Everything You Need to Know About Homonormativity

We know what you’re thinking: What is homonormativity? To put it in simplest terms, homonormativity is saying you’re not like most gay men. Homonormativity is dismissing black men in the club because, while you respect black people, you’re “just not attracted” to them. Homonormativity is thinking differently about someone you love on Twitter when you see they use a wheelchair IRL. 

Homonormativity is gay white men dominating queer TV representation and white cis men playing trans women. Homonormativity is the nation organizing for gay marriage, but not for trans lives. Homonormativity is a privileging set of hierarchies, social norms, and expectations that cause the oppressed to oppress one another.

Homonormativity is everywhere. It permeates into every fiber of queer life, ruining the community from inside out and top to bottom (no pun intended).

In the simplest terms, homonormativity is a set of rules used to decide which people in the queer community are the best. 

Homonormativity dictates that men should be muscular and masculine, while women should be slender and feminine. It encourages heterosexual mimicking wherein queer people get married, adopt children, attend church every weekend, and live in a suburban neighborhood with a white picket fence (think Modern Family). None of these things are inherently negative, but they can be when these desires of both lifestyle and trait determine who we interact with, who we help, and who we support.
Homonormativity made same-sex marriage priority number one, when trans people still can’t use bathrooms safely, can still be fired for being who they are, and can still be viciously abused by the prison system. Homonormativity tries, in essence to control how we feel about ourselves and others and it attempts to morph the queer community into the heterosexual community, having us act and live just like them.

Unfortunately, the topic of homonormativity still has yet to be commonly found outside of elite, intellectual texts that take way too long to get through and are often difficult for most people to access or comprehend. This is a big deal!
When information like this is inaccessible to the masses, you’re left with generations of queer people who can’t find the words to express the oppression that they’re facing. As a high school student, I didn’t know what I was being given from other people was wrong. I didn’t know people disliking and shaming me for being feminine was wrong. I thought I should hate myself too, and so I did. Luckily, I was blessed with a gay uncle who had spent a great deal of his life exploring cultural academia. He was able to talk me through this trauma and oppression, arming me with words like homonormativity and microaggression, which helped me not only live my reality, but to make it better. What I learned, at the simplest level, was how to advocate for myself.
If I hadn’t had the uncle that I do, I may still have been enforcing homonormative values on myself (butching it up) and on others (saying I wouldn’t date feminine gay men). As a community, we have to make knowledge about homonormativity available to everyone, so that people can speak up. The thing about societal trends like homonormativity is that they’re made to be insidious. We accept trends and norms as natural, when they are anything but natural. There is no correct way to be gay, or bi, or trans, or queer. Once you name homonormativity and point it out, it loses power.
We need homonormativity to lose power because it wrecks lives, tears communities apart, and even kills. Homonormativity can explain why masculine gay men are often left alone, tolerated at worst and accepted at best, by society, while feminine gay men (particularly POC) are still frequently attacked by aggressive mobs on the daily. Homonormativity is why there is actual legislation against the trans community, based on gross accusations and stereotypes about them, that will force them to use the bathroom of the gender they were assigned at birth (as if this legislation won’t cause unspeakable harm to these individuals). This is not liberal, culture-policing. This is real life.
The change needs to start from the bottom up. We need to be conscious about how we talk and how we conduct ourselves in public, both physically and online. We need to listen when people different from us talk, and recognize our own privileges and adjust accordingly (because no one is totally oppressed, we all have privileges somewhere). We need to organize for issues that are not gay marriage and fight for the rights of people who do not share our identities. We need to let queer people be queer people and stop enforcing molds created by a heterosexual world that wants us to be less like us and more like them.

Homonormativity is all of us this and more, but what it needs to be is history, not the present and future.

Leather lifestyle

Most members of the community are more than willing to share their views, thoughts knowledge and education about the Leather Lifestyle. Individuals who wear club or organization colors are very willing to help a newcomer in his new journey into the Leather Lifestyle.

The leather subculture denotes practices and styles of dress organized around sexual activities that involve leather garments, such as leather jackets, vests, boots, chaps, harnesses, or other items. 

Wearing leather garments is one way that participants in this culture self-consciously distinguish themselves from mainstream sexual cultures. Leather culture is most visible in gay communities and most often associated with gay men (enthusiasts are nicknamed “leathermen”), but it is also reflected in various ways in the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and straight worlds. 

Many people associate leather culture with BDSM (Bondage/Discipline, Dominance/Submission, Sado/Masochism, also called “SM” or “S&M”) practices and its many subcultures. 

But for others, wearing black leather clothing is an erotic fashion that expresses heightened masculinity or the appropriation of sexual power; love of motorcycles, motorcycle clubs and independence; and/or engagement in sexual kink or leather fetishism.

Numerous major cities host Leather Pride events, including San Francisco’s Folsom Street Fair, Berlin’s Easter in Berlin (Europe’s biggest gay fetish event) from 1975 and Folsom Europe, New York City’s Folsom Street East, Chicago’s International Mr. Leather, Washington, DC’s MidAtlantic Leather and Amsterdam’s Leather Pride. 

New leather events kept popping up. In 2004 the San Francisco Folsom Street Fair got a European counterpart in Berlin Germany, Folsom Europe. In the first weekend of September thousands of leathermen from all over Europe, and the rest of the world, gathered in the German capital to celebrate a weekend together. It is a huge street party at the hear of the Berlin Leather scene and in the meantime home to some new kinds of events, such as the Cigar Lounge or the Classic Meets Fetish fetish classical concert .

Who Are Leatherfolk?

Broadly stated, “leatherfolk” are affiliated by virtue of their shared interest in certain unorthodox sexual expressions. These expressions may involve elements of dominance and submission among partners; fetishism, a sexual orientation towards particular parts of the body, objects, or materials, leather not the least among these; and the giving and taking of physically painful or humiliating stimuli. Only the last of these may be properly understood as sadomasochism; and “leathersex” may be distinguished from s/m by its inclusion of other sexual and symbolic elements.

Not all of the subculture’s participants practice dominance and submission, fetishism, and s/m in common, and the number of variations on and additions to these three erotic themes among leatherfolk is seemingly limitless. The credo among leather practitioners is that all such expressions are mindful of physical, mental, and emotional health, are understood as mutually consensual, and are experienced as pleasurable by all parties involved.

Sociological studies as well as anecdotal evidence indicate that persons interested in leather experience a coming-out process akin to coming out as lesbian, gay , bisexual, or transgender . For many queer people, coming out into leather postdates coming out as queer (though this may be changing as leather achieves some degree of prevalence and social acceptance). It involves gaining sexual experience and deepening one’s knowledge of queer community life (including its leather institutions), as well as overcoming the widespread social stigma, both inside and outside of queer communities, attached to certain forms of leathersex.

Sadism, masochism, and fetishism continue to be classified as mental illnesses by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychological Association, as was homosexuality until 1973. Their exercise continues to be publicly restricted or ruled flatly illegal in many parts of the United States. Like other sexual minority populations, leatherfolk characteristically view their sexual expression as an issue of freedom from intervention into what many consider a fundamentally private aspect of their lives. They believe their behavior threatens no one, including themselves, and does not impinge on the lifestyle choices of their detractors.

For many, participation in leather life is restricted to a socio-sexual sphere, finding expression only in the bar , the Internet chat room, or the bedroom. Significantly , though, there are a large number of persons who make these interests a part of their public (and not specifically sexual) personae. These people help build leather community through forming organizations, developing media for communicating their interests, educating others, staging public events, and integrating the aesthetic and ethic of leather more fully into their everyday lives.

Where Did Leather Come From?

The emphasis on aesthetics and ethics alluded to above derives from the earliest period in leather’s brief history, customarily termed “Old Leather” or “the Old Guard.” Leather culture had its origins in the increasingly public and specifically gay culture that flourished in major U. S. port cities during and after World War II.

Among gay men in these cities there were a certain number who eschewed stereotypical gay behaviors and preoccupations. Some shared an interest in military life, its hierarchy and its honor codes, as well as its trappings, especially uniforms, close-cropped hair , the motorcycle, and its requisite leather attire. Other divergent yet equally significant influences included so-called “physique” periodicals and the art of T om of Finland (Touko Laaksonen), as well as films glamorizing bands of social outlaws, such as Marlon Brando’sThe Wild One (1953).

Taken either together or separately, these elements inspired the cultivation of a hypermasculine mode of comportment and interaction among certain gay men. These “leathermen” formed social institutions distinct from others in the gay world that allowed them to pursue a social life with those who shared their interests.

The first of these institutions were motorcycle clubs, already being formed by the early 1950s. Clubs staged runs, public events where men could meet and members of different clubs come together . Club members patronized certain bars, typically hanging a banner that bore their club’s emblem in one bar to mark it as an informal meeting place.


Today’s leather bars are the heirs of this tradition. Many still fly the colors of a cycle club or other leather organization. Yet bar patronage has never been restricted to club members, and bars developed a social world of their own that operated alongside and independent of the clubs.
Still other circles of leathermen did not form organizations and did not frequent bars. Rather , they were members of more private networks that hosted exclusive parties.

Conduct within some clubs was strictly regimented, following quasi-military conceptions of hierarchy and protocol. Membership was restricted to a select few; prospective members were sponsored by a current member and initiated by way of conferring status as a pledge. Pledges started at the bottom of the hierarchy and were taught elements of dress and comportment, along with sexual techniques, by more senior members.

A scant few leather clubs still uphold such “Old Guard” traditions, and many current leathermen–and women–idolize them. Yet the clubs of 1950s and 1960s were by no means unanimous in their embrace of such rigorous codes for conduct. Many were considerably less formal, their members emulating to some degree the ungovernable and sexually aggressive on-screen personae of Brando or James Dean.

The origins of leather were thus multiple, and the “Old Guard” had many faces. But with the coming of the sexual revolution, and the women’s liberation and the gay liberation movements, the conception of leather culture outlined above was further broadened and transformed.

How Has Leather Changed?

The 1970s and early 1980s saw a greater integration of elements of leather culture into both the larger gay subculture as well as into popular culture. Members of rock bands like The Village People and Judas Priest appropriated some of the trappings of leather culture to enhance their stage personas. Films such as Cruising (1980) as well as the photography of Robert Mapplethorpe introduced audiences to portrayals of sadomasochistic persons and relationships, albeit often imagined in decidedly negative ways.

The vogue for leather among gay men led to a proliferation of leather bars and bathhouses in cities large and small, part of the larger institutional elaboration of gay community life characteristic of the time. Leather-specific writing first transcended the purely pornographic with the publication of Larry T ownsend’s Leatherman’s Handbook (1972), a how-to manual of sorts that initiated many more men into leather than the private clubs and informal networks of the previous two decades ever could have. Many works of gay- themed fiction from these years include a reference to or commentary on leather life.


Yet despite this effusion, leather culture as it had been known up to that point was already on the wane. Gayle Rubin has persuasively demonstrated in her work on the history of San Francisco leather culture that the motorcycle clubs and bars that had made that city’s South of Market neighborhood such a haven for leathermen in the 1960s were already being threatened with destruction by real estate speculation and urban redevelopment by the mid-1970s.
The coming of AIDS is often credited with the destruction of leather culture in San Francisco and other cities. While the loss of leathermen and their contributions to community life to the epidemic cannot be overestimated, it should also be noted that AIDS emerged at a time when the leather community was already undergoing a significant transformation at the hands of other social forces.

Many persons, both inside and outside of the gay community, were quick to decry the sexual excesses of leathermen as responsible for engendering and spreading AIDS, at a time when the etiology of the disease was still largely not understood. In retrospect, this appears ironic, since the primary mode of transmission of the virus was not via whips and chains but rather through the gay male sexual commonplace of anal intercourse. Leathermen were thus unwitting practitioners of safer sex before the term was even coined.

With the demise of earlier institutions, new ones arose, which broadly shared an ethic and organizational characteristics that differentiated them from “the Old Guard.” 

The new leather groups were typically more open; they made explicit their purpose and mission of promoting leathersex. They were more democratic, inviting interested persons to become paying members and even club officers, instead of subjecting chosen initiates to a probationary period before conferring membership upon them. This openness was no doubt due to the legacy of 1960s consciousness-raising around such issues as feminism and gay liberation, and many groups adopted a philosophy that was more political as well as more public in its orientation.

As with gay and lesbian liberation, however , the ideal of a pansexual leather movement was difficult to realize; emergent straight and lesbian leather communities formed organizations separate from those of gay men as well as separate from one another . Fortunately , this breakdown along lines of gender and sexual identity has not prevented cordial relations and collaboration among organizations serving different populations.

With this change in outlook and means of communication, the character of public leather life also changed. While some invitation-only runs persisted (often sponsored by an older generation of motorcycle clubs), newer organizations’ regular meetings and special events were typically open to all. While they allowed for and encouraged socialization, sex, and s/m encounters, the cornerstone of these new events was education. Prominent, skilled, and charismatic leaders within the community were called upon to impart their knowledge of leathersex techniques as well as opinions regarding the state and direction of the leather community to event audiences. In some ways this educational mission was a substitute for the close mentoring of an earlier period, and many bemoaned the loss of a more intimate and exclusive model for the transmission of cultural knowledge.

Another novel phenomenon was the institution of leather title competitions, perhaps the most notable being International Mr . Leather , held annually in Chicago and featuring participants from all over the world. These competitions have proliferated to such an extent that almost any city with a sizable leather community, from Amsterdam and Munich to New York City and Los Angeles, sponsors one such event and may have multiple local title holders. Leather contest winners are enjoined by their status to work to cultivate local leather life, as well as to represent the local community at national and international events. Fundraising and support for charity work has become increasingly integral to this role; since the 1980s, leather organizations have raised large sums for the fight against AIDS as well as the advancement of legal protections for leathersex and the preservation of leather culture and history.

Modes of communication among leather folk also changed. The 1970s saw the advent of national and international leather-themed magazines that shared information, propagated sexual styles, and brought people together through personal ads. By the late 1990s, the Internet had supplanted magazines as a source of information.

Opportunities to meet individuals into leather or make contact with leather organizations on the worldwide web continue to multiply. More and more highly specific and esoteric kinks are outlined and cultivated here in ways which they likely could not be in a for-profit medium attempting to target the largest portion of an already small market share. Extensive use of the Internet has lowered barriers to entering leather life considerably, yet proposed laws that aim to restrict the kinds of content available on the web potentially threaten the online leather community’s continued vitality.

Leather culture continues to draw medical and legal opprobrium. It remains socially and spatially marginal and thus vulnerable to the vicissitudes of moral crusaders, medical authorities, social service providers, real estate mavens, and conservative forces within the “mainstream” lesbian and gay community. But as more leatherfolk discover the rich history and tremendous diversity of their community and choose to publicly acknowledge their affiliation with one another , leather culture becomes a more formidable entity . It is the hope of leatherfolk that the tradition they uphold and the recognition they struggle for will contribute to the sexual emancipation of all people.