“When a straight man puts on a dress and goes on a sexual kick he is a transvestite. When a man is a woman trapped in a man's body and has a little operation he is a Transsexual. When a gay man has way too much fashion sense for one gender he is a drag queen.”

Noxeema Jackson (Wesley Snipes)
To Wong Foo - Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar

According to one legend, the Stonewall Riots of 1969 were started when one transgendered person, Sylvia Rae Rivera, threw a bottle at a police officer who was harassing her. [1] Whether that is true or not, it is definitely true that drag queens and transgendered people played a prominent role in that historic event often hailed as the 'turning point' of the modern gay rights movement. And it seems that ever since, drag queens and the transgendered have been regarded as untouchable patron saints in gay circles. The drag queen has come to symbolize gay courage. To say something negative about queens around even many apparently masculine gay men is to invite a scolding. I've heard variations on this censure over the years, and even encountered a perfect example of the Drag Queen Creed recently in, of all things, the book Bears on Bears:

“The whole gay movement was initiated by these heroes/heroines; we Bears can continue to learn much from them. Talk about real courage! Do you know any Bear who has had to face the stuff drag queens have? They're the real men!”[2]

But what makes drag queens so damn courageous?

As the quote from Too Wong Foo above humorously explains, drag queens are not transsexuals. Drag queens are just effeminate (and sometimes not so effeminate) gay men who enjoy dressing up as women. Not because they are tortured souls struggling with gender identity issues, but because they like doing it. Simply toss on a dress and suddenly you're given the same Gay Badge of Courage as transgendered people. That hardly seems fair. What is it, exactly, that drag queens have to face these days?

Many drag queens are professional entertainers that cater to both gay and non-gay audiences. Famous drag queens like RuPaul, Charles Busch, Lypsinka, and The Lady Bunny have had successful careers as drag queens that span decades. They've built on the fish-out-of-water gag of a man in women's clothing and turned it into a genre of pop art performance. Films like Priscilla Queen of the Desert and Too Wong Foo were not only major mainstream productions, they are old, so I guess I should say they used to be mainstream. Drag was so big in the early 90s, it's almost retro now. Female impersonator Frank Marino has not one, but two stars on the Las Vegas Walk of Fame for his long running drag revue. An old friend of mine, Miss Understood, runs a successful business providing drag queens for high profile events in New York City and around the country. Drag queens in urban areas are often popular nightclub host(esess) and promotors. As entertainers, these guys dressed as dolls are not simply tolerated, they're celebrated! were not only major mainstream productions, they are

On a more local level, getting into drag—perhaps in part because drag queens are so revered, but more likely because they're fun and flamboyant—can make one an instant party celebrity. Slick drag admittedly requires some expertise, but sloppy drag queens are often just as popular, because sloppy drag is an easy gag. The most amateur queen can often get a gig performing at a weekly venue. (I know, I've done it myself) I've seen some queens who are very talented performers, but it's just as often an excuse to get on stage and grab a little limelight that you couldn't score as a fella. Singing is hard; lip-syncing to one of your favorite female vocals is comparatively easy. You just have to know the words and camp it up; a crowd of drunk gays will eat it up. You don't even have to be a homo to do it; straight guys were doing drag in comedy acts long before drag queens became the official icons of gayness. Frat boys still do it all the time. Barry Bonds appeared on TV recently dressed as Paula Abdul, and was only criticized by sportscasters because they didn't believe he's really that much fun. They assumed it was merely a publicity stunt someone dreamed up to humanize him.

Drag is a great way to get attention, and that's the real reason a lot of the casual/non professional queens don a dress. As regular homos, they blend into the wallpaper, but a little MAC makeup and suddenly they're spinning disco balls of faggy fun. Drag also offers a second identity that gives a homo carte blanche to get away with behavior that would never fly if he were in masculine attire. I've seen countless young or attractive men practically molested by queens whom they would never allow to touch them out of drag. But if it's a drag queen grabbing your package, it's all in the name of 'good clean fun,' right? Never mind that it's an aging, bloated pervert, or some homely fag whom you wouldn't normally even acknowledge. Drag queens are heralded as symbols of gay freedom, and in my experience they do feel free to do whatever they want, even if it's obnoxious. Everyone laughs and encourages them. They may be symbols, but they're not saints. Often, they're just dirty old/young men in sequins. Of course, you can't say that. After all, they're Drag Queens! Where would we be without them?!

It doesn't take a lot of courage to be a drag queen in this day and age. Many drag queens, high on their own supply, will be the first to recite the Drag Queen Creed. But drag is so institutionalized that it's hardly transgressive, and it isn't all that courageous. Getting into drag and hitting some backwoods watering hole in West Virginia isn't courageous, it's just stupid. And doing drag in some gay ghetto or for 'seen-it-all' urbanites is just...doing drag. There aren't any more cops to throw bottles at. Stonewall was over 30 years ago. Many of the drag queens around today weren't even born in 1969. Calling drag courageous is an insult to the genuinely courageous. Soldiers in the Middle East are courageous. Firemen saving children from burning buildings are courageous. There's nothing inherently wrong with doing drag, but it's time regular homosexual men stopped feeling the need to enshrine drag queens like heroes. Drag queens are just fags getting dressed up like women and having fun.

I also take issue with the other part of The Drag Queen Creed which states that “They're the real men!” That's a cute truism and I hear it recited regularly without irony, but if being a man has any meaning, it is definitlely not being a drag queen. Being a man is the opposite of being a drag queen; it's being a man. And to people who haven't been drinking gay/feminist/postmodern Flavor-Aid, that still means something. 'Being a man' actually means striving to embody masculinity, as a man. The theory usually goes that drag queens challenge gender roles, 'proving' that gender is simply 'drag.' But drag queens are rarely feminine in a geniuine way; they're only proving that men can dress up and create charicatures of women for an audience. And we already knew that. Only a man who hates being a man would honestly concede that drag queens represent manhood in any legitimate way. Drag, taken out of its rightful context as simple entertainment and held up as an ideal for homosexual men, is a rejection of masculinity. It's a rejection of self, not a celebration of self.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

[2] Dr. Lawrence Mass as interviewed in Bears on Bears, by Ron Suresha