As much as there is a desire to eschew categorisation, gays habitually categorise other gays: If he is a bottom, he is assumed to be effeminate. If he is effeminate, he is assumed to be submissive in all aspects of the relationship(s) - including in bed. He is most likely to covet the latest fashionable items, to care about Bonang Matheba or participate in the eternal debate over who's the bigger influencer in pop culture between Rihanna and Beyoncé - and he is most probably emotionally expressive.
If you're closeted, you view such a gay man as most likely to "out" you. Potentially embarrass you. Potentially alter your life and other relationships and how "normal" or heterosexual people relate to you.
If he is a top, he is assumed to play the dominant role - to pay the bill at dinner, to take the driver's seat, during the drive home and in all other spheres. He is "straight acting". Normal. That's just one of many boxes - alarmingly - that exist even within spaces designed for queer folk.
We place people in such boxes so we know which ones to avoid. We do so because we want to know who will attract fewer eyes and therefore less scrutiny into our lives and sexuality. Less scrutiny into our lives means we can continue living safely from denunciation by family, colleagues, church and being shunned in all other social spaces. It's startling that some queer folk believe they can get away with condemning others for their homophobia, while humiliating one another for living openly.
Opinion
On Manana: Prejudice can be a very queer thing
It’s not only heterosexuals who are guilty of homophobia and pigeonholing people
For many of us who watched, and read about, Deputy Minister of Higher Education and Training Mduduzi Manana's disgusting attack on a woman who called him gay, his reaction shouldn't have been a surprise.
Let me explain: Of course it was startling to see a man who holds such a position in government behave in such a despicable manner - and especially against a woman.
And of course it was infuriating to learn it was over something that should be trivial.
Here's the truth: To many people who are closeted or unsure or in denial about their sexuality, being called gay feels like a slur.
When it occurs in public spaces, such as the popular Cubana restaurant, it can feel like being found out. The woman in question could have used this as a means to win their presumed argument, in which case she should be ashamed for perpetuating the idea that being gay means being "less" than heterosexual. That's one of the few ugly and non-PC truths that emerged.
I have been involved in a few discussions at social gatherings in the past week and heard varying opinions on Manana's reaction, the responses from Police Minister Fikile Mbalula and ANC Women's League leader Bathabile Dlamini, as well as testimonies from men who have been "accused" of being gay.
Yes, it appears it is still seen as an accusation in 2017!
But what if I told you that queer folk have shown themselves to not only be just as problematic latterly, but for a very long time?
That's another truth.
What if I told you that some (including dear friends) have responded with ridiculous statements such as, "Of course he is gay", simply because there were images of Manana in colourful or "flamboyant" suits?
Language among gays is just as dubious as some of the sentiments I've heard recently.
Heteronormativity still reigns proudly.
As much as there is a desire to eschew categorisation, gays habitually categorise other gays: If he is a bottom, he is assumed to be effeminate. If he is effeminate, he is assumed to be submissive in all aspects of the relationship(s) - including in bed. He is most likely to covet the latest fashionable items, to care about Bonang Matheba or participate in the eternal debate over who's the bigger influencer in pop culture between Rihanna and Beyoncé - and he is most probably emotionally expressive.
If you're closeted, you view such a gay man as most likely to "out" you. Potentially embarrass you. Potentially alter your life and other relationships and how "normal" or heterosexual people relate to you.
If he is a top, he is assumed to play the dominant role - to pay the bill at dinner, to take the driver's seat, during the drive home and in all other spheres. He is "straight acting". Normal. That's just one of many boxes - alarmingly - that exist even within spaces designed for queer folk.
We place people in such boxes so we know which ones to avoid. We do so because we want to know who will attract fewer eyes and therefore less scrutiny into our lives and sexuality. Less scrutiny into our lives means we can continue living safely from denunciation by family, colleagues, church and being shunned in all other social spaces. It's startling that some queer folk believe they can get away with condemning others for their homophobia, while humiliating one another for living openly.
Queer folk shouldn't have to twist and fold themselves to make themselves appear less threatening or to make heterosexual folk feel unthreatened. Similarly, queer men and women must not oppress fellow queers. It's a no-brainer.
While we're at it, we need to refrain from the bullsh*t habit of trying to solve other people's sexual orientation and preferences - it has never been and should never be any of our business.
"I just searched Mduduzi Manana and we have mutual friends. Our mutual friends are gay," read a tweet a few days ago.
Why is it even a thrill to go down that road to serve your curiosity about someone who means nothing to us?
Finally, Manana deserves all that is coming his way - assuming he will be treated equally to other criminals and not with kid gloves.