Comparison of the establishment of a homosexual outlet in nightlife between New York and Tokyo
...distinguished from actual female actors by the public. Following this influence from Kabuki, transvestitism became more prominent and kagema (or male prostitutes) who could guise as women became highly sought after. One key factor in all of these issues however, is that only the feminine aspect of homosexuality was recognized. Gay behavior could be tolerated provided that the public never had to consider someone as having both feminine and masculine qualities. Hence gay Kabuki actors played either male or female parts, but never both; and kagema either disguised themselves as women or simply continued only to operate well below the pubic gaze. So while homosexuality was on the rise in the Tokyo night-scene, the general public did not see it this way. They continued to isolate masculinity and femininity from one another, and despised those who did otherwise. Hence, while gay performers and socialites could now become a mainstream part of their professions, they must forfeit one aspect of their personality to do so; either identify as hegemonicly masculine or reservedly feminine . A similar phenomenon was occurring as New York edged towards the twentieth century. Gay entertainers and socialites saw an assumption of qualities belonging to the opposite sex as a means of entering mainstream nightlife. It was at this point in time that New York had established a series of ‘Molly Houses’ under the influence of the British. These ‘houses’ were underground establishments where men could come and dress as explicitly feminine women (Mollies) and act out a number of typically female scenarios including, in the case of ‘Molly Harrigan’s,’ the act of giving birth . However it was under the French influence that homosexuality in New York nightlife took its greatest step towards the mainstream. During this transition from the nineteenth to twentieth centuries, there was an immense fascination in New York with the behaviour of the French; particularly the aristocracy. Hence this period saw the establishment of the “dandy” on the New York social circuit; an appropriation of the be-wigged, colourfully dressed, aristocratic, French male who was seen by New York bohemians as the pinnacle of subversive style . These ‘dandies’ began to frequent New York dance halls, often around The Bowery, but usually stayed in inwardly-socialising groups as there was still an understanding that this type of subversion of masculine ideals did not appeal to widespread opinion and could provoke violence. However, through cabaret, this type of behaviour eventually found a mainstream audience. In the early 1900s gay cabaret performers began to perform both male and female roles in their acts, disregarding the prior need to separate the two. In fact, the cabaret actor Tommy Richards was once heard to say, “I am just as convincing in a dress as I am in trousers.” Thus, initially through female guise, homosexuality was eventually able to permeate New York nightlife. While it may have only been appreciated for its novelty value at the time, this did pave the way for the new century. Tokyo on the other hand, continued to require a distinction between male and female aspects of personality and hence had only superficially established some grounding for queer nightlife. By the twentieth century, the nightlife crowd in the two cities had had roughly twenty years of ‘gender-bending’ entertainment, and one could assume that the next step of progress would be an open acceptance of homosexual culture as a valid social platform. This was very far from being the case in Tokyo. At the end of the Meiji Era in 1912 there was still a desire to keep the basic two gender groups and shy away from anything which seemed to contradict nature and the strict moral laws which governed Japanese culture. By this point some gay males had even managed to penetrate the Geisha circle as actual Geisha however, just as before, this was still in keeping masculinity and femininity as far from one another as possible . These individuals adopted completely female personas when donning the traditional costume and make-up and hence learnt to hide the very fact that they were male (and hence gay) entirely. Same-sex sex continued to exist as a covert sub-culture and began to take place at assignation houses which were solely same-sex, as this type of couple could well be excluded from typical assignation houses . Some have also suggested that homosexual behaviour was only ever the property of the powerful, as those in the middle and lower classes could not gain access to these houses and hence had no safe locale for rendezvous. Sex between women is not documented in Japanese society at this point as males seem to be the protagonists of sexual behaviour, and hence while men could chose to initiate sex with whomever they please (to a degree), women had no choice at all. If there was one thing sanctioned less than gay male sex it was gay female sex, as there is no-one in this situation who is the ‘authoritarian figure;’ a necessary part of Japanese relations. Thus one can see that homosexuality never formed a basis for entertainment in general Tokyo nightlife, it remained hidden and was rarely spoken of; very much the opposite of what was occurring in New York at around the same time. It was during the 1910s and 1920s that Harlem and Greenwich Village began to feature queer culture as a mode of entertainment on a variety of levels. For those within the communities, gay entertainment began to become a valid part of nightlife. Aside from the plethora of clubs frequented by “pansies” and “lesbians,” there were a series of events (most notably balls) where gay culture such as drag performances was on display. The ‘Hamilton Lodge Ball’ in Harlem was the biggest of these events and is often noted as the brashest . Drag performers would entertain the audience, who were mostly from Harlem, with songs and ‘tongue-in-cheek’ skits. Events such as this and the ‘Liberal Club Ball’ in Greenwich Village are notable because they were organized by gay groups with gay audiences in mind, denoting the fact that (if only within these communities) queer culture had become a legitimate nightlife pursuit. This legitimacy did not extend very far outside of these communities however. Often people from other parts of New York would visit Harlem or (more often) Greenwich Village to observe and experience gay nightlife without actually becoming involved. In what has been described as going on “safari” visitors would come, enjoy the festivity, then leave without fear, all the while only enjoying the queer culture for its novelty value . At no point did this culture gain respect from the masses outside the two main gay enclaves, it was appreciated as a welcome departure from the monotony of daily life, but a departure which would necessarily be short lived when the “slummer” returned to more acceptable activities. Even when this slumming took place, those visiting the districts did not venture too far into the homosexual arena, steering clear of lesbian speakeasies and Jazz clubs featuring African-American transvestite entertainers and filling their time with a much less threatening vista of gay nightlife. Hence, while homosexuality entered the nightlife scene as an acceptable set of entertainments for those within the gay communities it gained no respect as anything other than a novelty in the eyes of those outside of Harlem and Greenwich Village. In Tokyo queer culture did not even gain this amount of respect. Homosexuality continued to be shunned and hence only existed in its truest from outside of the public’s view. It would seem fair to assume that if gay nightlife was centred on one or two key districts in a city, a community reflective of this nightlife would develop. In Tokyo this simply never occurred. While most homosexual assignations occurred in the Shinjuku district, this district was known for its eccentrics and unconventional frequenters of all types, not just gay. Hence no actual community formed in Tokyo as a loadstone for gay culture as a result of gay nightlife. This is clearly a reflection of the fact that homosexuality never even gained a sliver of respect from any social circle as a valid representation of any facet of the city’s existence. One might also assume that there was never really a need to establish a homosexually defined community in Tokyo due to the nature of gay interaction in the city. Any homosexual interaction was merely sexual and usually involved one of the participants being in a position of authority over the other. The behaviour was so frowned upon that any contact other than sexual was difficult as it had to be kept secret. Therefore most homosexual encounters were necessarily fleeting, making the possibility of forming an actual relationship practically impossible. One might argue then, that in the absence of any extended foray into gay life, the establishment of some sort of queer-identifying enclave would have been redundant. What is indisputable is the fact that an area of this type was never formed, in stark contrast to the districts of Harlem and Greenwich Village in New York. Greenwich Village (more so than Harlem) became identified as a Mecca for all aspects of gay culture and hence a perfect place for homosexually identifying people to establish residence. On top of the booming queer nightlife, Greenwich Village (or ‘the Village’) was renowned for its ‘free-thinking,’ artistically-minded residents. This lead a great many residents to think with a perception rejecting socially defined boundaries, such as gender distinctions; and hence this easy-going atmosphere made The Village comfortable for gay house-hunters looking for somewhere to live free from persecution . Establishments such as Josephson’s ‘Café Society,’ which were formed as a conscious departure from social normality, epitomized The Village’s openness to values which were not openly tolerated by the greater city . The fact that The Village provided cheap accommodation for singles also made it attractive to unattached gay individuals who could capitalize on the abundance of opportunities for social interaction in the search for a meaningful (or otherwise) relationship . A residential community centred on homosexuality was also formed in Harlem, however n...