Queer Eye for the Straight Guy = Homophobic?

[mondo joe]

Some people feel this show exploits and confirms every gay male stereotype.

Some people feel this show is pro-gay and increases acceptance of gays.

Can one or the other be true? Can they both be true? Can people sincerely disagree on these points without either being homophobic?

[Beelzebud]

1. It's just bad TV. I hate "reality" shows.

[mondo joe]

2. Don't worry - it's not real!

But is it homophobic or pro gay?

[Felix Mala]

45. I agree. It's somewhat harmful because gays are reduced to

asexual "elfs" who only do good deeds. The truth is, gay people are human and there are those with good and bad motives. (Although I think that Jai guy comes close to losing his patience with some of those denser straight guys.) When they have those wedding shows it reminds me of Maria's wedding in The Sound of Music where the nuns are locked out of the ceremony with big iron gates.

[bunkerbuster1]

3. It was fun for about a season

Does it reinforce especially negative stereotypes? Dunno. I see the fab five and I see distinct personalities, myself.

But I don't really watch it any more--sometimes my better half has it on, and I know what that means--there ain't nothin' else on to veg to.

[long_green]

68. You've got it right

I'm a straight guy and I thought the concept was brilliant and the execution brilliant as well. The problem it has now is that it is on American TV where any successful thing MUST be run into the ground. Every good series now gets to the "WON'T IT JUST DIE?" phase.

[indie_voter]

73. I agree, first season was fantastic

Then they became caricatures of themselves.

Why is it that American TV drives everything in to the ground? I know, I know, the golden goose, money. Still it is so sad to watch good shows decline.

The X-Files went on much longer than it should have, so did almost every other show on air.

[Alcibiades]

4. It's fabulous

Let's face it, straight guys need all the help we can get with the clothing. If gay guys cannot do fashion, then why are so many in the industry? Why are so many nattily attired? Go with your natural strengths.

Without my wife's help, I would still be wearing contrasting plaids together.

[AtomicKitten]

72. agreed

I still enjoy the show.

[bryant69]

5. They certainly coudl both be true

Everybodies experience with art or media is different. There's what the art brings to the table, and what the reader or viewer or listener brings to the table. So it's likely that some homophobic jerk watches the show, enjoys it because he laughs at them, while another with more positive views watches it and enjoys seeing well adjusted gay guys on tv. The text doesn't change, but reactions to it do.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[mondo joe]

16. Can the same be true of racism? Can a racist see a movie

and enjoy it because he thinks it mocks other races, and a more positive person can see it and just enjoy the same thing?

[bryant69]

24. Probably not

You mean a movie that mocks blacks, for example? A racist person would enjoy htat mockery; a non-racist might enjoy it despite that mockery.

does this go back to King Kong?

Bryant

[mondo joe]

25. But how can it not be true of both? If the difference is the

perspective of the viewer, why wouldn't it apply to race as well as sexual orientation?

[ultraist]

34. Yes, it could apply to either and it could be both

Take the early portrayals of Blacks in television for instance. Back when Blacks rarely were allowed acting jobs. The characters were often stereotypes, Sanford and Son, Good Times, etc. but the exposure did have a positive effect. Think about Richard Pryor for example.

I think this is parallel to what we are seeing with Gays on television. Gays were not shown AT ALL on tv until recent years, (Ellen DeGeneres' coming out, for instance). The exposure has a positive effect but the stereotypes perpetuate negative attitudes.

A show, work of art, movie, story, etc can send out more than one message and/or conflicting messages. It's not an either or situation in all cases.

As far as depicting Blacks negatively in the media now, we are well beyond the point that this should be continuing. Depicting most Black males as rapists, gang members or brutes in general, is harmful.

[mondo joe]

37. Wait, are you saying the Queer Eye guys are a negative

stereotype?

Please clarify - thanks!

[ultraist]

41. No, I didn't mention that show specifically

I haven't ever watched it. I said that stereotypes in general can be harmful but actually showing Gays can have a positive effect. Dismissing their existance in our society by never showing any Gay characters is more damaging than SOME of the stereotypical characters.

The ideal of course, would be to show a more honest depiction of Gays and give them a fair billing.

There was a day when Blacks were allowed to appear ONLY if they painted their faces white. From Minstrels to movie stars, it's a long progression.

[mondo joe]

42. But some of those sterotypes are accurate. The guys on

Queer Eye are positive brutes compared to a LOT Of gay guys I've known in my life.

They're also not accurate of some gays.

But I don't see how a show can be charged with giving a global representation. Or how a character can.

[bryant69]

56. I guess the difference is using the qualifier of racism

If you stipulate a joke as racist; well we all know the right answer to that. Racism is bad; telling a racist joke is bad.

If we could say a joke that one person takes as racist and another person does not as see as racist; well then it could be both. But the truth is that we are usually uncomfortable with that answer. If anybody sees a joke or a situation as racist; it is racist, and anybody who enjoyed it has at last the potential for racism.

Bryant

[mondo joe]

57. But the thing we're MORE uncomfortable with, IMO, is

who is telling the joke.

If Chris Rock tells a racial joke and a white guy tells the exact same joke, one will not be considered racist but the other will. And id you laugh at Rock's telling AND the other guy's, then you can still be considered racist.

Similarly, I've talked with gay men about things they would find very funny if watching with other gay men, but when they see the same thing with a bunch of straight men they instead feel awkward and derided.

So I think it's much more complicated than whether a joke, tv show or whatever is RACIST or HOMOPHOBIC in and of itself.

[bryant69]

58. I would certainly agree with that - context is everything

But I would also say that we carry some of our own context with us.

Bryant

[mondo joe]

59. Sure - but again, if we turn to the example of Queer Eye, some

people call it an offensive minstrel show. Others see it as a real promotion of acceptence.

Do we have to decide that one side is right and one is wrong? I think we can settle on saying some people see one thing, and some another.

[AllegroRondo]

48. Blazing Saddles did just that

racists saw it, and said "wow, they're using the N word! We're right!"

the rest of us saw it, and realized how stupid racism was.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

6. Good question!

I think they can both be true, depending on your viewpoint. I, non-gay female, enjoy the show, and the guys are so likeable that I think it would increase acceptance of gays. On the other hand, I have a gay male friend who finds the show disgusting because he says it confirms gay male stereotypes.

[xultar]

7. I know lots of Gays who love the show. It's like can't people laugh @

themselves for once.

It's like black folk being over sensitive on things. I think we as liberals can't be so uptight. Everything isn't a battle.
It's just a show. It's not like those gay men came off the moon and that they speak for all gays.

Stereotypes are funny because they are. Like LaQuicha @ the airport working for TSA, the white guy nerd, the Beaner(Carlos Mencia), David Chapelle and his whole sthicht on black characters keepin it real, etc.

Can't we just all laugh for once?

[ultraist]

39. Comical stereotypes, yes.

I enjoy humorous exaggerations and stereotypes but what about the more harsh examples, such as showing all Black women as living in the ghetto, acting Jerry Springer like, living off of welfare, and having five kids by five different dads? Is promoting the "welfare queen" stereotype something to just laugh at? Or does promoting this myth do damage?

Or, when the large majority of Black males are shown as violent rapists or murderers. Should that be taken lightly too?

[xultar]

61. Should black males being portrayed as violent offenders be taken

lightly my instinct is to say know but...we do laugh @ it because we consider it the ignorance of whitey.
IT bugs me but when I do see it it makes me laugh cuz it is so wrong. I think people are seeing through that crap....
Ever go to a movie in a predominately black area...we can instantly pick out the negro that is gonna die @ the beginning
of the movie. We know the crazed sistah whore with 80 kids etc.

So what is funny is that while it is disturbing it only gives it power when you don't find humor in it.
I don't take it seriously because I know it ain't true.
If I did, I'd never be able to go to a movie or watch teev.

[ultraist]

62. Ah yes, for you

Because you have a keen sense of awareness but for someone who is not as educated about racism, it may well feed their demented attitudes, IMO. Like the "looters" of NOLA.

As to your point of not giving it power, I've heard this about the use of the word 'nigga' in that Blacks took charge of the use of that word to disempower whites' use of it (I guess Richard Pryor was one of the first mainstream people to do so). When I hear 'nigga' in songs, by Black artists, it seems to be a slap in the face to whites who want to use that word as a weapon. Kind of judo thing---redirecting someone's force to use it against them, disempowering them by taking their weapon.

Thanks for the insightful and honest response.

[xultar]

64. ...

[ultraist]

65. ...

:toast:

[Swede]

8. A copycat thread in GD?

What's next?

[ultraist]

46. It's a legit topic

I don't get the feeling the intent is to merely mock another thread. I get the feeling the OP is genuinely stirring up a dialog about this issue.

I think it's a positive to open up this discussion.

[Lerkfish]

9. I think its in the eye of the beholder..

if you are uncomfortable with gay people, this will feed into that.
If you're accepting, this will support that.

I've watched it a few times, and I find it entertaining. I DO feel a couple of the guys enjoy being a bit over the top flamboyant in front of the client straight guy, almost seeing how far they can go before making him uncomfortable, but that doesn't bother me as someone watching it.

[RagingInMiami]

10. It is stereotypical

I'm not gay and I know gay men who are worse cooks than me and dress worse than me.

I also know gay men who are slobs and leave everything strewn around.

[Avalux]

11. It's just a TV show.

And incidentally, I know someone who works behind the scenes on the show - she has a blast and says all the guys are really nice. That's about all I want to think about it. :hi:

[SmokingJacket]

12. I think they're kind of both true.

They *do* exploit gay stereotypes.

However... I believe the characters are likeable and the show does help make gay people seem like an acceptable part of life. So it creates a certain kind of problem (making people think that gays are all a specific way) while helping solve another (showing people that gays can be likeable and interesting).

Ultimately, it's just TV, and nothing will change for real until laws are changed.

[LiberalArkie]

13. Homophobic

They show that gays are good cooks, good at dressing, good at decorating. It shows that the straights are good at being a good down to earth guy. I DON'T LIKE BEING CALLED QUEER. How about a show "niggers" show "white people" how to work in the garden? I wonder how that would sell. Notice derogatory names and non-derogatory names.

[hfojvt]

63. those are pretty positive stereotypes aren't they?

Queer is a negative label, but not so much as the N-word. When gays came out of the closet and into the streets in the 1970s and 1980s, one of their chants was "we're here, we're queer" so not everyone is riled by it.

The straights are good at being down to earth guys, but apparently with the FF's help they are more attractive/successful. It's not like the show features five straight guys showing a gay how to be a "real" man. That would be homophobic.

[MsKandice01]

14. I love the show..

The guys are so likeable and they seriously crack me up. I watch it for pure entertainment value. The "gay" thing rarely even crosses my mind. Chappelle's Show was great even though it perpetuated every stereotype about Black people known to man. It's okay to laugh at yourself every once in a while. Lord knows we need as much laughter as we can get these days.

[The_Casual_Observer]

15. That program is about people helping other people

It leaves me with a good feeling whenever I see it, it is all positive.

[iconoclastNYC]

17. Boring and offensive

It seems like as the series goes on they are acting more and more "over the top", probably because Carson has the highest profile.

The only one I really like is Ted because he's most like the gays I know.

[MsKandice01]

18. Carson is definitely more over-the-top than the others...

[AnnieBW]

19. Only Reality TV I Watch

Some shows are better than others. Especially when the straight guy is really pathetic, or a character himself. Carson is over the top, but the rest of the guys are cool. My husband is actually learning to dress a little better because of it.

Yes, it exploits gay stereotypes. But, let's face it, TV in general (especially reality TV) exploits stereotypes - be it Fundamentalist, gay, alternative, etc. Everybody wants to see the freak show.

[QC]

20. It's a minstrel show. n/t

[mondo joe]

21. What I'm wondering is how it can be a minstrel show AND

be great and positive at the same time.

Do you think there's any chance that the show itself is neither minstrel nor positive, and those things are just how we see it?

[QC]

28. Well, since you asked...

I don't think the show is the most offensive thing on earth or doing serious harm or anything, but...

It does play to the safest gay stereotype--the screaming mary. Even the worst homophobes are generally comfortable with this one, because it's not threatening. You can always spot those people, right? They really stand out, and I (the 'phobe) am not like that at all. Plus, they're fun to laugh at!

If you really want to make people--even ostensibly cool straights--uncomfortable, show them a homo who does not fit the stereotype, one who resembles a guy they were in the Army with, or played football with, their dad, etc. That's what really worries folks.

Gore Vidal makes a similar argument in one of his best essays, "Pink Triangle and Yellow Star." He says that no one feels particularly threatened by Truman Capote, but if you point out that nine of the first ten caesars, who were a pretty tough bunch, liked to do it with guys, then that is a whole other thing, and not something many people particularly want to deal with.

That's why I think that Brokeback Mountain is going to piss off the fundies and phobes a lot more than such lighthearted minstrelsy as Queer Eye.

[mondo joe]

32. Thanks, but I still don't think it answers my question. :-(

And I don't know why the goal would be to make straights uncomfortable. :-(

But I do wonder, if a show can be simultaneously minstrel AND encouraging acceptance, doesn't its status have more to do with WHO is watching than WHAT they are watching?

Don't we imbue the show with our own issues, rather than the reverse???

[QC]

38. How about this?

In the larger scheme of things, I would say that the show is insubstantial, commercial fluff that has no great impact or meaning at all. In five years no one will remember it, except for the Fab Four themselves.

Rather than "making people uncomfortable," maybe I should say, "challenging assumptions." That's always a good thing to do, and this show, rather than challenge common assumptions, simply validates them.

And sure, whenever we approach any show, or movie, or text, or whatever, we bring our own background and experiences to bear on it. Context is important, too, of course. Queer Eye would have been brave, groundbreaking show in, maybe, 1972, but now it's just safe and obvious.

[mondo joe]

40. Thanks QC. n/t

[XemaSab]

47. I think the nature of the show

selects for stereotyped "screaming mary" gay guys.

There are gay guys who are really into fashion and food, and there are gays who aren't, and I strongly suspect that the former group are more likely to play up stereotypes than the latter group.

[Shakespeare]

52. Nah, I disagree (a littlle) - the range of personalities is broad.

Ted and Kyan, especially, don't come off as a "screaming mary" type. I think it shows that gay people come in all varieties, just as heterosexuals do. They may be effeminate, they may not. And they have a devilishly good time playing on the paranoia of homophobes, which is a kick to watch--it has a kind of Archie Bunker effect by making the straight guys look like complete boobs for being ignorant and uptight.

[AntiCoup2K4]

22. They aren't really gay.... they're CRAB PEOPLE!!

[DarkTirade]

23. It's both

it's good in the sense that it shows homosexuality in the open, but it only shows the gay stereotype, which isn't good.
Nobody said everything has to be in black and white.
Unless you get a cheap TV from a thrift store, then you don't have a choice. :)

[alcibiades_mystery]

27. Thanks you...of course it is both

The will to either celebrate or condemn is childish. Most shit is more complicated than all that.

[emulatorloo]

26. Who cares - just get Thom Filicia to come decorate my house for free

because that man is a genuis.

And when I'm feeling down, a peptalk from Kyan would really help out. . .

[mondo joe]

35. I could turn straight for that.

It's a high price to pay, but I really want my whole house redone in free Crate & Barrel.

[Missy Vixen]

49. When Thom's done

please send him to our house. We're in dire need of some decorating. You're right, he's a genius. If we're really lucky, maybe Ted will show up and cook dinner!

Julie

[Dark]

29. I think it increases acceptance. n/t

[pointblank]

30. Anyone see the South Park

where the kids find out that the "Fab 5" are not gay?

South Park, the ultmate in "reality TV"...telling it how it is.

(I am not saying that the Fab 5 are not gay BTW, only that SP is funny as shit because most of the time they are right on.)

[kittenwithmittens]

71. Was that the same one

where metrosexuality swept South Park?

"You guys look like fags."

"Thanks!"

[Bridget Burke]

31. The show is NOT homophobic.

In fact, it discourages fear & hatred of homosexuals.

Of course, many gays are not like the guys on the show. Many het guys are not slobs, either. That's entertainment!

[yurbud]

33. Put this up as a poll

[yurbud]

36. used to live in Hollywood, now the Westside of LA, know several gays

There are really guys like that and they are a pretty good cross section.

The flamer

The pretty boy who is mildly effeminate

The straight acting guy

This show probably goes a ways toward reducing the paranoia of the corn fed states. It's hard to hate and fear someone who reminds you of characters on a TV show you like.

[ultraist]

43. Negative stereotyping the in the media has been well studied

Many universities like NYU, Yale, & Harvard offer course work on this and numerous scholars have explored the issue. The idea that negative stereotypes in the media do inflict damage on our society and influence attitudes, sometimes leading to social violence is not a fantasy trip.

There is a lot of info out there on this subject for the taking:
http://www.yale.edu/ypq/articles/oct99/oct99b.html

Mass media have played and will continue to play a crucial role in the way white Americans perceive African-Americans. As a result of the overwhelming media focus on crime, drug use, gang violence, and other forms of anti-social behavior among African-Americans, the media have fostered a distorted and pernicious public perception of African-Americans. 1

The history of African-Americans is a centuries old struggle against oppression and discrimination. The media have played a key role in perpetuating the effects of this historical oppression and in contributing to African-Americans' continuing status as second-class citizens. As a result, white America has suffered from a deep uncertainty as to who African-Americans really are. Despite this racial divide, something indisputably American about African-Americans has raised doubts about the white man's value system. Indeed, it has also aroused the troubling suspicion that whatever else the true American is, he is also somehow black. 2



http://www.usc.edu/isd/archives/ethnicstudies/media_stereotypes.html

i]For many years the entertainment industry has been heavily criticized, particularly by groups representing various minorities, for the way ethnic groups have been portrayed in films and television programs. Although considerable progress has been made in the fight against unfair and unflattering portrayals based on false information, nevertheless the mass media is often still guilty of insensitivity in this area -- witness the continuing controversy over the portrayal of Black families in situation comedies.

[xchrom]

44. personally i think more straight guys are becoming more like gay guys that

in the past have been viewed as stereotypes.

and that is the source of viewing the show in a negative light.

fear of change and modernity.

[XemaSab]

50. metrosexuals

n/t

[xchrom]

55. yeah that' s our current term for it.

but whatever our phrases -- the distinctions are/will turn more to what we used to think of as gay.

and i think we will see more out bi-sexual men.

[ultraist]

51. GLAAD's take

http://www.glaad.org/eye/ontv/overview.php

AUGUST 29, 2005 - After a promising network pilot season that saw many new shows developed with gay and lesbian characters, the actual number of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) representations on the six major broadcast networks will comprise less than 2% of all characters on the networks' 2005-06 schedule, according to an analysis conducted by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD).


Crumbs
GLAAD counts only 16 "series regular" and recurring gay, lesbian and bisexual roles (there continue to be no transgender characters) scheduled to appear on 14 different scripted programs (out of 110 total) on the broadcast networks. While this number is up from the 11 characters counted last season, the lack of representation is still cause for concern. "Out of 710 'series regulars' that will appear this season on the broadcast networks, gay, lesbian and bisexual characters make up less than 2%," says GLAAD Entertainment Media Director Damon Romine. "This is a shocking misrepresentation of reality and of the audience watching these programs."

Television is a reflection of society, but the broadcast networks are not doing enough to fairly represent the diversity of their audience. We are still too often portrayed as stereotyped caricatures, and the reality of our lives and relationships is largely ignored."

[BigBearJohn]

53. It shows gays coming to rescue of straights and puts gays in a good light

Plus, it gets "straight" people used to seeing gays...
and see straights happily getting along with openly
gay men. BRAVO for BRAVO!

[XemaSab]

54. I think they can both be true

The whole premise of the show is based on a stereotype: that gays know about fashion and decorating and straights don't.

Unfortunately, many stereotypes are grounded in some truth, and the truth here is that we live in a society that discourages straight men from learning about these things. In some tribes in Africa, the men paint their faces and act like a bunch of middle school girls, preening and looking in the mirror. It's totally cultural that straight men in America are discouraged from fiber arts and reading home decorating magazines. Gay men are already marginalized, and I'm sure there's some sort of social acceptance for gay men in these fields.

So I think it reinforces a stereotype that is grounded in truth.

[rd_kent]

60. Who cares?

EOM

[AlCzervik]

66. they are more than welcome to come to my house and make it and me over

[sui generis]

67. unfortunately

(for the so-called stereotype) many of us really are that way. It IS a one sided presentation, but it's about design and style, fer cryin' out loud.

What are we gonna hire a bunch of soldiers and firemen to decorate people's apartments? I'm sure just as soon as we have a special about gays in the military or police force or firemen or EMT's or emergency rooms we'll have characters that support the premise of those shows.

Not that they wouldn't have fabulous fashion sense themselves. Speaking for myself, I could use skilled interior design - I personally didn't get that in my gay gene prize package.

[kittenwithmittens]

69. I think the fab five are fairly representative

of the range, though not completely inclusive. You have the annoyingly flambouyant and lecherous blonde guy (I don't remember their names), and the more conservative acting chef. The other three fall into a range somewhere between.

The show is getting old, but I still laugh at the blonde guy at the end of the show, when they do their tips.

"Take a wicker basket, turn it upside down, put some glass on it, and you have a stylish coffee table!"

[NNadir]

70. I like the show. It's a fantasy show, to be sure, but it's people

helping one another. It's about the only "entertainment" show on TV that I will watch.

It's a materialistic show, but it's all in good fun. It's not, at least, a show about people blowing one another away. It's not one of those awful offal propaganda news shows.

I have known gay people of all types, those who fit the gay stereotype and those who don't. However much mugging these guys do, they come across as really nice guys with ethical values, and even if they are only all pretending, I like the conceit.