Does GAY media represent you?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 8:48 PM GMT
    I've often wondered, and may be making it the topic of my next documentary, how off-base gay media seems to be. I think the majority of gay-identified men are regular masculine guys you'd never know were gay, the silent majority. What do you think?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 9:30 PM GMT
    I agree, what I learned when I came out. Indeed, this is what helped me to come out in the first place. The realization that being gay wasn't the stereotype I thought it was.

    Gay men are as masculine as any other men. In fact, given the AIDS crisis, and the prejudice we face every day, I wonder that we aren't actually tougher inside than most straight men.

    They never have to face what we do; the world is handed to them. We have to fight for everything we have. No, on balance, and having lived on both sides of the fence, I think that gay men are far tougher than straight men.

    It's high time we realized that, and stopped hiding in the shadows. We are tougher, and braver, more resourceful, certainly more creative, and more resilient than any straight man I've ever met, including my 25 years in military uniform.

    All we need is some organization, and we will rule the world. But that's our fatal flaw, that we resist organization, everyone of us a cat who can't be herded. And so I fear we will remain marginalized, a minority without influence, dependent upon the political charity of others.
  • jgymnast733

    Posts: 1783

    Jul 17, 2009 9:43 PM GMT
    I can agree with that, I love my fem comrades but I do feel rather invisable in GAY media.....Guess we should have more dialogue with the editors to bring us out of the darkness...
    What do you guys think ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 10:36 PM GMT
    There was an episode of 30 Days that kinda touched on this subject. The guy was surprised when he met a masculine jock type gay guy that didn't have any hints of a stereotypical gay that is often portrayed on TV.

    Watch it, if you have some time..

    http://www.hulu.com/watch/5293/30-days-straight-man-in-a-gay-world

    A God-fearing 24-year-old conservative homophobe from red state America travels to San Francisco's Castro district to live in what is notoriously known as one of the gayest areas of the country.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 1:05 AM GMT
    wrestlervic saidI've often wondered, and may be making it the topic of my next documentary, how off-base gay media seems to be. I think the majority of gay-identified men are regular masculine guys you'd never know were gay, the silent majority. What do you think?
    Are you sure it is a majority? I saw something that said as much a 50% of gay people can be picked out of a crowd.

    I don't think it is relevant. If this majority that "you would never know" are not known outside the bedroom, then what difference does it make what the other guys do?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 1:11 AM GMT


    Nope, the gay media falls seriously short of the mark.
  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Jul 18, 2009 1:43 AM GMT
    No, I don't necessarily feel represented in what gay media I've seen in the US; yet, that's not the fault of that media, so much as it is my fault for not participating. I have no right to expect representation when I don't put myself publicly out there as another gay voice.

    To clarify though, I don't consider myself a "regular masculine guy." I am a man that has masculine features and feminine features (and non-gendered features).

    I guess I should ask how you define gay media. Are you including gay media such as The Advocate, or are you talking about gay representation in not-gay-targeted media?

    ***
    In Norway, the general LGBTQ magazine Blikk fits the bill I think many gay men on this site would like. It combines the comparatively desexualized tone of The Advocate with culture features (including pop stars, musicals, and actors) and interviews with regular Joe and Jane 'Mo (as well as celebrity interviews).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 1:47 AM GMT
    NO! A resounding noicon_exclaim.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 1:54 AM GMT
    gay media doesn't represent me.. but then, gay media is such a small sliver of who I am that you need to seriously ask your self.. can anything represent you?

    I'm more then gay ya know.. I'm a scuba diver, a painter, designer, gardener, I love talking philosophically, being around my mates AND SOOOOOOOOOO Much much much much more then that..

    how can the "gay media" possible represent me? it merely seeks to represent a small portion of who I am by making who I am blatant enough that you can not simply ignore it and believe it does not exist..

    do you think african american people got where they are by "fitting in" or did they blatantly put it all out there in a way that shoved it into peoples faces to make them feel uncomfortable and scared..

    Hell.. if it takes some flaming drag queen screaming from the top of a building.. I'll be right behind her keeping her from falling off that damned roof!

    Unless I see some really hot guy.. then I'll be taking her megaphone!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 1:54 AM GMT
    oh, I thot this was about Anderson Cooper.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 2:12 AM GMT
    I worked in gay media (magazine publishing) for five years, so I know how hard it can be to make any kind of publication or production representative of the entire gay community. You have all ages, genders, races, religions, etc. in one large, diverse group.

    Still, we made an effort. Not all gay media does. There's a definite emphasis on youth, fashion, and stereotypes. I don't see my life represented in our local gay media these days. I don't take it personally, but it would be nice, especially since I don't often see myself represented in any other kinds of media out there. Then again, in a province with 1,213,815 people, I'm the only gay climber and the only gay kayaker I know of (so far). I guess it would be asking a lot for the media to cater to an audience of one.
  • Delivis

    Posts: 2332

    Jul 18, 2009 2:29 AM GMT
    No, and i find anything like "gay media" or "black media" to be silly and offensive.
  • jlly_rnchr

    Posts: 1759

    Jul 18, 2009 2:55 AM GMT
    Can someone define "gay media"?

    If we're talking about gay roles in TV and movies, then it represents me a little. I enjoy musicals, award shows, I have a female best friend, and I have a lot of clothes. But I don't do drugs and go clubbing, I don't have a lisp, I don't go tanning, I don't talk with my hands and have a limp wrist, I played football and baseball, and I'm not nearly as clever and quippy as most gay characters.

    It's hit or miss, like any stereotype. It's an extremely exaggerated form of a lot of us.
  • styrgan

    Posts: 2017

    Jul 18, 2009 3:08 AM GMT
    xrichx saidThere was an episode of 30 Days that kinda touched on this subject. The guy was surprised when he met a masculine jock type gay guy that didn't have any hints of a stereotypical gay that is often portrayed on TV.


    It's worth pointing out that the subject of that documentary was never exposed to gay media outlets.

    Perhaps it's not the gay media that is "misrepresenting" us.

    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:11 AM GMT
    It is an epidemic!

    My answer to your great question is that the media misrepresents whatever they try to write about. And, it is epidemic.

    I learned early on in high school (as a features editor for the school news) that the way to make people read your writing is to get a good hook in the headline. Most of the time, this hook distorts the readers interpretation because it is usually over the top (as a first impression) and the rest of the article either continues the sensationalism or loses the readers interest when the writer comes clean (and then they don't read the rest of the facts, but remember the fluff).

    How many times have you caught a headline and then jumped to read it and then after reading a few lines decided..."oh...this story is not really what the headline is saying" (after reading the story--the anticlimax)

    So, we have overblown headlines that give an initial impression which distorts objective treatment and the issue at hand--even if the writer comes clean in the article, sometimes that initial impression remains, espeically if the reader falls off of reading the entire story.

    Fareed Zakaria wrote a book called The Post-American World, which isn't about this, but nonetheless a decent read. He said one thing in it that I remembered very clearly.

    I will summarize. Essentially, he says that media as a constant reporting mechanism is still relatively young in human culture and people have not yet learned how to respond to it. In other words, people feel a need to constantly react to news, but the truth is that most of the facts and ideas are pretty boring and unworthy of much attention. His assumption is true, if you ask me. If you notice, people are starting to become more aware. An example is evidenced by not only a like for "reality tv" but also the ability of those who watch it to "call bullshit" if in fact is is not really reality tv.

    So, my thought is that the people who believe that they are being misrepresented are actually those who know the real facts and are less apt to go along with something that is written as mind candy.

    In the end, people follow journalists who deliver pertinent info, and it would be my recommendation for anyone creating media-- Keep it real!

    The truth is, gay men are so vastly different that gay media cannot condense much into a single subject to represent all of them. Gay is still very much a sort of fringe, (not a mass audience) and will always be. As in any fringe, you get alot of variation.

    I find the concept of variation to be interesting as a topic of expolration in a documentary.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:12 AM GMT
    jlly_rnchr saidCan someone define "gay media"?


    I was defining it as media that directly target gay men, such as Out or The Advocate magazines. Otherwise, you'd be looking at how mainstream media portray gay men, which is a different issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:13 AM GMT
    Red_Vespa saidI agree, what I learned when I came out. Indeed, this is what helped me to come out in the first place. The realization that being gay wasn't the stereotype I thought it was.

    Gay men are as masculine as any other men. In fact, given the AIDS crisis, and the prejudice we face every day, I wonder that we aren't actually tougher inside than most straight men.

    They never have to face what we do; the world is handed to them. We have to fight for everything we have. No, on balance, and having lived on both sides of the fence, I think that gay men are far tougher than straight men.

    It's high time we realized that, and stopped hiding in the shadows. We are tougher, and braver, more resourceful, certainly more creative, and more resilient than any straight man I've ever met.

    All we need is some organization, and we will rule the world. But that's our fatal flaw, that we resist organization, everyone of us a cat who can't be herded. And so I fear we will remain marginalized, a minority without influence, dependent upon the political charity of others.


    I'm sorry, but I have to call you out on this. Although struggling internally with your sexuality is not an issue to be scoffed at, it pales in comparison to other things in the world that can affect people of both sexualities.

    The AIDs 'crisis,' as you so aptly put it, doesn't only affect individuals of a homosexual nature but affects our whole race. That is why the virus that initially attacks the system of affected people is called the Human immunodeficiency virus. Notice it has not been named Homosexual immunodeficiency virus.

    Personally, apart from the obviously closeted people, I hardly think that we "live in the shadows." While I agree that not everything is as I would like it to be within the world in regards to equality, I think that people have to realise that change comes slowly. You go as far as stating that we possess a "fatal flaw," like some tragic Shakespearean character (King Lear, anyone): the lack of unity. I think, although fruitless, the large and unified protests against Prop 8 showed a willingness to combine our strengths.

    this whole paragraph:
    "It's high time we realized that, and stopped hiding in the shadows. We are tougher, and braver, more resourceful, certainly more creative, and more resilient than any straight man I've ever met."

    Is complete and utter bullshit. You and I both know that both gay and straight, male and female, people possess these in different measures.

    And as far as ruling the world? Leave that to the cracked dictators please:
    126152_214811.jpg



  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Jul 18, 2009 3:13 AM GMT
    It seems to me that the gay media plays to the gay stereotypes that heterosexuals like to use against us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:19 AM GMT
    As to reply to the original post: No, I don't think there's such a thing as "GAY" (omg caps-lock111!!!oneleven) media. There's just media, duh.
    Prominent gay individuals within said media do tend to be the effeminate type, but I'm all for them, they're not afraid to express who they are to the world, and contrary to (realjock) popular opinion I find that so called "masculine" figures within the media are so full of hypocrisy it hurts to hear them speak
    *COUGH* BRIAN PADDICK*COUGH*

    brian_paddick.jpg

    What I think people now need to focus on is integrating seamlessly into the media. I have heard multiple people on this site complain that the "flamer" doesn't represent them, or their views, but always, its due to inaction on their own part.
    I'm guilty of it myself, and I think it may be part of an apathy born of a reluctance to out themselves without fear of blowing their "straight-acting" (lol) persona.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:21 AM GMT
    I wonder where "the gay media" gets all their money and power to represent all other gays?? icon_rolleyes.gif Maybe the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? Or Donald Trump? I mean it must cost a lot of money to print all those magazines, get all those models, and place their stuff out in public. Where oh where does all that money come from icon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:28 AM GMT
    ActiveAndFit saidI wonder where "the gay media" gets all their money and power to represent all other gays?? icon_rolleyes.gif Maybe the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? Or Donald Trump? I mean it must cost a lot of money to print all those magazines, get all those models, and place their stuff out in public. Where oh where does all that money come from icon_question.gif


    Good point, but the the Don can't afford it, I am thinking Geffen and the gay mafia LOL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:32 AM GMT
    ActiveAndFit saidI wonder where "the gay media" gets all their money and power to represent all other gays?? icon_rolleyes.gif Maybe the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? Or Donald Trump? I mean it must cost a lot of money to print all those magazines, get all those models, and place their stuff out in public. Where oh where does all that money come from icon_question.gif


    We got all our money through paid advertising, which is pretty much how most magazines make their money. Our distribution was free, but even newsstand magazines don't make that much from direct sales, and only a little more from subscriptions.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2009 3:43 AM GMT
    Maestoso said
    ActiveAndFit saidI wonder where "the gay media" gets all their money and power to represent all other gays?? icon_rolleyes.gif Maybe the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? Or Donald Trump? I mean it must cost a lot of money to print all those magazines, get all those models, and place their stuff out in public. Where oh where does all that money come from icon_question.gif


    We got all our money through paid advertising, which is pretty much how most magazines make their money. Our distribution was free, but even newsstand magazines don't make that much from direct sales, and only a little more from subscriptions.
    What kind of advertising? What kinds of things were selling? And who was buying them? icon_idea.gif
  • MikemikeMike

    Posts: 6932

    Jul 18, 2009 3:51 AM GMT
    It doesn't represent me or my b/f at all !!!!!!!!icon_idea.gif
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Jul 18, 2009 3:55 AM GMT
    The way I view gay media is any publication or media (i.e. video) that caters to a gay audience. IT DOES EXIST. Let's make a list...



    LOGO http://www.logoonline.com/

    The Advocate (online & print) http://www.advocate.com/

    OUT http://www.out.com/

    DNA http://www.dnamagazine.com.au/Default.asp?c=185246

    Sirius Satellite's OUTQ channel


    Holy shizz....there's a database for gay media: http://www.gaydata.com/


    Yep! There is a gay media after all.