[anticlimacus]

http://www.npr.org/2013/03/25/175265720 ... mmentBlock

I saw this article on Ellen Degeneres and how she helped change the discussion on same sex relations and rolled my eyes. As a disclaimer I am and have been for years a staunch supporter of same sex relations and have no problem with homosexuality. But these kinds of articles that focus on celebrities and pop entertainment are a bit hyperbolic.

But it also occurred to me that shows like Ellen's show and Will and Grace, which are given all kinds of accolades for "changing the conversation", may have actually limited the conversation and tamed it. Instead of opening up the assumptions about gender and sexuality and the social power structures supporting them, these shows, I think, kept the conversation safe, in the sense that homosexuality was to be seen as the equivalent to heterosexual traditional monogamous relationships. The question of sexuality and power, of what it means to be a "man" and a "woman" and how sexuality is controlled never entered into mass media. Instead what we got was this watered down, it's OK to be gay--just so long as gay people act like normal heterosexuals. But sexuality must remain suppressed and the gender relations and the power structures that they create and the power structures in categories like "masculine" and "feminine" remain taboo discussions--or simply too radical and therefore illegitimate. At any rate, I think these shows did much less than they are given credit, and may have actually done harm.

[redcarpet]

So it's only 'normal' for straights to talk about sex and relationships,
in public or private.

But if it's ever mentioned or addressed by gay people you have a
problem with it. That's a incoherent argument.

E. G. is a gay icon and for the right reasons. People don't just need
to read about their icons but see them on TV which helps with
confidence. Even makes people like me out of the closet feel better.
Silence or suppression of public view or discussion is unhelpful to
say the least.

[anticlimacus]

So it's only 'normal' for straights to talk about sex and relationships,
in public or private.

Please point to where I said this or alluded to it...

But if it's ever mentioned or addressed by gay people you have a
problem with it.

And where I said or alluded to this...


In all honesty my post was not to bash Ellen. Perhaps her show was helpful. I'm just wondering if it in any way diluted the issue on homosexuality and sexuality in general. I think you misread what I wrote. But I absolutely did NOT say that its only normal for straights to talk about sex etc. --implicitly or explicitly--in my post (perhaps society views it this way, but that is certainly not my opinion or what I said). I suggested that the show limited the discussion of sexuality by keeping the conversation safe. Perhaps that's what needed to happen. But that's what I said--not that "if gays talk about sex I have a problem with it" etc.

[redcarpet]

Well, any discussion on TV is limited by time, above all things.

Unless you have a computer's memory you can't drone out facts
like a printer. Maybe one or two as a basis for a question.

The mere format of TV itself dilutes any issue discussed.
So it's a half-yes, but it's not her decision. It's the restrictions
that automatically apply. Radio talkback shows can be more
informative, outside the right wing shockjock rubbish of course.
Though radio is becoming more and more commercialised so we
can't point to it for long.