientation. In this part the users are expected to choose among the three identification of the orientation section, namely, gay, bisexual and transgender. However, during my actively membership on the aforementioned web-site, I rarely encounter profiles that identified as transgender, so to speak. As a matter of fact, there might be said that there is a considerable sissy-phobia regarding my own Gayromeo experiences. The dominant discourse within the members on the website is that usually composes of statements which refers to “real men” and “straight-acting” issues. Hence, gay and bisexual identifications are popular among the members. After the ostensible orientation part, the users proceed the relationship status, which has four different alternatives. Namely, “I am a single, I have a partner, open relationship, married”

Then, user choose the age range according to his age preferences. The age range is included between the 18 and 99. Some members have strict definition of age preferences, whilst some member indicated that “I am looking for someone between the age of 18 and 99”

By doing so, some of them stand against the age discrimination. According to Payne(2007), this is a kind of dissident identification to stand against the discursive dominant understanding.

After the definition of age preferences, users select the definition of aim, such as for sex dates, for relationship and for friends. Then, comes the “headline” and “your statement” parts. Within these parts users are expected to write about themselves and some other important information which help to attract to the other members. Headline part is limited with the 15-200 characters. Headline part is appeared as highlighted on the member's profile and it is considered as the prominent interesting section of the users. Namely, if the user prefers only chubby ones, masculine ones, only bears, or if the user is attracted by merely straight-acting type of gay, he emphasizes on his headline section by doing so.

“Your statement” part is limited with 50- 30,000 characters. According to the web-site indication, members can talk about anything else they want to mention about themselves. In addition to this statement, there is also an advice, that is, “there is plenty of space so do not limit yourself to just three words”. In this part, members usually state their sexual preferences, and what they look like, what kind of things impress them and so forth. This part is very important indeed, because of the fact that in this part, they usually state what they are and accordingly what they are not. For example, some users do not prefer sissies, feminine ones. Some members want “normal guys”, or some members do not looking for drama queens and seeking merely non string-attached sex. By doing so, they also state certain information cues on their identity. The identity construction process always is articulated by exclusion. According to Hall, identity is a structured representation which only achieves its positive through the eye of the negative(Hall,1996)

There is usually excessive or insufficient graduation of identification process.

The statements that is held on this part usually refers to becoming of the member.

I would like to exemplify to put it bluntly. One of the common discourses as the following.

“I would like to meet a guy who knows what gay means. I do not want to meet with gays whom are too much degenerated. I want “normal guys”

The statement that mentioned above is actually definition of proper gay identity among the particular members. By defining the proper gayness over relatively the “negative” one, the member refers his identity through the exclusion. Hence he articulates his identification process by doing so.

After the “statements” section, users are expected to enter their sexual preferences. This part is composed of eight sections which users can enter the following options. “I am generally top only, more top, versatile, more bottom, bottom only” as to indicate sexual position. However this part is not mandatory or to put in another word arbitrarily .As the user wishes, he can skip this part or he can deliberately leave as unselected. Sexual preferences are composed of “safer sex(yes,no,always)

anal(top only, more top, versatile, no, more bottom,bottom only) SM(yes, no, soft sm only)

fisting(active, active/passive, passive) dirty(yes, no, ws only) dick size(small, medium,large, xlarge and xxlarge) and cut and uncut. Finally, users come to the fetish part. This part is also arbitrarily.

There are some most acknowledged fetishes, such as leather, sportswear, uniform, rubber, boots, jeans and so forth. The members can select more than one option, and owing to the limited selection of fetish list, the member can indicate more on their profiles according to their taste. Or, they can exclude the fetish part out of their profile concerning with their sexual identity elements.

To conclude this process, the members are expected to upload images, photos. This part is arbitrarily as well. However, it is highly recommended in the course of better communication, actually for better cruising, so to speak. The choice of image is also worth to discuss on very much indeed. Owing to the fact the visual representation is one of the most prominent element of the identification process. According to me, the “proper” representation of the profile might relatively help the member to represent the arbitrary “true self” by choosing relevant images with their statements.

During my observations, I can state that some of the members (most of them indeed) are in tended to do so. To put it crudely, if the member state that he is top only or more top and if he identifies himself as “straight-acting,” masculine type of guy, his general tendency is to choose mostly images which indicate or represent the member as equivalent with the general look of the profile.

The aforementioned images are mostly composed of as followings. Outdoor images have high reputation among these type of guys, such as captured images during the outdoor activities, namely particular sport activities, or certain captured images during working out in the gym, or some similar images which represent the masculine unity or equivalent elements according to the user.

In addition to this, if the member state that he is a “decent guy”, “not into gay scene” and looks for the same-minded persons, within this perspective, the user's general tendency on the visual representation is more or less similar. Actually, most of the time, yet arbitrarily indeed, the notions of “straight-acting” and “decent” might be considered as equivalent with each other. On the other hand, off course there are particular members who resist this dominant discourse and shape their profile not according to the mentioned discourses above. Besides, there are fake profiles as well and others who do not indicate anything regarding with the “headline, your statements and photo” parts.

According to Rodriguez(2003) “the discursive space does not establish which identity practices are available , but it does provide frame through which these practices are received in that context.”

Conclusion

“Digital discourses, those virtual exchanges we glimpse on the Net, are textual performances: fleeting, transient, ephemeral, already past. Like the etxt of a play, they leave a trace to which meaning can be assigned, but these traces are haunted by the absence that performance itself, its reception, and its emotive power.” Juana Maria Rodriguez

Doing research on the internet is very challenging process indeed. Having been a new medium and rarely conducted research sometimes cause the researcher to be disturbed and sometimes push the researcher to find own possibilities within the field regarding with the conducted researches, case studies and conducted methodologies as well.

On this paper, I tried to trace the everyday identification practices on the Gayrome concerning with the online profile issue. One can easily sense that how the every day particular identity enactments shape the online profile within the tools of language and of specific website on cyberspace. Through the suturing and articulation process(Hall,1996), the aforementioned website' users (re)constitute the gender and sexual identity over and over. This process refers to the non-stability and to be in the progress of the identity problematic and its constructed structure.

According to Edelman(2004), every identity is textual, every identity is interactive. Each body that always demands to be read and each body “on which his sexuality is always already inscribed. Hence, through the online profile and cyberspace we encounter textual-identity performance that is representing textuality of the self, “a constant coding and decoding of the self and the other.” (Rodriguez,2003)

REFERENCES

Asford,Chris (2007) The Only Gay In The Village: Sexuality and Net. Information & Communications Technology Law, Vol. 15, No. 3, October 2006

Bell, David( 2001) An Introduction to The Cybercultures. Routledge.

Burton, P. (1995) Amongst the Aliens: Some Aspects of a Gay Life (Brighton, Millvres Books).

DiMarco, A. & DiMarco, H. (2003) Investigating Cybersociety: a consideration of the ethical and

practical issues surrounding online research in chat rooms. in Y. Jewkes (Ed.), Dot.cons: Crime,

Deviance and Identity on the Internet (Culhampton, Willan).

Foucault,M. (1981) History of Sexuality Volume 1, Harmondsworth:Penguin.

Hall,S.(1996)The Questions of Cultural Identity. London:Sage Publication

Henen, Peter(2008) Fearies,Bears and Leeathermen: Men in Community, Queering The Masculine.

University of Chicago Press

Rodriguez,J Maria(2003) Queer Latinidad:Identity Practices, Discursive Spaces. New York: New York University Press

Shaw, David F(1997) Gay Men and Computer Communication: A Discourse of Sex and Identity in Cyberspace. Virutal Culture Reader. London:Sage Publication

Walker, C., Wall, D. & Akdeniz, Y. (2000) The Internet, law and society. in C. Walker, D. Wall &

Y. Akdeniz (Eds), The Internet, Law and Society (Harlow, Pearson).

1Most of the user of Gayromeo describe themselves as well-educated persons.