Fuchsia Focus: a queer critique of the media

commodification of oppression

2008-04-13T17:44:00.000-07:00

I don't know that I even have the words to express my utter disgust at this new Hanes add (which interestingly enough will not be appearing in the states) and it's blatend commodification of oppression. This add along with it's sidekicks one saying nigger, and the other saying paki) make the claim that the world puts enough labels on people, your underwear shouldn't thus encouraging consumers to purchase tagless underwear.

I never thought I would see the day that gender complexity would be celebrated with this degree of respect by the mainstream media

2008-04-03T17:22:00.000-07:00

photo taken from Oprah.com

As many of you know a lot of the media studies research that I have done has revolved around the representation of transgender bodies and lives on the Oprah show, it is for that reason along with a host of others that I eagerly awaited Thomas Beatie's appearance on her show this afternoon. It is uncommon for me to fall in love with something that I have seen in the media, particularly when it comes to transgender lives, but without a doubt he was incredible. I was practically in tears as I watched this episode (yes I am that big of a media nerd) for the life of me I never thought that I would witness mainstream media cover a story of this complexity, and handle it with the respect that they have. Here is a man who is proudly talking about his body, history, and family and in doing so is shattering the narrow and restrictive transgender narrative which all too frequently is the only option the media provides for the telling of gender diverse lives.

On Oprah Beatie responded thoughtfully and strongly about why he and his wife made the decisions they did both in regards to getting pregnant, but with coming forward. He spoke about wanting ot be the one to tell their story, to present it to the media before someone else did, and I have to say even as someone who works with and critiques queer media they couldn't have done it any better. There was such strength in their story as they spoke of the pain of trying to get doctors too bogged down by their own transphobia to work with them, and they spoke candidly at their shock about the way in which they saythe national transgender movement has shut them out.

As a transgender person who lived as an FTM for a number of years before quitting T I believe that I have somewhat of an understandings of the alienation that they are feeling and the fear that they must have had with going forward with the media. I know what it feels like to be shut out of communities which claim to be your family, and when I went off T and began living as a queer femme I watched many of my transgender brothers and sisters walk away from me. This is a media moment to be celebrated, for arguably the first time the mainstream American public is being asked to grapple with the complexity of gender. For the first time the mainstream media is in a very public way showing the complexity and beauty of our community and we are not dumbing down our lives, identities, bodies, or experiences in order to fit into a prescribed idea of what a transgender person should be.

I have been watching a lot of media coverage of Thomas prior to today's Oprah and People exclusives and to be honest I have been thrilled with the response from audiences. Yes there have been the transphobic people who have said extremely hurtful things, including late night TV host David Letterman (whose actions were deplorable) however the majority of people have interfaced with this situation quite well. I have seen very few pronoun blunders, and I have seen people truly embracing this queerness that they never knew existed in the world.

It is true that he is not the first man to do this, Patrick Califia and Matt Black are perhaps the other most well known couple to have done this, and I personally know a number of people who either have gone off T to get pregnant, or who have planned on it, however this is without a doubt the most publicized case to date. The American public, and really the world has been handed an honest look at the queerness of our community, and they are not shying away, sometimes (and as a former queer separatist I never thought I'd be the one to say this) but i think we don't give straight folks enough credit. I may be proved wrong, but at this point they are rising to the occasion, and truly getting a look at what the possibilities of gender.

The search for the gay gene is killing our culture

2008-03-30T07:49:00.000-07:00

In recent days the anything but new "scientific research" regarding the so called gay gene has been making a lot of news, including garnering a great deal of attention in mainstream press, including this coverage on ABC http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=4529843&page=1 which discusses this molecular genetic study of sexual orientation http://www.gaybros.com/

Research into discovering the gay gene seems to run in cycles in terms of the frequency with which it gets mainstream attention. I remember doing research for my senior's honors english class in high school about weather or not searching for the gay gene was ethical, and what sort of impacts it would have on the community. Since then, i've seen the issue crop up a handful of times every few years as new "discoveries" are made. I won't even go into the issues that I have with them searching for this, or why i feel it's damaging for some in the community to seek validation of themselves through it' discovery (if in it does actually exist) i also am a very strong believer in the ideology behind queer by choice, and would not find it powerful or validating to have some scientist tel me that i had no control over who i am.

However there is no doubt in my mind that if at some point in the future they are able to discover "the gay gene" which htey have been looking for for quite some time but seems to make the news every so often i believe that #1 the first place this will go will be a search for a "cure" and #2 parents will have the ability to "determine" their child's sexual orientation before birth---which hypothetically is going to put pro-life conservative christian nutjobs in a hillarious position - do they defend the "life" of the unborn if it's a queer fetus?

this is an issue that i feel really passionate about, we need to stop groveling to mainstream heterosexual society to be seen as "normal" and "just like them" that will never get us anywhere other than theoretically genetically eliminated. queerness shouldn't be something that we need to feel horrific about unless we can say "it's not my fault, it's just my genes" which is complete bullshit.

It's interesting to watch the gay community clammer for approval, practically salivating over the idea that the gay gene could be found, and that their lives, families, and desires could somehow be excused by some doctor in a white lab coat. I understand the argument that this could grant additional rights, could prove that we can't help who we are attracted to, but is that really what we want? From a media perspective the fact that this is being discussed in a positive way is interesting, it's very exciting to have parents of a teenaged gay boy say that they love their son (although I do take issue with them saying they *knew* he was gay from the time he was a toddler) and wouldn't have changed his sexual orientation if they could.

That said, by showing loving and rational parents this mediated portrayal of the issue systematically devalues and dismisses the very real concerns of queer folks who know that their families of origin would have behaved differently. Weather we like it or not there are countless people around the world who, if given the choice would either abort a queer fetus, or would choose to undergo medical care in order to genetically alter that fetus into being straight. The only opposition to this research shown in the news segment was a fundamentalist christian psychologist who took issue with the research findings, and believes that gayness is not a result of genetics. One is left wondering where the voices of queer activists were?

Are we as a community willing to stand by while they debate eugenics? Are we willing to beg to be seen as normal simply so that they can kill our culture?

Labor of Love

2008-03-21T06:23:00.000-07:00

http://advocate.com/issue_story.asp?id=52664&page=1

I'm so used to having huge complaints about the ways in which queer lives and bodies, and especially gender nonconforming bodies are presented in the media that I will admit that i am not only shocked but thrilled to say that I am highly impressed with the way in which The Advocate (of all places) covered the story of Thomas Beatie a transman in Oregon who is currently preagnent with he and his wife's first child.

I am thrilled to see a media outlet which is so commonly conservative in what aspects of the queer community it chooses to cover publish (even if only online) an op-ed which explores the complexities of queered bodies, and addresses the horrific medical experiences which so many who defy the "normal" trans-narrative are unfortuinatly subjected to in our current, highly broken, queer-phobic medical industry.

I wish all the best to Thomas and his wife Nancy as they await the birth of their daughter, and would like to encourage other media outlets to look beyond conservative and traditional queer lives and bodies when they write about our community.

Luke and Noah

2008-03-07T15:58:00.000-08:00

I'm the first to admit that despite being a media junkie i'm not the most knowledgeable when it comes to the world of soap operas. However they have caught my attention this week, specifically the current situation with the As the World Turns characters Luke and Noah. Plots around the gay couple have angered fans, but not for the reasons that you might think. Fans are upset because the show has not featured a kiss in months. The exact time in days, hours, minutes, and seconds can be found on a fan site which is running a countdown clock, demanding that he network http://www.lukeandnoahfans.com/ feature a kiss between the two men.

Now i'm all for queer kissing in the media, but i'll admit that even i am shocked by the amount of media attention these fans have been receiving. i also can't help but laugh a little bit because it seems to me in terms of mediated representation of the community we probably have a lot more important things to be concerned about than weather a fictional couple has kissed on screen recently. That said, given that soaps are known for their steamy scenes the noticeable lack of physical intimacy with this gay couple feeds into a cultural dialogue which desexualizes queer folk, at times to avoid controversy.

"spanked children also are more likely to... engage in masochistic sex, including arousal by spanking, later in life"

2008-02-28T13:05:00.000-08:00

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,333551,00.html

Today Fox news decided to report on a study about how according to the research done by the folks at the Family Research Laboratory, children who are spanked are considerably more likely to as adults engage in "risky sexual behavior" what sexual behavior is that? oh right, masochistic sex which according to Fox news is a sexual "problem" give me a break. This is the sort of news coverage which further stigmatizes members queers and leather folks, and roots the consenting acts of adults to disorders, and medicalizing our bodies and desires.

Do we love kids more when they are dead?

2008-02-28T09:58:00.000-08:00

photograph taken from the San Francisco Chronicle article about the memorial for Lawrence King at the SF LGBTQ community center http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/20/BAQBV5EBJ.DTL

There has news within the community, and thankfully a bit within mainstream press about the murder of the queer student in Oxnard California who was shot in the back of the head while sitting in a Junior High Computer lab. The shooting was horrific, and for sure a wakeup call to our community. it is however interesting to note the relative lack of media coverage say compared to the college shooting at the university in Illinois just days later. As a nation it is clear that we do not value the lives of queer people, especially youth. i think that it is especially interesting to note that Lawrence King (the student who was murdered) was part of the foster care system, and was living in a shelter for abused children.

Homelessness amongst queer youth has reached epidemic proportions, and as a whole the community does very little about it. I'm editing an anthology from Homofactus Press which will be out early 2009 titled "Kicked Out" and is bringing together the stories of current and former LGBTQ youth who left home as a result of their sexuality and/or gender identity. the news of this young queers death thus touched me very deeply, and it has also made me angry. I think that it is wonderful that queer groups are having vigils across the country, and that gay press is buzzing with news of this, i've even heard this student referenced as the "new matthew shepard" as people from the trans community, and gay community alike rushing to hold Lawrence up as martyr for their cause. I'm left wondering, when are we as a community going to expend as much attention on living and breathing homeless youth as we do on the ones who die? Why isn't that being talked about? I guess it's easier to have a vigil.

Rural Faggot

2008-02-09T13:44:00.000-08:00

A portion of the song can be listened to online here:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.indigogirls.com/media/images/discographyandlyrics/otherrecordings/250prom.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.indigogirls.com/discographyandlyrics/otherrecordings/prom.html&h=250&w=250&sz=43&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=K9TTYct1ZoNUQM:&tbnh=111&tbnw=111&prev=/images%3Fq%3Damy%2Bray%2Brural%2Bfaggot%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den-us%26sa%3DN

There are times in life when you hear a song and are instantly captivated, because it speaks to a part of your heart and soul, that's the way I instantly felt about Amy Ray's Rural Faggot which is included on her solo album "Prom." The song which describes the reality of living in a rural area and watching the coming of age of young gay men within the horrors of extreme homophobia speaks to me on many levels, most literally it reminds me of my own experiences of high school in semi-rural Oregon, and what it meant to be a dyke, and even more specifically what it meant for my gay male friends. Listening to this song takes me back to all those scary, dangerous, and haunting memories of a place, where gay bashing is seen as fun, and a game, but it takes me somewhere beautiful. There is something about the country that is truly captivating, and this song brings me back to that place and all the things I loved about it despite the danger and hate. Rural Faggot is a powerful mediated text because of the way it embodies the coming of age narratives of a young rural gay man, a story rarely told within the media which so frequently shapes queerness as a urban phenomenon.

Lyrics:
AMY RAY
Rural Faggot

You ride your John Deere down to the pond
Just to watch me struggle along.
You say you got your daddy's seed in you
And you think you're bored with anything there is to do with me.

You wipe your hands across your bare chest
And rub your fingers through your crew cut hair.
“Expelled from school,” you tell me with a grin,
“I copped a feel from an ex-girlfriend.”

I know you want to break the rules-
We were made by nature's fools.
And so you ride all day long, all by yourself,
‘Til you feel strong-

Strong enough to stay
Strong enough to be
Standing in the way
Of everything I see.

You wanna know why I had to go
Down to the baseball park to see you blow it.
All the balls just fall from your hands,
And your daddy asks me, When is he gonna be a man?”

I know you want to change the truth-
We were made by nature's fools.
So you ride all night long
With your boys in those muscle cars.
And you go down to the city
And laugh at the faggots
Until the girls look pretty and until you feel strong-

Strong enough to stay
Strong enough to be
Standing in the way
Of everything that you could see.

I'm just a magnet for the rural faggots.
They come and knock on my door
Just to find they're running out of time
To figure out what they come here for.

I know you want to know the truth
And I'm the dyke who will give it to you.
By this time next year
you'll know you're queer
It'll all be okay
It'll all be clear
And you'll run away from home
But not to be alone
And you'll go down to the city
Where the boys are pretty

And where you feel strong
Strong enough to stay
Strong enough to be
A country boy who's gay.

2008-02-08T13:52:00.000-08:00

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/02/in-election-08.html

Rarely does one see the news grapple with LGBTQ issues in a powerful and meaningful way, but this week a USA today opinion piece by Bruce Kluger titled " In Election '08 is there a place for gay rights?" grapples with some of the complex issues LGBTQ Americans face going into the 2008 election. I have no intention of getting into a candidate war on this blog about who I think would be the best candidate, after all I honestly think that of the democratic choices both are pretty similar in terms of how they will or won't protect LGBTQ folks (after all it isn't like either of the top candidates has been brave enough to support marriage equality). That said, at least Hillary hasn't gone out of her way to invite "ex-gay" leaders to campaign for her.

Kluger's post grapples with the very real needs of LGBTQ Americans, the discrimination we face on a legal level, and the silences, which exist around that. He speaks passionately about the needs of folks and the way our issues have been overlooked, and interjects popular culture references from the likes of the L word discussing the ways in which as a community we have in some ways fooled ourselves through these mediated representations, and loose sight of the fact that we lack fundamental rights. As he argues " this significant step forward carries with it a liability: As entertainment executives conscientiously work to bring the gay experience into the mainstream in a non-political way, they also run the risk of neglecting the real-life struggles gays continue to face."

A great read for anyone interested in politics and way LGBTQ folks will be impacted, as well as a look at the power of the media and it's relation to the way we conceptualize the LGBTQ movement and politics.

"The Axis of She-Vil"

2008-02-08T13:48:00.000-08:00

The New York Post isn't known for it's positive coverage of queer issues, but even I was floored when I saw their article that ran yesterday titled "The Axis of She-Vil: Death to Gays but Free Ops for Irani Trannies" the poor taste of the cover is just the beginning of this tabloid sensationalistic piece which is in theory telling the stories of what it means to be transgender within Iran where the "crime" of "homosexuality" is punished by death, however trans issues are understood to be medical conditions where the government pays for people to have SRS.

While an interesting topic to explore, the Post did a horrific job of turning this into something to laugh about especially in regards to the article's title and they showed a complete lack of understanding and sensitivity to LGBTQ issues or people.

The full article can be found online here:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02072008/news/worldnews/axis_of_she_vil_92617.htm

a big mistake

2008-02-02T20:34:00.000-08:00

“Writer, musician, and bicycle advocate/planner with a tendancy towards big mistakes” (please note, the misspelling of tendency is not mine) reads the website of Darwin S. Ward (http://www.darwinward.com) the author of “Becoming Alec,” a newly self-published book through lulu.com. Without a doubt, “Becoming Alec” was one of those big mistakes.

This is by far one of the most poorly written, and misogynistic books I have read in quite some time. “Becoming Alec” is the story of a young transsexual man named Alec as he struggles to find his way through the intersections of life, love, career, family, and community. I had really high hopes for the book, but those hopes were swiftly dashed as in every chapter I was confronted with clunky backstory and dry poorly constructed dialogue.

Perhaps what alarmed me more than anything was the blatant misogyny, which ran rampant within the text. The transmen in Ward’s novel seem destined to prove their manhood and “normalness” (a frequently mentioned goal) through degrading women. Characters repeatedly referred to female characters as “chicks” and even took issue with women’s desire for sexual pleasure. As such, far from break new ground, this novel played directly into oppressive and patriarchal stereotypes of who men are and how they should behave. While I would like to expect that all men biological or otherwise in our supposedly enlightened society to refrain from blatant degradation of women, it’s particularly unexpected and unacceptable from those men who previously experienced sexism firsthand.

This Film is not yet Rated

2008-01-27T09:08:00.000-08:00

A couple of weeks ago when the mailman delivered "this film is not yet rated" to our apartment (oh netflix how i love you) to be honest i was less than excited to see it. as we sat down with a big bowl of popcorn my partner and i both questioned why we had put it in our list of films to see, but then it started and for the remainder of the film i was completely captivated, and knew that I needed to talk about it here.

Despite being a complete media junkie, and having gotten a degree in media studies even i was shocked at some of the innerworkings of the motion picture association. i was especially interested in the queer aspects of the film, the ways in which sex is policed and particularly anything transgressive. these are the people that control who sees cinematic depictions of our lives, and really how our experiences are portrayed, and it's something that we all need to be paying serious attention to.

storytelling at its finest

2008-01-19T13:23:00.000-08:00

Eli Clare’s poetry and prose rushed through my heart and soul with the same intensity as the mighty Oregon rivers which feature so prominently in his work. “The Marrow’s Telling: Words in Motion” is storytelling in its finest form. This book challenges readers to look beyond initial assumptions and expectations in order to intimately explore the intersections of race, ability, gender, and sexuality. Politically charged, this work forges an important trail through body memories linked to childhood sexual abuse, ritual abuse, gender transformation, the act of sex, and body acceptance. Through tantalizing poetry “The Marrow’s Telling” challenges us as readers to look more closely at the geography of our own lives.

"Everyone Deserves a Proud Parent"

2008-01-18T17:09:00.000-08:00

This new ad campaign unveiled by the "Family Builders by Adoption" organization in California is one of the most incredible uses of media that I have seen in quite some time. The agency, recognizing the specific needs of LGBTQ youth who are less likely to be placed in loving homes, more likely to be abused, and extremely likely to be homeless (it is estimated that upwards of 40% of all homeless youth in the United States are LGBTQ identified).

The ad campaign which kicked off this week in San Francisco with advertisements in the subway system makes the clear and powerful argument that every kid deserves a home, and that queer kids have and continue to be considered difficult to adopt. Seamlessly appealing to the emotions of community members, this ad is a call to action for our community, as yet another way we can step forward to help some of our most vulnerable community members.

A wonderful article in the Bay Area Reporter about the new campaign can be found here: http://ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=2618

2008-01-15T07:10:00.000-08:00

http://www.amazon.com/Self-Organizing-Men-Conscious-Masculinities-Space/dp/0978597303

Punctuated with powerful artistic depictions and introspective cartoons grappling with constructed maleness Jay Sennett’s Self Organizing Men breaks new ground bringing together a diverse group of artists, authors, and performers to explore the complexities of masculinity and maleness. Self Organizing Men pays particular attention to the diversity of experiences across borders of gender, sexuality, race, ability, and class and how those social locations and lived experiences shape and transform the lives and identities of contributors, and our culture at large. Injected with a visible feminist consciousness, Self Organizing Men challenges dominant ideologies of maleness, providing a reconceptualization and challenge to the notions of privilege, patriarchy, and the inadequacies of the gender binary. This is an ideal book for anyone interested in gender studies, men’s studies, feminist studies, queer studies, or constructed masculinity.

The Award-Winning LGBT New Site?!?!?????

2008-01-12T05:57:00.001-08:00

The Advocate magazine is perhaps the most recognizable glossy publication targeted to the gay and lesbian (and occasionally queer) community. The monthly magazine is a combination of news and celebrity gossip which impacts the community. Although not personally a huge fan of Advocate, even I was surprised when a friend brought to my attention their "Annual Sissy Awards." (http://www.advocate.com/issue_story.asp?id=50984&page=1 ). The article goes on to describe that the "Sissy Awards" are basically code for all of the homophobic and oppressive things which have happened over the year; for example this years include Tim Hardaway's homophobic radio rant, the antics of Bill O'Reilly as well as the absurd statements of Mahomoud Ahmadinejad. In an attempt to describe their awards the Advocate says "every year we have to endure our fair share of idiots, but this year takes the cake. So we here at The Advocate have reinstated our annual sissy awards, recognizing those who show arrogant stupidity, dishonesty, or just a severe lack of spine."

As queer people, we need to be taking serous issue with the fact that arguably our most recognizable publication is furthering and promoting a campaign which is seeped in sissyphobia and furthering the oppressive ideals that gay men are supposed to only be masculine, that there is something shameful about being a "sissy" and that the only acceptable type of gay man is the one who can fit into a heterosexist cultures ideals of masculinity. "Sissy" is a word which has and continues to be hurled at effeminate gay men, and by the same token is a term which many have begun to reclaim, it is reprehensible for an LGBTQ publication to be using it as an insult, or as code for bad or wrong, or things which should be avoided.

"Rich, White, and Gay"

2008-01-08T09:23:00.000-08:00

"Rich, White, Gay"
http://www.riotfolk.org/music/31/09%20Rich,%20White,%20and%20Gay.m4a

The HRC made news this fall when they went against the rest of the LGBTQ community supporting the ENDA legislation, and making it very clear about how supportive they are of the trans community, and everyone else who is at all gender non-conforming. Anyway I'm always on the lookout for queer media which looks critically at the HRC, and calls attention to the queerphobic policies supported by the mainstream gay community. I recently was introduced to the music of Adhamh Roland who is part of the Riot Folk collective ( http://www.riotfolk.org/member.php?id=5 ) and fell in love with his song "Rich, White, and Gay" which speaks to a lot of the issues many of us have with contemporary gay rights ideologies and especially the HRC.

The song moves away from simply being a bashing of the HRC and instead explores other problems within the community, and the ways in which trans folks, sex workers, youth, poor folks, folks of color, differently abled folks etc. are marginalized and silenced in an effort for the "normal" gays and lesbians to gain political and social power, leaving everyone else behind fighting over metaphorical scraps. From a media perspective the "it’s queers who equate true equality with straight privilege like shows on t.v. " line was especially powerful as it addressed the ways in which simply being on TV isn't enough if those representations are still based in oppression, stereotypes, and fail to account for the true diversity of our community, and fail to recognize that true equality is more than simplistic mediated representation.

Roland's song brings to attention some really important issues that the queer community in the States really needs to be paying attention to, as far as whose values and needs are being represented by the gay mainstream.

Lyrics:

Rich, White, and Gay
while mainstream gays and lesbians are prioritizing things like marriage and adoption, the rest of the community is left to fend for ourselves against racism, classism, transphobia, ablism and more. queer liberation means liberation for all, while gay assimilation means just that—assimilation. this song was inspired by the anthology, that’s revolting: queer strategies on resisting assimilation.
capo 3rd fret

well, what do you see of the gay mainstream?
queer eye, queer folk—it’s queer t.v.
and you say ‘oh my goodness look how far we’ve come’
but that all depends on where you’re coming from

chorus:
‘cause when you say ‘we’
i think i know what you mean
it’s that rich, white, gay and lesbian
so called community

it’s the folks who wanna end housing discrimination
but ban youth shelters in the name of beautification
who think their partners should have health coverage to share
but don’t give a damn ‘bout universal health care
who fight in the courts for tougher hate crimes
but think the racist system is working just fine
‘cause it’s o.k. to haul off to jail the homeless and the youth
people of color, trannys, sex workers too
as long as it’s not people like you
then you can maintain you’re agenda
that benefits the few

it’s a gay mainstream that votes anti-poor
as long as civil unions are accounted for
they don’t seem to see their obvious connections
between race, class, ability, and gender expression
they don’t think of the black drag queens that battled for us all
hurlin’ high heels at the cops outside of stonewall
when they vote to put more pigs on the streets
and never hear about the people that they beat

‘cause the human rights campaign is sponsored by nike and coors
who violate everybody’s rights but yours
they claim to advocate for queers and trannys
and then don’t write them into nondiscrimination policies
they even endorsed a republican candidate
thanks h.r.c. for bein’ my advocate

it’s the log cabins, the don’t ask don’t tell
it’s consumerisms choice demographic to sell
it’s climbin’ up the ladder leavin’ everyone behind
it’s the best pecking order capitalism can find
it’s the upwardly mobile that want to marry
it’s the strict butch/femme dichotomy
it’s queers who equate true equality
with straight privilege like shows on t.v.
as long as the butt of the jokes are still based on misogyny
and the lead roles are straight in reality
it’s a slap in the face to kioshi (web link)
and every other liberation warrior since the sixties
and anyone ever arrested on your street
cuz they might lower the value of your property

last chorus
when you say we
i think i know what you mean
it’s that rich, white, gay and lesbian so called....
well it’s not the trannys, it’s not the dykes
it’s not anyone who’s not white
it’s not the whores, not the fags
not asians, latinas, natives, or blacks
it’s not the homeless, the deaf or blind
it’s not fake cocks or chests that bind
it’s not the fat folks, or the freaks
or any combination of any sort of identity

except that rich, white, gay
that rich, white, and gay
that rich, white, gay ...
...and sometimes lesbian
so called community

2008-01-05T05:55:00.000-08:00

So I’ve following "quarterlife" http://www.quarterlife.com since its arrival on the net a few months ago. The show is attempting to be new and edgy only airing it's episodes online, with loads of flashy technology, obvious corporate placements and desire to plaster myspace with adds for themselves. The show is focused around the lives of six twenty-somethings lost and confused about life, love, jobs etc. the show's primary gimmick revolves around the "quarterlife" site where artists can upload their work and communicate with other lost twenty-somethings attempting to make it in their chosen artist realm complete with cheesy plots surrounding the shows characters also using the site to showcase their videos and video blogs about their oh so tragic, oh so privileged lives.

The reason this show is even making it to my queer media blog is because of how disappointing it is. One of the shows main selling features is that it's done by the creators of "My So Called Life" whose limited run was truly groundbreaking in terms of diversity and the complexity of issues, which were addressed and shown to teen audiences. It was one of the first shows that were willing to treat teens like adults, and creating a show centered around what it really meant to be a teenager. The show included the complex flamboyant queer character of Ricki, and even addressed things like school bullying. This new show attempting to capitalize on the original shows old fans now all grown up fails to present any of the diversity of it's original- it lacks a single character of color, and with the exception of a brief discussion of girl on girl action where lead character Dylan discusses having been with a girl because of how lost she is, and then getting hit on by her obnoxious female boss the show fails to address queerness at all. The portrayal that it does establish trivializes queer experience as nothing more than an experiment that someone might try in college, less real and valid than heterosexuality, and nothing more than something which is explored when one is so drunk they won't remember it the next morning.

All in all, this show is a flop (which if you read the comments on the website it's clear that many viewers share my feelings). It's nothing more than a washed-up attempt to salvage something which was truly revolutionary and package what had been groundbreaking, and diverse into a white, rich, heteronormative show about how much it must clearly suck to be rich and white and straight and traditionally attractive, and oh so terribly talented.

A Pirate's Life for Me!

2007-12-29T08:58:00.001-08:00

Used as comic relief within Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy the characters Pintel and Ragetti are highly effeminate and the use of their characters as comedy within the movies feeds into a rich historical tradition of Disney (and many others) using ideas of homoeroticism as comedy. The two men are rarely if ever seen away from one another, sharing intimate jokes, plots, and glances unlike anything exchanged between any of the other male pirates. This while the other pirates with the notable exception of Will and Elizabeth seem to not really get along well with one another, or at least do not appear to have strong connections or bonds in the way that Pintel and Ragetti demonstrate. In this way these two men are constructed as outsiders, different somehow from the other pirates as a result of their relationship

Having watched the "at the worlds end" film for the first time within the past few days I became increasingly aware of the intense affection and homoeroticism these characters brought to the plot of the movie. While there is no denying that the majority of their antics were quite humorous (although they do predominantly resort to slapstick humor) it would be nice if we could have clearly gay characters with depth, who were able to move beyond being simply something to laugh at.

2007-12-29T07:32:00.000-08:00

For christmas this year our kids (two puddle cats and a princess dog) got my partner and I six months of Netflix! As a media junkie this pleases me beyond belief and I know that more and more movies will for sure be making their way to being blogged about here at Fuchsia Focus.

I feel a little bit behind the times, as last night was the first time I had seen John Cameron Mitchell's Shortbus. Despite hearing rave reviews since it's release I hadn't managed to actually sit down and watch it. Going in I had a few fears that its popularity was all hype, and cult adoration, however it truly was as fantastic as everyone had made it out to be. Set in my favorite city, and home (NYC) the film explores the sexual lives of individuals who frequent the fictional hangout of "Shortbus" with a fantastic cast of people, many well known in the independent and queer communities (such as Bitch - who was half of the infamous 'Bitch and Animal' queer band and now a successful musician in her own right) playing themselves, and helping the script to evolve organically.

With beautiful imagery the film travels throught the city and taking an intimate look into the bedrooms, diverse sexual desires, and needs it's characters. This film explores the limits of sexuality, and why we are all so drawn to it's queerness.

2007-12-11T12:46:00.002-08:00

Felicia Luna Lemus' "Trace Elements of Random Tea Parties" is one of the best fiction novels I have read in quite some time. Each character takes on a life and depth all her own, rising above any sterotypes or limits associated with identity which so frequently plague the pages of queer fiction. In this book the characters queerness is not the defining aspect, rather it is only a part of their multifasceted lives which serves to make them all the more believable. "Trace Elements" is a captivating look into the life of Leti a queer dyke in Los Angeles who her girlfriend comes to describe as a "shy bookworm sweater femme boy" as she struggles to find a place for herself in an ever changing world. Readers follow her journey as she grapples with the intersections of love, family, gender, sexuality, culture, and spirituality coming of age and being forced to deal with changes she never imagined. Lemus tackles big issues of belonging, family, and comitment within these pages and handles them all seamlessly. Her characters are so tangible, that as I set down the book after turning the final page I felt as though they were my friends, seeing the faces of my community on each page.

2007-12-07T05:49:00.000-08:00

MediaTakeOut.com ( http://www.mediatakeout.com/19978/exclusive_queen_latifah_pops_the_question_to_longtime_girlfriend_-_pair_plan_a_public_wedding.html ) just broke the news that Queen Latifah is officially engaged and beginning to plan what will be a public wedding to her long-time girlfriend! This is fantastic news and i wish the couple all the best and many congratulations!

This is also big media news as despite the speculation that has gone on for many years regarding Queen Latifah's sexuality she had never officially come out.

"having fun with two mommies"

2007-12-04T18:03:00.000-08:00

well i wasn't going to make this entry about kids programming as i just covered "king and king" but well i couldn't seem to resist this one. i happened to stumble upon a new cartoon called "Buddy G two moms and me" aimed at small kids. the show stars an animated five year old, his two moms and his computer named "socrates" (which amuses me more than it ought to i'm sure).

the show has an interactive website http://www.buddyg.tv/home.php and it's possible to watch the shows intro here: http://www.buddyg.tv/login.php?mode=preview

compete with a catchy tune which includes such fantastic lines as: "having fun with two mommies," "growing our own family tree," and "buddy G two moms and me, just a normal family"

i'd be really curious to actually see episodes of the show to see if it has any real plot other than that a kid happens to have two moms

"So began the search to find the prince's perfect match and lo and behold.... his name was Lee"

2007-11-18T16:32:00.000-08:00

"Once there lived a lovelorn prince whose mother decreed that he must marry by the end of the summer. So began the search to find the prince’s perfect match and lo and behold...

...his name was Lee."

Ten Speed Press' "King & King" written by Linda de Haan and Stern Nijland is the very best picture book i've seen to address gay issue. So many texts who try to bring queer lives into children's books end up falling short of anything appealing to children lacking bright pictures and tell a story that is about gay people and not simply a picture book which has gay characters. Although groundbreaking texts "Heather Has Two Mommies" and "Daddies Roommate" are both very guilty of this. "King & King" presents the story of a prince whose mother wants him to marry but he isn't interested in any of the princesses and then manages to find his "perfect match" in a prince!

This is a fantastic book filled with bright and beautiful ilistrations and an entertaining storyline where the prince's sexual orientation is never an issue, it simply is part of the story! The sequil to the book "King & King & Family" is also a fantastic read, which follows the Kings through their travels and desires to build a family of their own. These are great books for people of all ages, especially kids as it teaches about the diversity of families in an accessable and fun way.

I tend to like banned books, and "King & King" has had it's share of controversies. The book even sparked a 2006 law suite by a parent who felt it was inapropriate for his child's second grade teacher to have read this book in class, as it was "indocternating children into homosexuality." I forgot, teaching kids about different sorts of families, and teaching tolerance is "indocternation." Thankfully, U.S. District Court Judge Mark Wolf ruled that public schools are "entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy."

"i would be [ok with the cutest heterosexual couple] because it's the norm in society"

2007-11-11T16:28:00.000-08:00

In typical O'Reilly fashion, Bill O'Reilly homophobically attacks a couple of lesbian teenagers whose school voted them the "cutest couple" in a competition for the yearbook. In this O'Reilly rant we watch as he attempts to railroad his guest Dr. Laura Berman NorthWestern University , and discuss with her how the action of the couple was highly inapropriate, how they were being sexually provocative. According to O'Reilly these two kids which he refers to as "so called self-proclaimed lesbians" were only attempting to "tweak" adults, and make adults uncomfortable, completly negating the fact that the girls are in love, and that their peers voted them the cutest couple in the school.

Attempting to bully Dr. Berman (who by the way held her own against him better and more successfully than most of his 'guests') O'Reilly went off on a tirade about how it was inapropriate behavior in the public school system, how it went against the morals of many parents, and was going to encourage experametnation. The crux of his argument centered around the idea that private behavior belonged in private, insistant that he was "not udging anyone" O'Reilly was backed into a corner by Dr. Berman and was was forced to admit that he would not have an issue with a heterosexual "cutest couple" because "it's the norm of society"

"they look like girls, but act and think like boys"

2007-11-09T09:38:00.000-08:00

The past few days many of us have seen the news about American scientists manipulating the brains of worms, in order to alter their sexual orientation. Now I'm going to avoid the debate about animal testing, but even excluding that there are an array of ethical concerns about the root of this testing. I have been particularly interested in the way that research has been addressed within the news media, and the broader implications of this sort of research on the queer community.

The scientists altered the genes in the brains of these little female worms, and the end result was that the worms are now attracted to female worms. In online yahoo news article titled "Gene Switch Altered Sex Orientation of Worms" Julie Steenhuysen reported on the scientists' findings about the ability to alter the sexual orientation of worms. I was particularly concerned by the ways in which Steenhuysen and researches themselves referenced the idea that the worms were still female, but now behaved as if they were male. This sort of logic is steeped in heterosexism and insinuates that there is something abnormal about same-sex attraction amongst animals. ""They look like girls, but act and think like boys," Utah researcher Jamie White, who worked on the study published in the journal Current Biology, said in a statement" explained Steenhuysen. In this way sexual orientation and gender were being referenced as the same thing. This sort of construction feeds into the ideology that only heterosexuality is natural, or normal. The article was careful to state that humans were more complex than worms, and so it was not likely that there would be any sort of implication for research into human sexuality. That said there is always the danger in this sort of research that it could be used to "fix" queer folks.

Worms are fantastically little queer things, the article went on to discuss how many worms have both 'male' and 'female' sexual organs and are capable of fertalizing eggs and producing offspring without the help of another worm. The article references these worms as "hermaphrodites" although the propor wording would have been 'intersex.' These worms are within the article referenced as 'female' and Steenhuysen describes how there are few "male" worms, seeming to insinuate that the existence of intersex worms is some sort of male replacement. It seems as though there is much to be learned about the queered lives, and bodies of these little wriggling wonders that crawl through dirt.

The yahoo news article can be found here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071025/sc_nm/worms_sex_dc

NYC Event!

2007-11-08T05:11:00.000-08:00

For anyone in NYC on December 1st I recommend checking out the Queer CUNY VIII conference which is taking place at Hunter College. The conference title is "The Twilight of Queerness?" and the keynote speaker is Lisa Duggan

brief description of the conference:
"Too much contemporary Queer/LGBT political activism and scholarship is bogged down by bitterly dichotomous academic disputes. The marriage/anti-marriage and relational/anti-relational debates, for instance, wildly miss a larger political and intellectual potential for queer studies to be a project that breaks apart and surpasses ideological binaries.

Queer CUNY VIII: The Twilight of Queerness? is a student conference that seeks to end reductionist political discourse. The organizers contend that the original possibilities of queer theory, while inspiring, have not been fully realized, and aim to provide more than just space in which to consider this quandary. Instead, the conference will encourage queer students, activists, teachers, community members, and others to imagine life and scholarship beyond the limits of ongoing dichotomy and division"

I plan on attending the conference all day, and my research titled "Modern Freak Shows: Transgender Representations on Oprah 2003-2005) has been accepted, and I will be presenting my findings in one of the panels (I don't have a time for the panel yet). I completed this research as an undergraduate- it grew out of a final project for a "Race, Class, Gender, Sexuality in the Media" course, and developed into a much larger undertaking which I had the honor of presenting at the Lewis and Clark Gender Studies Symposium last year. In case folks are interested in the work that I'm doing, I have included the abstract for this research here :)

Modern Freak Shows:
Transgender Representations on Oprah 2003-2005

My research is focused on the ways in which the transgender community is depicted within the talk show genera, specifically on the Oprah show. The talk show format embodies an important role in television, though powerful it is a genre, which is frequently dismissed as "trash." Acting as modern freak show talk shows educate the general public on human oddities, expanding the public's knowledge base on the queerness of human experience. Those who transgress gender norms, transgender people, transsexuals, drag kings, drag queens, cross dressers and the like are frequent guests in all areas of the talk show world. The Oprah Show, with its cultural acceptability and wide viewing audience across race, class, and gender lines, has had its share of transgender guests. Between the years 2003 and 2005 there were five shows, which focused on issues of gender variance from "the husband who became a woman" (5-6-03) to "when your identical twin has a sex change" (9-16-05).

Talk shows are THE area in mainstream media where gender variant people are given voice and allowed to share their story. As Larry Gross says in Up From Invisibility "transgendered people arouse endless fascination and evoke mixed emotional responses. TV talk shows have been obsessed with topics concerning transsexualism since the early 1980's…there is probably no topic more alluring to programmers." (Gross 187). These shows serve as cultural education, providing the masses with what is for many their first interaction with a trans person.

All five of the Oprah shows dealing with transsexuality between 2003 and 2005, were grounded in relationships to families, and the affect the transition of a family member has. This limited portrayal of trans experience is problematic particularly as it is coupled with a lack of discussion of other issues, which affect trans lives such as access to appropriate health care, police brutality and hate crimes. If this limited construction were altered, there would be an opportunity to increase the public knowledge base about the real lives of transgender people. Oprah is the most widely watched talk show in the United States; that alone makes it a powerful cultural entity. Combining that with a topic such as transgenderism, which is widely misunderstood, two options are presented: Either guests are chosen who reinforce existing cultural stereotypes, as the majority of the guests on the Oprah show have done; or a diverse range of trans people could be selected, and given the opportunity to talk about what it means to live outside of the binary, potentially causing a change in public opinion, policy and understanding as has begun to occur with some more recent guests.

The talk show genre is so important because it is literally the only mainstream media outlet where trans people play themselves. Other forms of media, such as film, fail to cast trans people as trans characters. Talk shows are for many their first introduction to topics of gender diversity, and when that introduction is happening on a show like Oprah, which has gained respect not only in the media but also in millions of homes, it is especially powerful. For many this is their only known exposure to those who transgress gender norms. Thus I argue that by giving transgender people a voice; the Oprah show has
the potential to work as a catalyst for social change.

Dumbledore's Gay!

2007-10-22T16:59:00.000-07:00

Normally my media critiques and examinations are of specific news or entertainment artifacts, however sometimes a situation comes along which one can’t help but pay attention to. Last Friday celebrated author J.K Rowling announced at a book tour in NYC that the much loved and admired headmaster of Hogwarts Albus Dumbledore is gay. She described how she had always imagined the character of Dumbledore as a gay man, and that he had been involved romantically with the dark wizard Grindelwald when the two were boys.

The news has rippled through both mainstream press, and certainly fan based communities across all media outlets, as people celebrate a beloved character’s outing. I personally was quite excited to the news--- as I’m currently in the midst of working on my own academic queer readings of the series. It’s been particularly interesting for me to watch the news coverage of this, and to see the reactions positive and negative (although predominantly positive).

The outing of such an important character---arguably the most powerful and admired wizard of all time is an astonishing revelation and a giant step forward for recognition of queer characters in the media. Far from the normal stereotypical representations of queer characters particularly gay men this is an example of a character who is great, respected, compassionate, and who we now learn also happens to be gay.

Rowling said that she saw her series bringing forth lessons in compassion. I agree with her, choosing to out such an important character in the book is a powerful step towards positive media representations, and I am grateful that she chose to take such a daring and culturally important step. It is my hope that she is paving the way for the creation of positive pop culture icons. Having these sorts of representations sends an important message to media consumers about the gay community, and helps to breakdown heterosexist ideologies in our culture by showcasing that there are gay people in society, and exposing kids to greater diversity, and lessons about love and compassion—central components of who Dumbledore as a character is in general.

The First Lady is a Man: Deconstructing Transphobia

2007-10-07T13:31:00.000-07:00

While at the corner drug store purchasing some toilet paper and shaving cream my eyes couldn’t help but be drawn to the cover of the New York Magazine. The October 8th issue of the magazine features a cover story exploring the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, through the angle of exploring what will happen with Bill if she moves into the white house.

The magazine’s cover features a digitally altered picture of the former president in a red dress, peal necklace and earrings complete with what could only be considered a properly styled bob fitting of a first lady. The article’s title “Bill Clinton, First Lady” says it all. The magazine’s cover uses unconsentual feminization of Bill in order to make a social and political point about the place of men and women in contemporary American society. Being the husband of a woman who becomes president according to the magazine would suddenly thrust Bill into a feminine role, and the article opens with a nonsense look at what Bill would be called if Hillary were elected.

This portrayal is highly inappropriate, and offensive in that it is making a mockery of the trans community. I find the timing of this cover art particularly interesting given the current state of ENDA and the rampant transphobia which has circulated both within the government and mainstream press surrounding the importance of including gender identity into this historic bill. Placing Bill in a dress in an attempt to achieve laughs, serves no purpose other than to simultaneously undermine the credibility of both Hillary’s campaign and add fuel to the fire about what many consider to be “absurdity” of the transgender community, at a time when the already vulnerable population is on the frontlines of a political battle for necessary legal protections.

Please Note: I am not in any way attempting to argue that Hillary is the right person for the job, in the democratic debate co-sponsored by the HRC and LOGO she vocalized her opposition to gay marriage (although she does support civil unions).

the article can be viewed online here:
http://nymag.com/news/politics/38362/

Fact or Fiction: Hollywood News

2007-09-23T17:50:00.000-07:00

CNN article can be viewed here: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/20/inmate.recants.ap/index.html?eref=rss_latest

There is no question that within the mainstream media that the line between “entertainment” and “news” has become frighteningly blurred at best. Often it is difficult to separate fact from fiction, and when the lines are intentionally blurred between Hollywood representation and actual events that the situation becomes even more complicated. This week news giant CNN reported updates in the well-publicized murder of Brandon Tina. Marvin Nissen one of the two men sentenced in the brutal hate crime, which received national attention, has changed his story, now claiming that he was the only killer. The hate crime Brandon Tina a gender variant individual in rural Nebraska garnered national attention from both queer and mainstream press. The case was later made into a mainstream film titled “Boys Don’t Cry” staring Hillary Swank as Brandon.

My interest in this news reporting honestly has less to do with the news itself (although that is interesting) but more to do with the ways in which the reporting was handled. The article’s title is “Inmate Recants in ‘Boys Don’t Cry’ Case” and accompanying the article is a picture of Hillary Swank from the movie. This dangerous blending of Hollywood fictional accounts, and the actual hate crime is highly alarming to me. I believe that showcasing the news in this case in this manner, delegitimates the horror of what actually happened in the 1993 hate crime and further buys into a mediated culture where people are increasingly unable to differentiate fiction from reality.

Furthermore, the article is highly offensive in it’s inappropriate use of names of covering news stories involving transgender people. Associated Press guidelines state that when reporting about a transgender person, pronouns, which correspond to the persons’ identity, should be used in all instances. This article interestingly enough avoided all pronouns for Brandon. Furthermore the article, referred to him by his legal name as apposed to his chosen name. Although on first appearance, and particularly for those unfamiliar with journalistic style things appear to be positive and progressive as the article repetedly references “Brandon.” However in the first paragraph he is referred to as “Tina Brandon” and as such the use of “Brandon” is simply corresponding to journalistic style of using a last name after the first citation.

Barbie Goes to Gay Pride...

2007-09-17T05:57:00.000-07:00

Now as most of you know, I mostly tend to talk about videos, books, articles and that sort of media artifact. However, this time I couldn’t resist showcasing a fantastic children’s toy that my partner and I happened upon while walking through a discount store. She’s called “Barbie Fairytopia- Rainbow Adventure Elina doll.” Upon arriving home and doing a bit of research, I learned that you can also purchase an accompanying video titled “Magic of the Rainbow.’

Now I’m not sure why anyone would actually purchase this toy for a child, all reviews of the bizarre toy are poor. According to advertising the doll is supposed to function as a remote control for the included DVD game. Comments from parents on a number of online shopping sites explain their inability to program the toy. That said, I know plenty of adults who would want her for novelty sake. I for example totally would display one proudly on my desk.

Barbie/Elina is cloaked in rainbows from her corset and wings to her glittering rainbow eye shadow looks as though a gay pride parade threw up on her, and I love it! The hyper femininity expressed through high wide eye shadow in a cascading rainbow upon her face invokes imagery of the theatrical flamboyant style embodied by many drag queens and queer high femmes. The use of gay imagery in her “fairy” outfit combined with the use of key phrases like “rainbow adventure” offers a plethora of possibilities for queer readings for this plastic character. The symbolism of the rainbow is linked intimately to the queer community. Further, the idea of going on a “gay adventure” conjures all sorts of homoerotic connotations, subsequently placing this doll who “is going to fairy school to learn to use her fairy powers” according to an online advertisement from Mattel firmly into the realm of the queer.

Marriage....is what brings us together, today.

2007-09-17T05:19:00.000-07:00

Marriage is an issue, which in recent years has become the most talked about issue related to the queer community. It is an issue, which decided a presidential election, and one which has divided a community. It’s a complicated issue, too often simplified by the media and by our own community. It’s an issue, which is highly emotional to people within the community and also within larger straight culture. Because of the emotional nature of this issue, it can be difficult to talk about. It can be particularly difficult to critique or debate in a productive, and respectful way. This is an issue close to the heart for many, and people on all sides tend to believe that they are fighting for their family’s wellbeing and protection. “ I Do, I Don’t: Queer’s on Marriage, edited by Greg Wharton and Ian Philips was released by Suspect Thoughts Press. The book was honored with a 2004 Lambda Literary Award for best Nonfiction Anthology. This is the first book I have found which tackles this issue in a respectful, thoughtful way which is validating for those who are against the institution, those who are fighting desperately to be included in it, and those who aren’t sure how they feel about it.

“I Do, I Don’t” is an excellent look at the diversity of ways marriage is understood within the LGBTQ community, and the range of arguments for and against the institution. This is a book that complicates assumptions, that breaks down oppression, and talks openly from the heart about queer families, queer relationships and what they need. I would recommend this book to anyone at all interested in looking further into this divisive issue. Too often it is simplified in order to fit into a neat box either pro or against, but not here. In true queer fashion this book explodes expectations, and breaks down binary boxes of “good” or “bad” in favor of showcasing all sides of the issue, and exploring the ways the issue is complicated by the differing lived experiences of community members.

"It's not that I want to be a sterotype of a passive femme girl, receptive polite"

2007-09-04T05:52:00.000-07:00

This is an artifact, which has been circulating around the Internet in a variety of queer locations. I happened across it in a butch/femme group that I belong to and was utterly horrified. As a queer femme while I’m defiantly all about increasing femme visibility and supporting other femmes but I was shocked by what I saw in this music video. In viewing it I believe that it plays into a variety of oppressive stereotypes within the queer and specifically butch/femme and dyke communities.

My main critique of the video from a queer media studies perspective comes first of all in the ways butchness is constructed, and then secondly the ways in which mythology surrounding butchness is perpetuated. The video opens with the two Gina’s commenting to one another about the disembodied butches whom we only witness by way of their denim clad asses. The two femmes are talking firstly about their attraction to butches, and attributes which turn them on, however they are also discussing something deeper about butchness. The two make the comments “they don’t make them like that anymore” and “they’re a dying breed.” In this section it is clear that they are making commentary about the theoretical “butch flight” in which some believe that all the butches are transitioning FTM. Playing into this transphobic mythology first of all silences the voices of many butches of all ages who do not identify as girls or woman and may or may not be transitioning who still very much identify as butch. Furthermore I think that despite my own beliefs, which do not coincide with the idea of butch flight, I think that there is place for debate and discussion of this sort, it however isn’t with young femmes of my generation. I hold a great deal of respect for older members of the community who have watched the boom of trans folks and trans butches and whom have some concerns about the issue, even though I disagree with their analysis. It however seems absurd to me that two young femmes are talking about “back in the day” when what the historical period they are romanticizing was before they were even born.

Similarly with the idea of romanticizing a historical location they never experienced in the beginning Team Gina makes further commentary about butches of the past saying “it’s sad you don’t see as many as you used to, back in the day when they had to wear at least three pieces of women’s clothes so they wouldn’t get arrested.” Referring to a specific point in American history where it was illegal for a butch to not be wearing three pieces of woman, their construction makes me sick to my stomach. There is a difference between knowing the history of your people, respecting that people and objectifying it. Romanticizing oppression that distorted the lives of many of our people, this construction is something that I read as disrespectful and irresponsible.

Team Gina also perpetuates oppressive ideology about who butches are or should aspire to be. In their mock “butch off” they score low points to the butch who doesn’t resemble the other skinny hipsters until she pulls out a beer bottle at which point her score magically increases. This paring of butchess to alcohol consumption is dangerous; furthermore their lyrics and imagery perpetuate the idea of monolithic butchness. According to their construction butches’ pants hang off their asses (a fashion choice which for the record I rarely have witnessed on butches, and is certainly not a universal phenomenon) and that butches wear their hair in Mohawks (something else which is certainly not something common across the board when you move beyond the hipster community). Although they offer the caveat about “not trying to be a stereotype” they humiliate a butch who is flagging bottom with her hanky in the video. “Hey Butch girl, I kinda got a problem I see from you hanky that you’re flagging a bottom. It’s not that I want to be a stereotype of the passive femme girl, receptive polite. But come on is your bark worse than your bite, are you really going to make me top you tonight? There is already so much silencing and shaming of butch bottoms I see no useful reason why this was included in the film. butch bottoms experience a great amount of invisibility within the community. The portrayal of this scenario within the music video with one of the Gina’s laughingly saying “I’m not trying to be predictable but you’re gonna have to pin me against this wall” is nothing but predictable. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a femme who is sexually submissive, knowing that and stating it as truth, it however portraying it as what is acceptable and shaming a butch who may also be sexually submissive is unacceptable. Furthermore within the music video butchness seems to be reduced to not only physical characteristics (specifically appearance and clothing) but it also becomes tied intimately to physical strength. For example the butches were judged on their ability to open jars. This simplification of butch masculinity and chivalry is highly ablest and limiting.

Despite my critique, I very much appreciate the ways in which Team Gina supports and creates femme visibility. Too frequently queer femmes take a back stage to butches, while here we see two femmes who have butches as their backup singers! These are femmes who are in control of their desire and sexuality, and are vocal about what they are and aren’t interested in. They are displaying a queer femininity and articulating that their femininity and desire resides outside of the confines of heterosexuality. Proudly claiming their desire for butch/femme dynamics, they are not the meek and duped feminine women, which historically femmes have been understood to be outside of queer culture. These are femmes who are not queered exclusively by their proximity to butchness rather; they are undoubtedly queer in their own right.

what kind of woman do modern lesbians want to be represented by?

2007-08-25T06:26:00.000-07:00

As I was doing research for another planned FF update I came across this little gem by accident. It’s a trailer for a new reality film out of the UK called “Lesbian Beauty.” The premise of the show is that lesbians are not attractive, and that they are going to give these women a makeover, turning them into models and then hold a beauty pageant, which will be “girls judged by girls who love girls.” The film describes its central purpose as being “ a fly on the wall look at a national search for the most beautiful lesbian in the UK. The central question this film poses is clear - what kind of woman do modern lesbians want to be represented by? Will she be a conventional..straight-looking.. beauty or a more stereotypical boyish woman? Or perhaps a tomboy inbetweener.”

From the film’s trailer and promotional material it seems to be buying into heteronormative ideas of beauty, and rather than challenging stereotypes as it claims to do falling in line with contemporary stereotypes of who lesbians are, or at least who they should aspire to be. It seems to be making a case that most lesbians are “boyish women” completely negating the rich cultural history of butches and other female identified masculine folks. Furthermore the premise of the film completely invalidates and silences femmes, by portraying lesbian femininity as something new and edgy rather than something which has always been part of the community. Furthermore it silences queer feminine expression, and packages it highly offensively as “straight looking.” Rather than celebrating the diversity of gender expression and identification within the lesbian community, the film is basically demanding that all lesbians conform to a heterosexualized version of beauty, and that all lesbians should aspire to look the same.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the film, is that based on its mission statement it seems to be arguing that first of all lesbians can or should be represented by one person, or one type of person, and then secondly that the image of the entire community could be determined by a beauty pageant! Even the vast majority of straight women would most likely take issue with someone arguing that the winner of the “Ms. Universe” pageant was the spokeswoman and image of all women, the idea that a beauty pageant will determine the face of the lesbian community is insulting and absurd. Furthermore the idea that the way lesbian beauty is perceived should be “changed forever” is oppressive and buys completely into the racist, classisist, fatphobic, homophobic, transphobic conceptions of beauty that the media perpetuates. Although I personally would never dream of speaking for all "modern lesbians" I would be willing to bet that the vast majority would not pick a super model to define their image.

exploring is fun, fine, and a healthy part of growing up, so long as you settle down in the end?

2007-08-25T05:45:00.000-07:00

Mango Kiss is an interesting indy film, which very queerly deals with a variety of frequently taboo, issues like leather, polyamory, and butch/femme relationship dynamics. Although at points it skirts the edge of decinegrating into a less than lucid art film, it’s saved by wildly captivating, and believable characters. The film also features a along with a believable storyline which many queer viewers particularly those with dyke histories will appreciate. Although I have a few critiques of the film, it remains high on my list of favorites, and stands alone in its unique portrayal of sexual difference within dyke communities.

The film follows the lives of two best friends Lou and Sassafras as they move together to San Francisco, and begin to develop a relationship with one another, as well as some of the interesting people they meet in the big city. One of the most interesting things is the way in which the film actively portrays poly families, and echoes the well-known advice of that these sorts of dynamics only work with “brutal honesty.” It is rare for poly relationships to be showcased in any sort of film, outside of perhaps showing polygamous Mormons in Utah. Furthermore showing polyamory in a dykc community is a breath of fresh air from the domesticated wife and mother roles lesbians are most frequently scripted as belonging to. This is a film which shows woman as not only highly sexual, but also sexually positive, adventurous and empowered.

In terms of portrayal of sexually empowered female-bodied queer folk, this film is truly ground breaking. It portrays large numbers of people exploring and experimenting with all sorts of sexual practices, particularly BDSM. Far from another weak portrayal of mild s/m “Mango Kiss” delves into the diversity of the leather community, and specifically the diversity of the leather dyke community showing everything from puppy play between Lou and her mistress, to the age play role-playing between Princess Sassy and her Captain Daddy Lou. The characters are shown negotiating scenes and consent, as well as establishing safe words, something rarely seen when any sort of BDSM is featured within a film.

One major criticism I have of the film is the way in which butch/femme couples and dynamics are portrayed. Although Lou and Sassy are constructed as a couple read as butch/femme and attempting to understand what that means to them- including making performance art about it, that aspect of their dynamic an relationship isn’t referenced in the same way that it is for their neighbors Val and Leslie. This couple is portrayed with nearly every stereotype of a 1950’s nuclear family, and is portrayed as highly old fashioned. The couple is vanilla, monogamous, and rather than celebrated as a different type of relationship they are mocked, and ridiculed through their highly characterized portrayal which only serves to further marginalize butch/femme couples within our present culture. By making them look like relics of the past a clear message is being sent to viewers about how butch/femme can be sexy roles to play with but the essence of that sort of relationship and any desire to fully embrace it is laughable, old fashioned, and utterly non hip.

My other primary critique of the film was the way in which by the end the main characters Lou and Sassy had reached the conclusion that they in fact could not be poly, and that they couldn’t live in a 24/7 BDSM dynamic. While I fully agree that the vast majority of couples first of all lack the ability and second of all have no interest in having either let alone both of those identities connected to their relationship, it seems counterintuitive for such a sexually progressive film to show yet another couple choosing against that. The message coming through seems then to be, that exploring is fun, fine, and a healthy part of growing up, so long as you settle down in the end.

The trailer for “Mango Kiss” can be viewed here:

Piercing Gender

2007-08-18T13:04:00.000-07:00

the full text of the article can be found here: http://www.bmezine.com/news/pubring/20070804.html

I’m a lover of just about any media artifact, which complicates gender in an interesting way. I’m always particularly interested in the ways in which gender nonconforming lives and bodies are presented in mediated contexts, as so rarely are transgender and genderqueer people provided with media outlets in order to tell the true stories of their lives. Rather all too frequently lives, which transgress gender norms, are scripted into narrow definitions of what it means to be a trans person. It is also interesting to note that in most mainstream media artifacts which depict transgender experience directors fail to cast transgender people into those roles (a great example of this is last years film Trans America). This is without a doubt one of the most interesting articles I have read in quite some time. Published online by BME Zine it is an interview titled “Ashley Crawford: Post-Gender. ” I am extremely appreciative of the complicated views of gender that I presents, and the ways in which Ash a tattoo artist and piercer from England creates powerful correlations between body modification such ass piercing and tattooing and the sorts of body modification often explored by members of the transgender community.

The article explores Ash’s commitment to living their life in a “post-gender” fashion in which they have chosen to make use of hormones and top surgery to modify their body in a similar way as they have used tattooing and scarification to modify their physical appearance. The article also focuses greatly on the ways in which various forms of body modification are used in the claiming of ones physical body, including incredible accounts of Ash’s experience with piercing their own cervix!

In the article Ash is quoted as saying: “Post-gender is absolutely not a transitional point between genders. That phrase implies that there are two proper genders to travel between and post-gender is somewhere you stop off on the way. The gas station of genders, if you will.” Rather they are arguing (as do many gender theorists, activists, and radicals of all sorts) that gender is highly complex and much more complicated than the “male” and “female” binary which is so frequently propagated by the larger culture, as well as mainstream media outlets. It is also important to note that within the interview Ash was skilled at making the distinction that not all transgender people have similar views about gender, and many are actually quite connected to binary views on the subject and that validating those believes is just as important as validating the opinions of those whom view gender in a more complicated way.
The main focus of the article is on body modifications, there is a distinct focus on the ways in which modifying ones body can relate to understanding and conceptualizing oneself in terms of gender and sexuality.

Constructing trans issues as a choice akin to other forms of body modification is exciting and radical territory to be heading into. For many within the community there is so much fear about putting out the idea that some members of the community view their altered bodies as choices, and an extensive body modification process. There is a great deal of fear that these views will be turned and used against the community, resulting in trans people being denied access to hormones, surgery, as well as political implications in terms of hate crimes legislation etc. Many also feel as though this sort of radical view of gender undermines their experience, on this issue Ash said ““There are a lot of transsexual people who only believe in two genders, and that they got the wrong sort of body to go with their inner gender. It’s threatening to hear someone say that inner gender doesn’t exist — it probably feels like I am undermining the importance of their transition. I’m not trying to do that. I respect their reality, even though it’s not mine.” Additionally, it was refreshing to see someone countering the pervasive tranny mythology that hormones in some way change who someone is more than other forms of body modification do.

My one concern with the article is the ways in which Ash seemed to be alluring to the idea that the ways in which altering their body was synonymous with intersexuality, repeatedly referring to things as “intersex.” It was unclear from the context of the article weather or not they have an intersex identity or past (although that did not appear to be the case.) My concern in this area thus lies in the fact that intersexuality is a very specific lived experience which is not automatically the same as transness (although many intersex people also identify as transgendered).

That said I feel as though this article does a spectacular job of exploring the complexities of gender and the ways in which one person in particular interfaces with gender outside of the binary. I was particularly appreciative of the focus on body modification as a way to perform a specific gender, or an attempt at no gender at all.

Jack the Ripper wasn't a kink forefather

2007-08-10T08:17:00.000-07:00

The independent film “Psychopathia Sexualis” was honestly one of the worst films that I have ever seen. This poorly done art film supposedly meandered its way through “a dreamlike depiction of turn-of-the-century sexual deviance, from the pages of Richard von KrafftEbing’s notorious medical text” however in reality it was a less than lucid smattering of blood, and vampires. Beyond the horrific acting, bad wigs, and poor sound quality the portrayal of “deviant” sexuality was not done well at all. I had no delusions going into this film that it would portray BDSM/leather in any sort of positive light, nor did I expect that gay and lesbian issues would be shown positively given that the film is intended to portray the Victorian understanding of sexual difference as it was becoming intimately connected to an oppressive medical community.

I did however expect that because this film would problematize the medical industry’s turn-of-the-century approach to sexual “deviants” given that it claims to create a “haunted vision of an era when medical science endeavored to label, cure or eliminate anyone who refused to conform to its idea of sexual ‘normalcy.’” It was this underlying plot message, which led me to watch the film in the first place after running into it by chance at a local Blockbuster. However the films nonlinear plot was highly distracting, but more than anything else I was frustrated by the ways in which kink was portrayed as this affliction and perversion. The characters in the film were one dimensional, and there was an excessive reliance upon blood and vampire tendencies. This portrayal was not done tastefully, nor realistically and seemed in some ways to simply be present to unnerve the audience; particularly with things like the lobotomy scene, as well as the theatrical vampire scenes which were not done realistically at all, particularly in terms of the amount of blood which was present. Furthermore the film opened with accounts of the historical figure of Jack the Ripper, which seemed to be suggesting that this gruesome historical figure was a sexual deviant akin to those who participate in consensual BDSM practices, gay men, and lesbians.

By far the best part of the film in my opinion was the last half hour which ironically came just as my partner and I were about to turn the film off as we couldn’t stomach much more of it’s offensive, and gruesome imagery. The end of the film explored the lives of two lesbians. This section seemed the most lucid of the entire film and ironically felt as though it was almost an afterthought to include the experience of lesbians, as it didn’t seem to connect with the rest of the film. That said the portrayal was on the whole rather well done as it showcased the difficulties that turn-of-the-century lesbians faced in life and love in a world which couldn’t’ handle their existence.

A trailer for the film can be viewed here:

"Warning...does not represent the opinions of the entire LGBT puppet community"

2007-08-02T04:00:00.000-07:00

LOGO’s new animated show “Rick and Steve” is without a doubt one of the most hilarious bits of LGBT representation that I have seen in quite some time! New in July 2007 on the LGBT television channel LOGO this show is sure to cause quite a stir in the queer community with its highly satirical approach to the community, no one is safe from their hilarious portrayal of what gay life for many has become for many. The show is set in “West Lahunga Beach” the “gayest of gay ghettos.” Cut off from heterosexuality West Lahunga Beach even has it’s own time zone, when you leave you must set your clocks to straight time which was “five minutes ago.” The show is clearly making a mockery of the reality of what much of the privileged gay culture has become in the United States and it is quite funny. The show opens with a “warning” about amongst other things” graphic language…and puppet-on-puppet sex.” The warning goes onto express that the show is not intended to be a “role model and does not represent the opinions the entire LGBT puppet community.” This “Warning” Label can be read as commentary on the pressures which are placed on queer media artifacts to portray positive and inclusive images of the entire (and highly diverse) community.

Accentuating the stereotypes of the queer community, this show like other animated satires such as South Park challenges the preconceived notions of it’s viewers and offers deep and opinion social criticism, however in the case of Rick and Steve this cultural critique is specifically aimed at the LGBT community. In the show the lesbians are completely obsessed with having babies, and attempting to obtain sperm is the driving force in their lives. Within the context of this show, the purpose of constructing them in such a way is to offer critique on the ways in which lesbians and lesbian culture has been hijacked by non-queer media and is shown as being entirely about being domestic and having babies. In this satirical sense I think that their portrayal is quite hilarious and showcases the problems with the ways in which lesbians are most frequently constructed.

The main critique that I have of the show is the portrayal and representation of the trans community. It is my suspicion given the rest of the show, is that the construction of trans characters is intended to (like the gay men and lesbians) to be satirical and to showcase problems and stereotypes within the larger LGBT community. However, I feel that in some ways this is less apparent not necessarily because of the ways in which it is addressed within the show but because of the deeply rooted transphobia within much of the lesbian and gay community. For example Rick and Steve are considering having a threesome and after a complete lack of success in attempting to pick up a man at a bar (which as a side note did address the systemic racism which exists in much of the queer community) the two head home. On the way they run into the pornstar with the 10.5 millimeters dick they had watched earlier in the episode, he offers to have sex with them and the three return home. Once in bed they realize that his dick is a “snap on” and freak out. His retort to them is that they should have watched the rest of his movie. Later the two call him a “lesbian” when it is fairly clear based on the construction of this character that he is gay male identified. This showcases so many of the problems which trans folks face in the gay and lesbian community where trans identities are not understood or respected. However given that the viewing audience of this show is by my guess primarily wealthy gays and lesbians (based on the need for cable television) I do have some concerns that the satirical value of this satirical value of trans representation will be missed by the larger viewing audience given the large lack of understanding in the community. Because of my personal connection to the trans community, I found this and the representation of the lesbian mothers with the baby whose assigned sex they did not know hilarious. The mothers had started two savings accounts for their child one for college and one for “sexual reassignment surgery.” The mothers refused to shove gender roles upon their child and thus were attempting to raise “she/he” as far removed from gender as possible, by simply not insolating its existence. Again I think that because of the larger gay and lesbian communities lack of understanding of trans and generqueer experiences there is a chance that the intended cultural meanings will be missed.

Another cultural critique expressed within the show occurs when Steve’s evangelical parents come to visit (although they are not aware that he is gay). There is some expected humor when they want to go out with the boys saying “I’ve seen this place the Eagle down the street, it sounds very patriotic” only to then think that the leather clad masters and slaves are part of some sort of masquerade ball. But prior to this when touring the house his mother tells Rick and Steve that they need a “queer and his eye” to redo their home, and that they had “a queer” in to decorate. This is a clear reference to “queer eye for the straight guy” and commentary on the ways in which queerness has become acceptable within the larger mainstream society so long as it is serving the straight community. It further reinforces the ways in which this sort of representation doesn’t alter societies oppressive and homophobic opinions as his mother comments that hell will be very well decorated. Despite the chance of misinterpretation in regards to trans characters I found the show to be quite funny, and probably the most interesting queer themed show that I have seen in quite some time. It relies entirely on cultural knowledge of being a member of the queer community, providing a space for queer humor without a translator for the straight folks.

Part 1 of Eppisode 1 can be viewed here:

"You're Here, You're Queer, Get Over It"

2007-07-23T20:15:00.000-07:00

“You’re Here, You’re Queer, Get Over It,” the headline screamed out from the Surf City: New York Politics from a Libertarian Perspective newspaper. This is not a paper that I normally read, to be honest prior to seeing this headline on my way to the grocery store I didn’t even know that the paper existed. However the headline caught my eye, that and the chains and leather harness which adorn the front page, and I had to pick it up. The newspaper rode around in my messenger bag for about a week before I remembered it and sat down to read. The main point of this front-page article written by Joseph Dobrian seems to be an attempt at exploring the social and political motivations of the LGBT community through the lenses of the annual pride parade.

The article gets off to a misogynistic start with citing the appearance of “topless lesbians” as a reason why the pride parade is the most enjoyable of “New York City’s many annual ‘special interest group’ parades.” The article then goes on to discuss the ways in which the LGBT community can never expect to be treated with the same validity as other minority groups because as a whole we fail to fit into the heteronormative roles of appropriate behavior. “At a time when so many gay people are demanding to be treated as ‘just folks,’ particularly on issues such as same sax marriages and adoption by gay couples, I wonder why so many gay people tend to hold up undesirable or bizarre behavior as particularly commendable.” Steeped in heterosexism, Dobrian clearly insinuates that unless queer people conform to straight norms of appropriate behavior, dress, and mannerisms that we do not have a right to protect our families. Instead of challenging larger cultural systems, which mandate conformity in order to achieve safety and protection, the victims of the systems are instead blamed for others inability to accept their difference. Later the article goes on to compare the struggles of the LGBTQ community with the experiences of people of color in our systematic racist society; during this analysis Dobrian chooses to use the highly racist phrase “negro” to refer to all people of color.

The article continues in it’s oppressive arguments inaccurately argue that AIDS is only contracted through “unsanitary and reckless” practices. Dobrian argues that the community treats those who are HIV positive as being “more gay” than community members who are negative. Despite his attention to HIV/AIDS he fails to address the real and profound affect that this disease has and continues to have on our community and instead trivializes it as nothing more than a political ploy for sympathy and a sort of badge of true gayness. Dobrian goes on to address the stereotypes, which the LGBT community perpetuates and in so doing shows a complete lack of cultural sensitivity or even basic understanding of LGBT community. In his analysis he argues that there is a certain “uniform” which must be worn. In that uniform he includes “leather motorcycle cap[s]” while failing to address the additional cultural meaning this clothing item has within queer leather culture, and instead chooses to treat it as simply an accessory. He also argues that lesbians “assume a surly scowl when speaking to men.” This further perpetuates the stereotypes that all lesbians are man haters, and I’m personally left wondering if perhaps his analysis is gained from attempting to talk to lesbians in the same disrespectful tone he has written his article in.

Dobrian concludes his article by saying, “to the gay community, don’t worry about being mainstream. You’ll never be any good at it anyway, and the parade would get really boring.” This dismissive attitude is highly offensive in that it dismisses the concerns of members of the community who worry about the mainstreaming of the LGBT community and lack of queer visibility. Furthermore it goes back to his initial oppressive arguments about how we are never going to be good enough to have our families protected and recognized. The problem becomes ours because our difference, because we “go around dressed in a jockstrap and a policeman’s hat, with chains strung through [our] nipples, doing Judy Garland imitations” Dobrian seems to argue that oppression is ok. Confusingly enough he argues that LGBT families deserve protections and recognition (although he admits he personally is uncomfortable with gay marriage). Yet despite his arguments for LGBT civil rights he seems intent on curtailing queer culture, something he clearly fails to have any sort of meaningful grasp of.

The article can be read here:
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:s-_brdDke1YJ:manhattanlp.org/SerfCity/serfcity_vol3_iss2.pdf+%22You%27re+Here,+You%27re+Queer,+Get+Over+It%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=safari

"FTF" have you really redefined femme?

2007-07-18T07:04:00.000-07:00

It is highly tempting when critiquing media so focus ones attention exclusively on mainstream large budget artifacts. Certainly there is important work to be done in exploring and critiquing these texts, they reach large audiences, and play a critical role in cultural constructions and understandings. With that in mind, I think it is also important to remember that independent media is still media and within our own little subcultures plays a large and important role in how we as queer folk conceptualize ourselves and those around us. “FTF: Female to Femme” is an independent film which debuted in 2006. In theory it is a film, which challenges the constructions of what it means to be a femme, positing femme can and should be understood, as it’s own gender separate from that of woman. FTF professes to align femme experience with that of other transgender peoples and suggesting (as many femmes have) that femme far from buying into cultural norms of femininity is instead subverting normative constructions of femininity and in effect queering them. Like many other genderqueer femmes I eagerly awaited my opportunity to view this groundbreaking film. Unfortunately the film fell far short of my expectations.

As apposed to positioning femme as a unique gender onto itself, FTF continually equated femme with woman, and furthermore with lesbian. Instead of challenging categories of identification and attempting to break out of a binary gender system FTF reinforces categorization, which places femme identity as being exclusively tied to “woman” and “lesbian.” Routinely within the documentary the femmes featured spoke of a collective “lesbian” experience and what that meant. This was particularly evident in the interviews with writer Jewelle Gomez whose reputed comments about femme being a radical feminist woman’s experience hurt the overall quality of the film. While of course it is important to discuss the ways in which feminist lesbian history has impacted the construction of a modern femme identity, and that for many of us that is a tangible history we can return to. It seems, counterintuitive to focus exclusively on this incarnation of femme if in fact the true purpose of the film is to challenge the borders of femme as an identity and shift it’s meaning into something outside that of “woman.”

In fact the only seemed to be a couple of the femmes featured in the film that were able to separate the concept of femme as an identity away from that of woman or lesbian and conceptualize them as separate entities. However the important messages presented by thus femmes particularly those of professor Masha Raskolnikov was lost in the overarching constructions of femme being exclusively and intimately tied to the categories of “woman” and “lesbian.” At times I found myself wondering if I was watching a documentary of burlesque troupes and not one about queer femme identity and it’s place in radical gender identity. While I appreciate burlesque as much as the next femme, and am in complete agreement that for many femmes it is an important part of their femme expression and identity, it wasn’t situated well within the film. While watching the film, it felt simply like filler and didn’t do much to further the intended purpose of the documentary. Additionally the mock femme transition support group which was intended to be comical didn't read as comedy (I only was able to learn that was it's intention from promotional materials). FTF was such an impressively cleaver title and places femme as a gender transgression similar to that of FTM or MTF experiences, thus furthering the work being done to make a place for femmes in the trans community as something more than allies.

Yet despite all of my critiques I couldn’t tear my eyes away from the screen the first time I viewed the film. I felt a kinship with the film even though I was thoroughly disappointed. There are so few representations of femme in the media, and specifically representations of femmes where we aren’t being mocked or ridiculed as “lipstick lesbians,” where it isn’t being argued that we are less queer, and where we have a voice to speak for ourselves I desperately wanted to fall in love with this documentary. And in a way I did, but what does it mean that because of a lack of representation we must settle for something that falls drastically short of even it’s own self professed goals?

Trailer for the film can be viewed here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mK9m7ls7crk

2007-07-16T20:53:00.001-07:00

[Man interrupts two women who are engaged in a conversation in a small-town sidewalk]
Perla (surprised): "Don Luis, strange to see you around here.."
Don Luis: "I wanted to know... when they gave you the loan from the bank to open your hair salon, did they ask for ID?"
Perla: "Yes"
Don Luis: "The document says that you are a man..."
Perla (turning less friendly): "Yes."
Don Luis: "They still gave it to you."
(woman nods)
Don Luis: "It's the same bank that gave me the loan for the car..."
Perla: "Hm."
Don Luis: "It made me think.. and it made me come to ask for forgiveness for having treated you badly all this time. For not knowing how to treat you... Take this, keep it" (hands the woman a figurine of a ballerina)
Perla (surprised): "For me?"
Don Luis: "Forgive me."
Perla (smiling warmly): "Thanks so much, Don Luis."
Don Luis: "Good-bye."

Caption: Your life changes when there's a bank that dared to change.

Voice-over: "You have a life, you have your bank."

NOTE: my ability to analyze this media artifact is a direct result of the translation, which was done by members of a livejouranl.com transgender community. My analysis of the artifact is thus based on a translation and the watching the commercial

While I normally tend to specifically explore the mediated representations of queer folks in the states every so often there is something that catches my eye. This is a bank advertisement form Argentina that prominently figures the discussion of trans issues. I am so interested and impressed with this commercial because of the ways in which trans people are portrayed as being part of a community in ways which I have yet to see occur in any mainstream media in the States. Furthermore the commercial grapples with the very real issues of transphobia and the oppression that gender nonconforming individuals often face on a daily basis.

While there is certainly room to problematize the ways in which LGBT people can and have been used by corporations as marketing ploys, and the ways in which the queer community has been marketed to by companies such as Budweiser I don’t think that this commercial can be placed solely in that camp. Certainly there is cause for concern as queer culture becomes increasingly defined by consumerism, and where pride parades look like one large commercial. However, I think that this commercial breaks out of that mold- instead of simply tokenizing queer people it addresses real issues that queer people, and specifically trans people face. The commercial focuses on the difficulties of obtaining something like a loan when your gender presentation doesn’t match the gender marker on your identification, something which trans people grapple with daily. If the commercial is to be believed it seems as though this particular bank is attempting to align itself with marginalized trans folks, and making a stand that oppression is not acceptable.

Furthermore the commercial addresses complex social justice issues related to transphobia. The interaction of the character sends a clear message to viewers that transphobia is not acceptable in any form. This is a huge statement, and one with has the potential to impact the lives of all trans people in that culture. Right or wrong, the media is where many of our lessons come from about how to treat others and what is and isn’t culturally acceptable. This sort of commercial is a huge step in the right direction, and the day that something like this airs in the States will make me very happy (although I’m not holding my breath).

"We're Not Really Married"

2007-07-15T18:56:00.001-07:00

It is impossible to go anywhere in New York City right now without seeing promotional posters for Universal Studio’s new motion picture “I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry.” The posters usually feature the two men in some sort of intimate position, although the wording on the ads makes it clear that this is supposed to be comical, by referencing the fact that they aren’t actually gay and in fact are “totally straight.” Thus avoiding the implication that a film was coming out which actually dealt with a gay male couple in a committed relationship. The films trailer presents the plot of this “comedy” as centering around the two men getting a domestic partnership in order to resolve a pension issue which would have left his children unable to collect the money from his pension in the case of his death (both men are New York City firemen). Gay marriage appears to be used synonymously with Domestic Partnerships in the films trailer, and inaccurate assumptions are constructed about the simplicity of having a domestic partnership respected. Although the film is set in NYC and domestic partnerships are legal here, it is not uncommon for queer couples with domestic partnerships to have their relationships challenged. Furthermore domestic partnerships are not federally recognized, in the same way that heterosexual marriage is thus the protections they can afford queer families is limited. The comical nature of this film overshadows the real danger that queer families face on a daily basis at the hands of our homophobic society and government. Queer relationships are not validated or respected, thus opening the door for marginalization and mistreatment of our families.

From the trailer it appears as though the film will rely on stale homophobic stereotypical humor, and example of this is as Chuck and Larry sit in their lawyer office discussing the ways in which they will proceed because their domestic partnership is being challenged by the government, they respond to their lawyer's claim that they have nothing to worry about by saying “we’re big time fruits.” Although some members of the queer community have reclaimed the term “fruit” in some cases, generally it remains a homophobic slur, and a term inappropriate for use by people who are not members of the straight community. Later in the trailer the narrator says “the only thing harder than being a mans man is letting go of being a ladies man.” Making a mockery out of gay men, and gay relationships the film insinuates that first of all there is something wrong with being a gay man, and secondly that the hardest thing is having to give up being interested in women; which feeds into the heterosexist ideals which dominate our society. Queerness is turned into a comedy at one point one of the children says “are you and dad homosexicals” the mispronunciation of “homosexual” is on the surface the punch line, however when you look deeper the “humor” of this scene is the implication that a child could know those sorts of words to begin with and could be growing up in an environment where they had gay parents. This film makes a mockery of queer relationships and queer families, which is particularly disconcerting given our current political climate and the ways in which queer families remain marginalized and placed in precarious positions by the defense of marriage act, the banning of gay marriage, and perhaps even more importantly the lack of federal civil unions or any other sweeping form of protection.

“Universal Pictures cordially invites you to a comedy” says the trailers narrator. Although the film is clearly itself a comedy, one is left wondering if this line has a deeper meaning. One could argue that it isn’t talking about the film at all, and rather is making social/political commentary on the nature of queer relationships. The underlying insinuation is that gay marriage is itself a comedy; “we’re not really married” is said later in the midst of a fight. Again although said in connection with the film, where they are not gay and are attempting to fraudulently claim a relationship, the implication is that gay relationships are not real. This sort of implication is particularly damaging as queer people attempt to build relationships outside of those which are sanctioned by the government-the implication being that any relationship which does not fit into the paradigm of married heterosexuality is not “real.”

Movie Trailer can be viewed here:

The Importance of Queer Cultural Sensitivity

2007-07-15T12:34:00.000-07:00

It’s pretty rare for me to like the media portrayal of the LGBTQ community in any mainstream media artifact. It’s even rarer for me to feel like the artifact in question went beyond the stereotypes that are deeply entrenched in our culture, breaking new ground and actively attempting to in a culturally sensitive way, and in a way which has the potential to bring about intelligent discussion about real life issues which impact the queer community. the 2005 Academy Award winning film “Brokeback Mountain” was just that kind of film. This film challenged the norms of what gayness looked like, and removed the stereotypes of whom gay men are, where they live and what their lives looked like. Having grown up in a semi-rural environment, and with all my family as farmers, loggers, and truck drivers I am intimately familiar with the communities the film attempted to portray. In the case of this film they were spot on. The construction of these men’s masculinity, and the ways in which that masculinity as expressed shows a deep understanding of the norms of rural working-class white masculinity.

Although this film caught heat from many queer critics, who believed that it should have shown a more ”positive” portrayal of the men’s love, that their interactions bordered on abusive at times, and that the last thing we needed was another media artifact which showed gay men marring women and living a “secret” life. I however believe that these critics completely missed the point of the film, and in doing so missed the truly groundbreaking impacts has opened possibilities for. So often the portrayal of gay men in the media relies on the stereotype that they are all flamboyant, effeminate, and urban. As such, this becomes the cultural norm and expectation of which gay men are, resulting in the complete silencing and invisibility of any expression of male queerness, which is not effeminate. Invisibility further occurs when the only recognizable expression for gay men is that of urban club culture (think “Queer as Folk”) thus removing the possibility of any forms of masculinity that do not fit inside this highly narrow and stereotypical construction.

Larger cultural impacts of this narrow media construction include the lack of recognition of queerness, which is not stereotypical, and the assumption that all queer people or in this case gay men behave or look a specific way. Real life implications of this occur as queer folks who do not fit this media constructed stereotype lack the ability to have their lives recognized as a result of heterosexist assumptions. Additionally, as this film articulates queer people are everywhere including conservative rural environments. Without mediated examples of lives lived queerly in diverse environments LGBTQ individuals attempting to come out will be unable to recognize themselves in any cultural artifacts. This is highly concerning, as the ability to find images of oneself within the media (particularly positive images) is often a key part of the ability to develop a positive self image, and recognize that you are not alone. “Brokeback Mountain” provides an entry into a world many have never seen, that of homophobic rural life, but instead of playing into the stereotypes which are associated with white rural communities: “redneck,” “white trash” etc. the film showcases a different way of loving, and the possibility of creating alternative family and love within the confines of oppressive heterotnormative and homophobic culture. Additionally, the film does not shy away from the realization that gay relationships are not acceptable in their culture, instead it is an issue which becomes a focal point of conversation between the characters as they attempt to come to terms with their love for one another. The real physical dangers which are present for these characters because of their geographic location, as well as the social/political climate (1963-1983) of the film was set in featured prominently in their lives. They spoke of men who were killed for trying to live lives together.

Brokeback Mountain challenges the norms, which exist within the media about who gay people are, where they live, and where they come from. These norms are particularly challenged given that the film centers on the relationship of two gay men. Although much of the films attention centered around the men’s kiss, there are other important lessons to be learned from this film about the importance of culturally sensitive constructions of characters and setting, as well as the importance of showcasing the diversity of LGBTQ experience within the mainstream media.

Movie Trailer:

Lesbian Gangs

2007-07-15T11:02:00.001-07:00

FOX “news” doesn’t have a particularly good track record for fair reporting or journalistic integrity. However, they are highly respected by large numbers of the American population who take their version of reality as truth and newsworthy. AS such, the reporting that they do on various issues is highly important when exploring the ways in which media representations of marginalized groups affect general public opinion. Recently the O’Reilly factor decided to take on what they have determined is the epidemic of “lesbian gangs” across the United States. The broadcast begins with discussing a real news case based out of New York City. In this case four lesbians have been sentenced to jail for allegedly beating up a heterosexual man. Fox’s analysis is that these woman beat up an innocent man. However the situation is much more complicated than the reporting implies, the women claim that the man approached them first, spit on them, and that they were acting in self-defense to prevent being gay bashed. Fox also neglected to mention that these woman were not in a “lesbian gang” and all charges of gang related activity were in fact dropped.

Appealing to the homophobic fears of a conservative public that makes up the majority of their viewers, the news report repeatedly discusses the indoctrination of youth into these “homosexual” gangs. Featured prominently in this broadcast is the theoretical sexual coercion of youth. This sort of sensationalist reporting brings to the surface the fears of middle America that their precious children could be the next victims of the rabid “homosexuals” waiting in dark alleys for an unsuspecting good and straight teen. The broadcast goes a step further to foster fears of parents through the discussion of the presence of these homosexual gangs in schools, and the recruitment practices. Was this a cheap shot at the inclusion of GSA’s in America’s High Schools and the fact that their numbers have increased exponentially in the past few years? It’s impossible to say, however the broadcast goes on to make sweeping claims without any apparent sources stating that the issues of homosexual gangs in American schools is “so prevalent” that school systems are “starting to take a closer look”. There is no mention of what schools, what these “gangs” look like etc.

One particularly interesting thing about the ways in which these gangs are framed over the course of the broadcast is they are compared to “ethnic gangs.” First of all these comparisons then rely on racist media portrayals and the institutionalized racism that is prevelant in American culture. The Fox viewers are used to hearing about these sorts of gangs, and have been indoctrinated in a media culture, which has already convinced them that they are in immanent danger of being attacked. This media broadcast thus plays into those already existing fears simply by making the subject of those fears the “homosexual” as apposed to people of color. There is also special attention paid to remind viewers that these are a “lower socioeconomic crew” thus playing into classist stereotypes, which fester, in the mainstream media as well as the American public at large. These are people, which are not like the good gays and lesbians which fox discusses being normally associated with “social movements.” Rather these individuals are associated with criminal activity feeding into stereotypes that poor queer people, and particularly poor queer people of color are dangerous. These media images serve to not only create a culture of fear surrounding queerness, but also further divide the queer community. White owning class gays and lesbians may have gained some degree of acceptability, and can be seen in the media: Will of Will and Grace is an example of this Rosie O’Donnell is another example. However the lines are clearly being drawn that queer people who do not fit into these appropriate categories are to be feared. It is interesting to note here that, while most conservative arguments frame “homosexuality” as a choice, this broadcast is aligning queerness with race. Thus the argument seems to be made here that queerness is in someway innate thus removing it from the “choice” moral arguments which often plague media discussion of these issues.

In the midst of this “news” broadcast it is also interesting to note that they make reference to the “Pink Pistols” saying that they are a “homosexual gang.” However in reality the Pink Pistols are an international organization who state on their website (http://www.pinkpistols.com) that they are "dedicated to the legal, safe, and responsible use of firearms for self-defense of the sexual-minority community. We no longer believe it is the right of those who hate and fear gay, lesbian, bi, trans, or polyamorous persons to use us as targets for their rage. Self-defense is our RIGHT." As an organization they do not promote gang violence, rather they support the rights of Americans to be armed, and argue that specifically queer Americans should own firearms to protect themselves in our homophobic dangerous society.

Note: In a follow-up broadcast after receiving heavy criticism from GLAAD and others, Fox admitted that the figures they used in discussing the “homosexual” gang epidemic were exaggerated and not accurate. They admit to have gotten “carried away” in their analysis although they still maintain that this is a valid news issue that should be reported on. In this broadcast they did an interview with a GLAAD spokesman that broadcast can be viewed bellow.

"I'll Glitter"

2007-07-10T15:47:00.000-07:00

In Walt Disney’s 1995 animated motion picture “Pocahontas” Governor Radcliffe was constructed and intended to embody everyone one could ask for in a villain, blood thirsty, greedy, self-absorbed, and queer. He is colonialism, and all the oppression and destruction that comes with it. Not unlike Jafar in Aladdin (1992), Radcliffe is also constructed as blatantly queer. Failing to embody traditional masculinity, we observe the braids in his hair are fastened with pink bows; he also does not partake in the physical work of “digging up Virginia”. In his musical number where he is singing about the gold that will be discovered in the “new world” he is dressed flamboyantly and sings “I’ll glitter” positioning him far outside of the norms of acceptable heterosexual masculinity. This is particularly true as men who are performing physical labor, thus displaying stereotypical heterosexual actions surround him. Positioning these hard working “good” men next to Radcliffe serves to further alienate audiences from him, and showcase his deviance.

Wiggings, Radcliffe’s confidant/servant/lover is without a doubt intended to be read as a queer character. Constructed as flamboyant and effeminate he embodies nearly all attributes and mannerisms, which are culturally attached to stereotypically gay males. Over the course of the film we watch as he cares for Percy Radcliffe’s pampered and very faggy pooch, which one can also read as queer not only in his mannerisms but also through his eventual romantic relationship with Meeko the presumably male raccoon. While all the sailors are constructed as embodying a culturally appropriate masculinity as they begin to build the fort and dig for gold, Wiggings is shown sculpting topiaries which serves to remove him further from appropriate masculinity. When the violence starts, unlike the other men who begin shooting guns, Wiggings is shown hiding behind his topiary art. In American culture where bearing arms is synonymous with appropriate heterosexual masculinity Wiggins is again culturally being coded as a deviant queer outsider.

Even prior to the ships arrival in the “new world” Wiggins has already been coded as queer, and his “inappropriate” masculinity has become a comic factor. Aboard the ship Radcliffe is discussing what the first meeting with the “savages” will be like. Saying “we shall have to give them a proper English welcome” to this Wiggings responds very excitedly “ohhhh gift baskets.” Although Wiggins primarily fulfills a comic role in the film, his queerness and potentially “inappropriately” close/possibly queer association with Radcliffe place him in the realm of the evil by association, thus again linking queerness with evil.

“oh I shall practice my curtsey”

2007-07-08T20:22:00.000-07:00

The plot and many of the characters in Disney’s “The Lion King” be read as prime examples of the ways in which blatant homophobia is tolerated within mass media. This film contains queer characters, which fall into two distinct categories: comic relief as in the case of Timone and Pumba, or evil as in the films villain Scar. These characterizations of queerness are combined with an overarching theme which values heteronormativity to the point of placing heterosexuality as THE path, anything outside of this simply fails to be part of “the circle of life” thus perpetuating a culture of heterosexism.

Positioning Scar as queer sends a clear message specifically to children about what is and is not acceptable behavior. Scar’s queerness is referred to continually through the film, in both his mannerisms and the dialogue between characters. For instance when confronted by Mufassa about missing the presentation of Simba Scar replies “oh I shall practice my curtsey” his limp-wristed paw near his face. In this moment he is enacting classical stereotypically queer mannerisms (the limp wrested faggot) and makes a comment, which accentuates. His effeminacy places him outside of appropriate masculinity, which is constructed, as desirable and normal for male lions. Immediately following this exchange viewers witness Zazu say to Mufassa “there’s one in every family two in mine, and they always managed to ruin special occasions” thus Scar’s queerness is constructed as problematic within the family structure.

Later in the film as Simba remarks, “Uncle Scar, you’re so weird” to this Scar replies, “You have no idea.” In this interaction “weird” becomes a not so subtle code for queer. Scar as the villain is scene as dangerous and evil which is problematic in and of itself however Disney then goes further and into even more oppressive cultural stereotypes by alluding to him as a child molester. Scar talking to Simba says “and remember it’s our little secret” while he could be referring to the information about the “elephant graveyard” he had just provided. This phrase is a classic recount of the sort of phrases used by abusers to keep their victims from telling. It is a line, which children in American society are very much trained to pick up on, and to recognize it as meaning some sort of inappropriate touching has occurred. Constructing Scar serves no purpose other than to feed into the widely populated and inaccurate stereotype of gay men as child abusers.

Scar is not the only queer character within the film; Timone and Pumba also embody a queerness, which is then shared by Simba in his time in the jungle. In my analysis of the film I would argue that Timone and Pumba are gay couple. After the entrance of Simba into the jungle I argue that their relationship shifts into that of a polyamerious triangle, where the three live together in a three-way relationship. Their poly relationship is perhaps the clearest in Timon’s introduction to the song “can you feel the love tonight” as he says “I can see what’s happening, and they don’t have a clue they’ll fall in love and here’s the bottom line, our trios down to two” (before breaking into tears at the prospect of loosing one of his partners) thus insinuating that Simba would surcome to compulsive heterosexuality (which he inevitably does) and return with Nala to the Pride Lands.

Simba’s return to heterosexuality is spurred on primarily by the vision of his father and his obvious disapproval. Mufassa says “you are more than what you have become, you have forgotten who you are and thus forgotten me…you must take your place in the circle of life”. Simba’s queer relationship with Timone and Pumba is not viewed as appropriate, and is viewed as a waste of life. It is only possible for Simba to regain appropriate status when he embodies appropriate masculinity (fighting Scar) and sexuality (mating with Nala and producing an heir). Timone and Pumba on the other hand continue to be constructed as queer even after Simba leaves. Viewers watch as Nala in her search for Simba wake Timone and Pumba who had been sleeping curled up together (further evidence of their relationship).

Later after Timone and Pumba follow Simba back to the Pridelands, an act that arguably occurs only because of their commitment to him, the two are expected to create a distraction. In a scene relying on classic queer humor Timone says, “What do you want me to do, dress in drag and do the hula?” immediately followed by him doing just that. The inclusion of the very phrase “drag” into the film leaves no room for interpretation into the queer nature of these characters. Their queerness however, unlike that of Scar’s is seen as humorous, they function as comic relief to what is otherwise a relatively heavy film filled with moralistic lessons about life, death, and compulsive heterosexuality. In exchange for their humor they are spared Scar’s fatal ending.

You ain't never had a "friend" like me

2007-07-08T15:54:00.000-07:00

In Disney’s “Aladdin” (1992) gender nonconformity is paradoxically used as a comic relief as well as social commentary as to the “need” for policing inappropriate gender behavior. Gender transgression was central to three of the films characters: Jafar, Iago and the Genie who were constructed in ways which placed them outside the traditional acceptable of heteronormativity. This queerness was enacted in different ways from the genie’s flamboyant antics, to Iago’s anger at being read as queer and his violent response to “inappropriate” sexual advancements/flirting by someone of the same sex.

Jafar, the power-hungry villain has little interest in Jasmine sexually she is simply a tool for him to get what he is truly after, power. He is revolted by the prospect of heterosexual marriage, and when this plan to marry the princess is first developed by Iago, Jafar’s facial expressions reveal nothing but utter shock and disgust at the idea. According to his plan, she will be killed after they are married, perpetuating sexualized violence against women. Furthermore, Jafar’s lack of sexual interest in women and his desire to kill the one whom he must marry in order to achieve his goal (power) situates his sexual deviance is dangerous. His all-consuming desire for money and power also feeds into existing cultural stereotypes surrounding the values of gay men.

Iago the parrot dresses as a pink flamingo in order to steal the magic lamp from Aladdin, an act that can be interpreted as being in drag. While in drag Iago feminizes his voice, disguising it as Jasmine’s in order to trick Aladdin into leaving his room, tying into cultural myths that drag queens and trans women are out to trick and deceive good heterosexual men.

In this moment, another flamingo approach Iago (still in drag) and begins to flirt with him. Based on his voice audiences are led to believe that this new flamingo is male. Iago responds violently to the advancements of the flamingo saying “you got a problem pinky” before hitting him over the head. This is more than simple slapstick comedy, before our eyes we are witnessing a gay bashing presented as a normal and appropriate behavior.

The Genie a flamboyant character crosses back and forth across gender lines frequently within the film, as he becomes a variety of pop-culture/media icons In this he is enacting an inappropriate queered masculinity where at different points within the film he is depicted as a gay tailor measuring Aladdin for clothes, then later as a flight attendant, and cheerleader with long blond hair. These are only a few of the times within the film that we witness the Genie transgress gendernorms. Despite the Genie’s gender transgressions, it was essential for Disney to maintain some semblance of acceptability when it comes to genderpresentation/identification and heteronormaive standards of behavior. The Genie who is beginning to build a friendship with Aladdin at one point in the film says “I’m getting kinda fond of you kid, not that I’d want to pick out curtains or anything” making it very clear that while it acceptable for men to be friends with other men there is a limit to that friendship. It is insinuated that there would be something wrong with their friendship developing into a romance where they would as the line eluded to have a home together. In this way audiences are given permission to laugh at gender transgression, the “absurdity” of two men loving each other while making sure that conservative homophobic “family” values are protected; there is no room for miscommunication of what sort of “friends” those two are.

2007-07-08T15:12:00.000-07:00

Disney’s animated film The Little Mermaid is the first film which I clearly remember viewing in a theater, and it was the beginning of the yearly Disney movies, which came to define my childhood. With the recent re-release of the film onto DVD it is clear that “The Little Mermaid” will come systematically indoctrinate a new generation into racist, classist, sexist, heterosexist, transphobic, fatphobic, abilist, American values.

Flounder, Ariel’s sidekick is constructed nearly identically to the ways in which gay men are commonly written into mass-media storylines. Flounder does not display what are commonly read as masculine characteristics. Instead the little fish embodies an effeminacy used often in mainstream media to characterize gay men. Although adherence to “appropriate” gender roles is not indicative of a lack of heterosexuality outside of queer culture and within the mainstream media the two have become understood as synonymous. We first meet flounder as he is helping Ariel scavenge the wreckage of a sunken we watch, as he comically is shown petrified with fear at the prospect of sharks. This resulting in Ariel calling him a “guppy” in a tone reminiscent to a playground taunts. The use of the term “guppy” serves to question Flounders masculinity/sexuality in a similar way to the taunt of “sissy” is used to question the masculinity/sexuality of a male-bodied individual who has moved outside the norms of appropriate male behavior.

Ursula the sea witch displays inappropriate expression of gender and sexuality. Her voice is stereotypically un-feminine in that it is very deep (considerably deeper than any of the other female characters in the film). Interestingly enough near the end of the film when she has gained King Triton’s power-through the form of his Triton (read: phallus) her voice becomes even deeper, further positioning her outside of the realm of appropriate femininity. Her queerness is not only tied to her “inappropriate” gender but also to her overt sexuality. As she sings “Poor Unfortunate Souls” Ursula is depicted as being highly sexual; we watch her do her hair and make-up, bringing the viewer into her bedroom as she primps and preens herself performing any number of highly intimate tasks. Ursula is fat and yet is very sexual thus on the surface breaking down beauty norms of a fatphobic society which argues that fat women are not sexy. However far from breaking free of the beauty mythology Ursula reinforces its lessons as her sexuality strays far from the limits of appropriate/heterosexual. Ursula is a “dangerous” character in the film, and the danger is tied intimately to her size inappropriate femininity and overt sexuality. In other words she is to be feared because she is both powerful and queer. Flounder on the other hand is allowed to remain lovable (to those other than King Triton who seems to disapprove of his daughters friendship with the little fish) because his deviance does not challenge the statuesque. He exists solely to serve the needs of his friend, a “good gay” character he knows his place and stays in it, whereas Ursuala seeks to rule the see, which would result in the normalization of her deviance.