Gays and the Media
Apr. 11th, 2007 12:41 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sparkindarknessThe Sparky has been pondering this for some time as it is an issue that he and Beloved actually disagree on.
This is difficult and shows reality is broken. Here‘s the thing: since Sparky is naturally perfect in every way all reasonable will agree with him. At the same time, Sparky (being perfect in every way) would not possibly have an unreasonable partner for as many years that he and Beloved have been together. Therefore reality is broken (see, it‘s just that simple).
However, since reality doesn’t appear to be falling apart at the seams and there are no gaping black holes in my bedroom floor, I think I will look at this more closely.
Beloved's Point: gays in the media is nearly always a good thing
Beloved’s point: gays in the media is nearly always a good thing. It doesn’t even really matter how they are portrayed, what they are doing or what their personality is like - the point is that they are gay and they are visible. Every gay theme, every gay plot, every gay character, unless outright portrayed as pure evil (say, predatory paedophiles) is a good thing.
Why? Because a large part of gay people’s problem has been (and continues to be) invisibility. We’re not on most people’s radar, we’re not on most people’s mind, our issues are non-issues to the vast majority. We don’t stand out and most of our numbers are still in at least semi-hiding. And as long as people can turn a blind eye to us then all kinds of crap can and will rain down on us with most people NOT KNOWING or caring. That’s part of what Pride Parades are all about, reminding everyone that “hey, we actually exist!” Some of these programmes focus on gay issues really well (he always points to a Will & Grace episode where Will’s dad did a huge hurtful faux pas that my own dad had done to me some time before) and bring them to light to people who would never even consider them.
Secondly, and pretty majorly, one of the worst ever things about being gay and growing up being gay is the endless oppressive feeling that YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE! Everyone else in the world is straight and you are the freak (who is probably evil and wrong anyway - after all, whenever the other kids at school say something is bad they call it “gay”). It’s good that these poor kids can look somewhere and see gay people - even if it’s a less than perfect representation.
Thirdly - it’s a major step. Go back 30 years and the idea of homosexuals being openly in major media was just alien and insane. Sure, it’s not perfect, but by encouraging it now we open the door to more and more accurate portrayals. One step at a time.
Fourthly - even if it doesn’t show gays perfectly, the media DOES generally show us as non-threatening. That reduces the fear of the unknown, reduces the fear of the different and generally makes life safer for all of us.
They’re good points. Reasonable points and I have to agree with them... but not the conclusion.
My point: I’ll be happier when the media lets gay people be people first and interesting freaks second, if at all.
Because I find it very rare that I see gays on television. Not gay people. I see caricatures. Whenever you see a gay person on television I can tell they’re gay within 2 seconds of watching them. Why? Because they might as well wave big feather boas and have linked mars symbols dripping from every extremity. Most of them are uber-camp over the top caricatures like Graham Norton or Julian Clary (a brief aside. I understand and respect that there are some, even many gays who are just like that - and all credit and respect because they probably get more grief than I do. But the media holds them up as an OTT representation of all gays). Then we have teams of people who just try to prop up every empty stereotype there is (Queer Eye of the Straight Guy, Queer Mates for Straight Dates? Yeah, I’m rolling my eyes so much I’m actually getting friction burns).
These aren’t portrayals of gay people. They’re Freak Shows. They’re programmes so that straight people can point at gay people and say “lookit, gay freaks!” The whole CONCEPT of these shows revolves around the idea that gay men are so weird and freaky that straight people will tune in and watch. It’s like some kind of nature programme, all you need is David Attenborough in the background “and here we have the Greater Mincing Homo, see his over the top demonstrative gestures, his obsession with clothes etc etc.” It’s the same mentality that had bearded ladies on display. Seriously, I don’t see a difference between this and having an Asian presenter on a chat show whose schtik is having buck teeth and saying “Me rike you vewy much!”
It’s not emphasising gay issues or gaining us prominence because it just portrays us far too much as OTT silly stereotypes, something to be amused by but certainly not to be taken seriously. As to reassuring young gays that there are other gay people out there? Major media treats you like a modern day freak show. Yes, because THAT gives you a sense of security and belonging doesn’t it?
And even when you do get actual gay characters in a programme you know it - almost instantly. Because even if they aren’t a walking stereotype they’re still just walking avatars of teh gay. Everything they do, everything they say, every plot line involving them is about homosexuality or a gay issue or a gay stereotype. You just don’t see someone who is a doctor/policeman/general person in a TV programme who, BTW, is gay or a lesbian and has a boyfriend/girlfriend/civil partner at home but on the whole is a normal person. No, if someone is gay then that is the TOTALITY of who they are. They are a walking avatar of the gay their lives will be nothing but gayness usually in exaggerated proportion. Ok, this is better than the excessive stereotype shows but they still have the freak show factor - there is still an air of “there are gay people here, come look at the gay folks,” and the fact that the homosexuality of the characters is driven home so hard gives the feeling of “we have a gay, milk it for all we can!”
It does put gay issues ion focus more, which is a good thing, but it just emphasises the outsider, the “other,” in short the “freak.” These aren’t people - they’re gays and they have only a vague relationship with people - they have different issues, different lives and are just different.
And I think that’s the whole thing with gays in the media - it all focuses on how different gays, even exaggerating and emphasising difference. Gays are always “other” and often in a less than flattering way.
I’ll be happier when the media lets gay people be people first and interesting freaks second, if at all.
This is difficult and shows reality is broken. Here‘s the thing: since Sparky is naturally perfect in every way all reasonable will agree with him. At the same time, Sparky (being perfect in every way) would not possibly have an unreasonable partner for as many years that he and Beloved have been together. Therefore reality is broken (see, it‘s just that simple).
However, since reality doesn’t appear to be falling apart at the seams and there are no gaping black holes in my bedroom floor, I think I will look at this more closely.
Beloved's Point: gays in the media is nearly always a good thing
Beloved’s point: gays in the media is nearly always a good thing. It doesn’t even really matter how they are portrayed, what they are doing or what their personality is like - the point is that they are gay and they are visible. Every gay theme, every gay plot, every gay character, unless outright portrayed as pure evil (say, predatory paedophiles) is a good thing.
Why? Because a large part of gay people’s problem has been (and continues to be) invisibility. We’re not on most people’s radar, we’re not on most people’s mind, our issues are non-issues to the vast majority. We don’t stand out and most of our numbers are still in at least semi-hiding. And as long as people can turn a blind eye to us then all kinds of crap can and will rain down on us with most people NOT KNOWING or caring. That’s part of what Pride Parades are all about, reminding everyone that “hey, we actually exist!” Some of these programmes focus on gay issues really well (he always points to a Will & Grace episode where Will’s dad did a huge hurtful faux pas that my own dad had done to me some time before) and bring them to light to people who would never even consider them.
Secondly, and pretty majorly, one of the worst ever things about being gay and growing up being gay is the endless oppressive feeling that YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE! Everyone else in the world is straight and you are the freak (who is probably evil and wrong anyway - after all, whenever the other kids at school say something is bad they call it “gay”). It’s good that these poor kids can look somewhere and see gay people - even if it’s a less than perfect representation.
Thirdly - it’s a major step. Go back 30 years and the idea of homosexuals being openly in major media was just alien and insane. Sure, it’s not perfect, but by encouraging it now we open the door to more and more accurate portrayals. One step at a time.
Fourthly - even if it doesn’t show gays perfectly, the media DOES generally show us as non-threatening. That reduces the fear of the unknown, reduces the fear of the different and generally makes life safer for all of us.
They’re good points. Reasonable points and I have to agree with them... but not the conclusion.
My point: I’ll be happier when the media lets gay people be people first and interesting freaks second, if at all.
Because I find it very rare that I see gays on television. Not gay people. I see caricatures. Whenever you see a gay person on television I can tell they’re gay within 2 seconds of watching them. Why? Because they might as well wave big feather boas and have linked mars symbols dripping from every extremity. Most of them are uber-camp over the top caricatures like Graham Norton or Julian Clary (a brief aside. I understand and respect that there are some, even many gays who are just like that - and all credit and respect because they probably get more grief than I do. But the media holds them up as an OTT representation of all gays). Then we have teams of people who just try to prop up every empty stereotype there is (Queer Eye of the Straight Guy, Queer Mates for Straight Dates? Yeah, I’m rolling my eyes so much I’m actually getting friction burns).
These aren’t portrayals of gay people. They’re Freak Shows. They’re programmes so that straight people can point at gay people and say “lookit, gay freaks!” The whole CONCEPT of these shows revolves around the idea that gay men are so weird and freaky that straight people will tune in and watch. It’s like some kind of nature programme, all you need is David Attenborough in the background “and here we have the Greater Mincing Homo, see his over the top demonstrative gestures, his obsession with clothes etc etc.” It’s the same mentality that had bearded ladies on display. Seriously, I don’t see a difference between this and having an Asian presenter on a chat show whose schtik is having buck teeth and saying “Me rike you vewy much!”
It’s not emphasising gay issues or gaining us prominence because it just portrays us far too much as OTT silly stereotypes, something to be amused by but certainly not to be taken seriously. As to reassuring young gays that there are other gay people out there? Major media treats you like a modern day freak show. Yes, because THAT gives you a sense of security and belonging doesn’t it?
And even when you do get actual gay characters in a programme you know it - almost instantly. Because even if they aren’t a walking stereotype they’re still just walking avatars of teh gay. Everything they do, everything they say, every plot line involving them is about homosexuality or a gay issue or a gay stereotype. You just don’t see someone who is a doctor/policeman/general person in a TV programme who, BTW, is gay or a lesbian and has a boyfriend/girlfriend/civil partner at home but on the whole is a normal person. No, if someone is gay then that is the TOTALITY of who they are. They are a walking avatar of the gay their lives will be nothing but gayness usually in exaggerated proportion. Ok, this is better than the excessive stereotype shows but they still have the freak show factor - there is still an air of “there are gay people here, come look at the gay folks,” and the fact that the homosexuality of the characters is driven home so hard gives the feeling of “we have a gay, milk it for all we can!”
It does put gay issues ion focus more, which is a good thing, but it just emphasises the outsider, the “other,” in short the “freak.” These aren’t people - they’re gays and they have only a vague relationship with people - they have different issues, different lives and are just different.
And I think that’s the whole thing with gays in the media - it all focuses on how different gays, even exaggerating and emphasising difference. Gays are always “other” and often in a less than flattering way.
I’ll be happier when the media lets gay people be people first and interesting freaks second, if at all.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-11 02:36 am (UTC)#1: The Kids In The Hall (Canadian cultural icons. Very much worth watching), where Scott Thompson occasionally went for an extreme over the top super-swishy character, but, for the most part, simply was who he was, played who he played, and was openly gay, out, and everyone was perfectly happy about it.
#2: Carter from Spin City, a passable but otherwise unremarkable sitcom where he played a gay man. There were cracks about his love life (but no more so than about the other characters), there were episodes devoted to him being gay and that causing problems (but not noticeably more than other characters with their quirks) and, for the most part, he was simply accepted as just another character.
#3: Sir Ian McKellan. You know, Gandalf and Magneto, among others.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-12 01:18 pm (UTC)2) Carter actually i had issues with the few times I watchede the programme. Because ANY episode that actually involved him as anything more than a bit character seemed to either be about his sexuality or his race. That's part of my point - it may be well portrayed, but he's still a walking avatar of teh gay.
3) Different issue really, he's a gay ACTOR. The media isn't portraying him as gay, none of his characters (to my knowledge) are gay. He's just a stunningly good actor who happens to be gay
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-18 01:57 pm (UTC)I never saw it in the theater (a travesty that would never happen now), but I stumbled across it on some channel or another a couple of years later and watched, fascinated, and caught the whole thing when it replayed later that evening. It's not The Most Compelling Movie Evar, but it's solid.
And it's McKellan playing an overtly gay character. Yes, the movie's about his being gay and not just 'oh, he happens to be gay', but sometimes, that's the sort of movie that gay actors and gay directors make. I mean, Bill Condon also made Kinsey and Dreamgirls.