Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Eww, kissing boys, yucky!

Today was supposed to be "A Day Without Gay" - some activists pushed for gay people to stay home from work, and not buy anything for 24 hours. Alas, I'm not on board with that initiative - it seems ill-timed, and well, just a little odd as a response to Prop 8; I'd be much more up for "Paint a Swastika on a Mormon Temple" or "Break a Stained Glass Window at the Pedophile Club" day. But I will post a little snippet from the David Letterman Show that bugged me when I saw it. I don't think of Letterman as particularly homophobic, but really, what is with this long harangue about how icky it is to kiss a guy? James Franco (plugging his latest, Milk, which I'll write about soon) handles his host's stupidity well, and the exchange ends on a cute note, but the whole sequence reminded me yet again of what a friend of mine calls "post-homophobic homophobia," i.e., the restatement of bigotry in an ironic disguise. Why does this go on? Why is it just about every other skit on Saturday Night Live, for instance, features some weird gay character in leather, or guys kissing guys? Why must every TV show still bow before the anxieties of Midwest male twenty-somethings? (Somehow, for instance, I doubt Letterman was as horrified by Britney kissing Madonna.) Sigh. I'm just saying.


  1. Was there a discernable economic impact to Day without a Gay? Even if one argues that it was a sensible thing to do, should the boycott apply to states like Massachusetts and Connecticut (or, for that matter, Canada, Spain and the Netherlands) since they all recognize marriage equality.

  2. I'm not sure how much impact it had - my guess is, not much; of course, the smallness of a minority only emphasizes the need for its civil rights to be protected against the prejudices of the majority. As you point out, in CT and MA, where our rights ARE protected, probably almost no one participated. I got the emails anyway, though.