Both assumptions are based in the fact that gender stereotypes are fixed in people's minds and are considered so 'natural', that there is no way they could be any different. For instance, it is
obvious' to most people that boys play with trucks, have rough games and get dirty; conversely, girls play with dolls, are delicate and cry when they get muddy.
This seemingly harmless way of thinking has consequences that go a lot farther than just the playground, it goes on to making it seem unnatural and inconceivable that either sex can get interested in the other's socially accepted areas.
In that case, I believe that we, homosexuals, get a chance that heterosexuals don't: we question the values set for us and actually need to go on a journey to discover who we are and what we like. Since our basic emotions are already out of the ordinary, breaking some other rules isn't much trouble for us. In other words, we are pushed to break the barriers of gender.
We allow ourselves to enjoy both sides of the coin, we can be rough and delicate, we can drink a shot of really strong tequila or sip a fruity drink. And yet, this is not and intrinsic quality of homosexuals. It is not like being gay automatically gives you that ability, it is just something we learn.
In the end, these are all social constructs that we acquire and adapt to as we grow up and develop in our environment. None of them can be considered 'unnatural' since they are all dependent on where we are.
So, while a boy who plays with dolls may be gay, it doesn't mean that it's a fact. It just means that he is a kid who is exploring his world and his own emotions and interests, beyond the limitations of a gender stereotype which he is not yet controlled by.
To conclude this post, I would like to describe a project a group of students did a few years ago, when I was still teaching at University level:
The task was to break a 'gender rule' in any way they wanted, document it and present it to the rest of the class. The instructions were vague on purpose in order to not interfere with their own creative process. A group formed by three girls and two boys asked if they could do a play, to which I agreed.
The first act showed a mother with her two children, a boy and a girl; they were having breakfast and the kids were fighting and being annoying. At one point, the mother got fed up with them and sent them to their room, 'but as punishment, you will go to the other one's bedroom and stay there until I say it's okay to come out!" she yelled. The children go reluctantly. The girl goes into the boy's room and starts crying, saying it's too dirty, too messy and dark; however, soon after she comes across an action figure, a G.I. Joe type toy, and starts playing with it. At the same time, the boy is in the girl's room complaining that it's all pink and fluffy, when he finds two Barbie dolls on the floor and start playing with it as well. When the mother sees this, she is scandalized by it and quickly puts the children in their respective rooms, without realizing that each had taken the toy they had been playing with.
This act ends with them going to sleep holding on to their 'new' toy, happy that they had the chance to find it. But it doesn't end there.
For the second act, the children dream that each is talking to the doll. The barbies are telling the boy he's a handsome little fellow and if he'd like to stay with them; the girl's G.I. Joe says he will protect her since she is so beautiful.
In the end, the children wake up as adults, the boy's Barbie dolls have turned into real life girls and the girl's action figure is a muscular handsome man.
They were trying to show the incongruence of such stereotypes and how it all depends on how people interpret these actions.
It made me think about when I was a boy and used to play with action figures... I loved taking their shirts off and looking at their muscular bodies!
