How Fox Packaged Homophobia as Entertainment

But what most of the media — and even the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) who called on Lythgoe to apologize – have missed is the much larger and more troubling aspect of this episode: the way homophobia was packaged and delivered to American audiences under the guise of entertainment.

Everything viewers witnessed – from the decision to feature Belfer and Kibel in the first place to the music played to the footage shown to the comments made by the judges that were included – was done on purpose and to create a specific “tone” for the segment.

In reality shows such as this, the producers usually edit each highlighted segment to induce a particular reaction in the viewer: spectacular footage to invoke awe at a contestant's skill. Interviews with family members to bring about empathy for a particularly moving or inspirational story. Or humor to create disdain and laughter for something deemed abnormal and funny.

It should be noted that unlike Lythgoe’s comments, which are his alone, this particular episode credits at least 33 people – besides host Cat Deeley and the three judges (Lythgoe is also the show’s co-creator and is listed as an executive producer, meaning he may or may not have been intimately involved with more than just judging) – as responsible for creating what viewers watched. Furthermore, SYTYCD is produced for 20th Century Fox by 19 Entertainment, which is in turn owned by entertainment company CKX, Inc.

And none of those 33 people, nor anyone else at any other stage of the process, apparently found anything troubling about the product they put on television screens. Make no mistake: what Fox and the producers of SYTYCD create every week is a product – a lucrative product that generates a great deal of profit.

To grasp exactly what transpired, it’s important to understand just how deliberate and calculated all of this was.

Out of the hundreds of people that auditioned in Denver, the producers selected a handful to feature on the show including Belfer and Kibel. Clearly those in charge of SYTYCD felt there was something noteworthy about the duo.

It wasn't that the men spectacular dancers. They weren't bad and even dance competitively, but they did fall at one point and never stood a real chance of advancing.

Nor was it the first time the show had featured two men dancing together. In fact, at one point Lythgoe cited that fact as if that somehow proved homophobia couldn't be involved. But as Lythgoe himself also specifically noted, it was the first time they'd had men dance in each other's arms.

While both men are not gay, what they were doing was "gay." And that's what caught the producers attention and that is what they highlighted. 

The footage of Belfer waiting for Kibel to emerge from the bathroom was staged, including someone making the decision ahead of time to zoom in on the men’s room sign as "It’s Raining Men" played over the scene (a song that is often associated with gay men).

The choice of "It’s Man’s Man’s Man’s World” playing at the end of the segment was even more dismaying for gay viewers as it seemed the specific lyrics producers chose to play – that life without a woman is “nothing, nothing” – implies gay men aren’t whole or normal since they fall in love with other men.

Not only did producers have to choose these songs, they then had to pay for and license them, something they felt worthwhile to create the tone for which they were going. It's hard to imagine a situation in which they would play a song implying a white man who had danced with a woman of any race was somehow not normal.

Furthermore, the shots of the two men walking to their audition were intercut with extravagant slow motion shots of their doing the Samba, an intimate, sensual dance.

Given that the entire segment was put together after the producers had already heard Lythgoe’s comments about a same-sex couple alienating their viewers, it’s curious that the show went to such lengths to highlight this particular aspect.

Indeed, the question begging to be answered is: Why include the duo at all?