The Wrap with Two Gay Guys: Do we have to watch something just because it's gay?
In this week's Two Gay Guys, Brent and Michael discuss whether we're obligated as gay people to support gay-inclusive entertainment regardless of how awful it may be. The guys then discuss the new FOX show Do Not Disturb (which premieres tonight) as an example, and wonder if the bar has been raised with the bump in gay characters on television and in movies. Check it out after the break! Submitted by on Wed, 2008-09-10 07:57. Alcohol & Medication!Submitted by
db (3165 points) (658 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 11:18.Thanks you! I am just so tempted to swim to the bottom of a bottle and stay there till the second week of November. It's been really hard for me to watch the election coverage--it is driving me crazy. The whole GOP hypocrisy and the cowed media--
The problem really is the mediaSubmitted by
The eat the Republican lies up. They LOVE it when McCain says something outrageous, even if it's obviously untrue. They don't have to do any work, just repeat the stupid McCain insult--"Obama wants to molest your child!" "Obama doesn't salute the flag!"--over and over and over again. If Obama can win in this media environment, it will TRULY be amazing...
Read my books! Explore "Brent's Brain" at http://www.brenthartinger.com Average (3 votes): The MediaSubmitted by
db (3165 points) (658 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 12:28.It's so true--I've watched too many commentators now get completely befuddled when they are accused of sexism by the same people who only months ago were saying the most offensive things about Hillary Clinton. The interview by Charles Gibson should be interesting--I want to see if he asks the same sort of questions he and George Stephanopolis asked of Obama in the debate.
Despite the claimsSubmitted by
Psionycx (7936 points) (1610 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 12:53.Despite the claims that conservatives like to make about the "liberal media", the truth is that most of it is run by corporate interests that subtly favor Republicans. Bush certainly has gotten away with a great deal. Indeed, he has run his administration almost the opposite of what he originally campaigned on and nobody seems to ever bring it up. Likewise the GOP trotting out things like claims of "sexism" is hysterical, and hypocritical. But again they're not getting called on it. ExactlySubmitted by
db (3165 points) (658 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 13:18.Notice how easily the media caves whenever the "liberal bias" is raised. All someone has to do is say "liberal" and the media whimpers.
Plus after 9/11Submitted by
Psionycx (7936 points) (1610 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 13:44.There was the "un-Patriotic" card that got trotted out all the time. Some of us remember how Bush, before he was president, used to complain about how Bill Clinton "overextended our armed forces in overseas engagements" and lambasted him for "nation building". That Bush himself went on to indulge in both to a degree undreamt of during the Clinton years is something nobody points out. Bush also campaigned on a plank of "fiscal discipline" (beloved by conservatives) but has been one of the most profligate presidents ever. Again this gets downplayed. McCain gets all this praise for being a "maverick" because he was so pointed in his attacks on Bush back when he was campaigning against him for the GOP nomination. But in actual legislative matters from his perch in the Senate McCain has rarely opposed Bush in anything. So how is he a "maverick"? Palin gets massive coverage and Biden gets almost none. Why? Because Palin is photogenic? There's been very little substantive coverage of her political views and the media certainly has dodged highlighting just how Right-wing she is. How many ex-Hillary fans would really support Palin if they were hearing about just how conservative she really is? And how hypocritical is the matter of Palin's daughter? When Clinton was president we got regular media coverage of Chelsea's dating habits after she was a legal adult and away at college! Any time Chelsea was seen with a guy it was a referendum on Bill and Hillary's parenting. Palin's teenage pregnant daughter and the boy she's about to be joined in a shotgun marriage to have certainly been scrubbed to make it look like Palin is a loving and devoted Pro-Life mother. If Palin were a Democrat then Pat Robertson and James Dobson would be on-air proclaiming that this is the result of mothers devoting themselves to career instead of family. It boils my blood because back when I lived in Boston this was a favorite theme of a conservative radio commentator that I used to listen to when I felt the need to get pissed off. He frequently cited Hillary as an example of the evils of working motherhood. So where's the criticism of Palin? Silenced because now they're suddenly pro-working-mom's when it looks like one might win them the presidency. Instead almost every word spoken against Palin is being recast as sexist. "Lipstick on a pig" is not a chauvinist joke but it certainly s useful for false outrage. But why is the media even reporting on so absurd a "controversy"? So much for the "liberal" media! "Maverick"Submitted by
Lyle Masaki (3516 points) (4428 posts) on Thu, 2008-09-11 08:22.McCain gets all this praise for being a "maverick" because he was so pointed in his attacks on Bush back when he was campaigning against him for the GOP nomination. But in actual legislative matters from his perch in the Senate McCain has rarely opposed Bush in anything. So how is he a "maverick"? The thing is, McCain has spoken against the majority Republican Party position a decent number of times... and in pretty much all of those cases he went on to vote with the Party. Since the media is "his base" he set himself up with an opportunity to have his cake and eat it too. I used to watch Race for the White House regularly for Rachel Maddow and I swear I heard some of that show's pundits go from "He's a maverick, he opposed the party on (fill-in-the issue)" to "In the end the Republicans can unite around him, even on (fill-in-the-same-issue) he went with what they want." Kerry got called a flip-flopper for much less but when it comes from McCain -- who has spent years getting chummy with the national media -- flip flopping (and pandering, as is the case in some examples) is a virtue... and not because he gave the issue some careful thought. Palin gets massive coverage and Biden gets almost none. Why? Because Palin is photogenic? There's been very little substantive coverage of her political views and the media certainly has dodged highlighting just how Right-wing she is. How many ex-Hillary fans would really support Palin if they were hearing about just how conservative she really is? I think some of it is Palin's newness, she's an unknown so there's mystery there, unlike Biden. However, I'm seeing the same problem with the media I've seen for the past decade (at least). A politician lies and the media corrects it... but when the lie gets repeated again and again most reporters seem to think "Well, we told our viewers that wasn't true last week, so we don't have to say it again. We'll just air her saying the lie again and they'll remember we told them it's not true on last Monday's show." I follow Media Matters' bulletins a lot and they feel repetitive -- a good number of them are 'Lie X was repeated to reporter Y, who didn't note that it wasn't true.' but it does need to be hammered in that the more often a lie gets uttered unchallenged, the greater the chances of leaving the voters misinformed. (Which, in the end, is the important thing -- in 2004 there was a study where people were quizzed about their presidential choice and what positions belonged to which candidate. People who planned to vote for Kerry were more likely to identify his positions correctly, while people who planned to vote for Bush were likely to get them wrong. If voters are basing their choices on an understanding of the candidate that's completely wrong, that undermines our democracy.) And how hypocritical is the matter of Palin's daughter? When Clinton was president we got regular media coverage of Chelsea's dating habits after she was a legal adult and away at college! Any time Chelsea was seen with a guy it was a referendum on Bill and Hillary's parenting. Palin's teenage pregnant daughter and the boy she's about to be joined in a shotgun marriage to have certainly been scrubbed to make it look like Palin is a loving and devoted Pro-Life mother. The Daily Show really nailed it last week when Samantha Bee (any chance she can be made into a Colbert Report guest host?) went around trying to get RNC attendees to admit that keeping the baby was a responsible choice Bristol made. Discussing Bristol Palin's pregnancy shouldn't be allowed to be a private matter simply because her mother doesn't believe other young women in a similar situation should be allowed to make a private choice with her family... why should Sarah Palin get more consideration than she thinks other families should get? To be honest, I've always been cynical, thinking if we ever saw a person of color or a woman become president it'd be a Republican. I always expected that a Democratic candidate would face racism and sexism -- both openly and in the form of code words and dog whistles. On the other hand, the people most likely to be throwing around those plays to bigotry, would be finding ways to decry the racism or sexism of the campaign for a Republican candidate instead. Sadly, I'm feeling some of that cynicism is being affirmed, right now. I hope that affirmation doesn't continue. Quality in gay mediaSubmitted by
Psionycx (7936 points) (1610 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 11:38.I’m inclined to agree with Brent. Things have changed from 20 years ago. Rather than a hidden demographic that could not be openly marketed to, gay people are now an open target market. So in that regard we do pursue entertainment that has gay characters in it. That’s no different than the way media companies produce programming oriented towards African-Americans, who in turn actively seek to watch shows with black characters. So there’s nothing unusual or unique about gays seeking out programming that contains gay characters. That said, I think we’ve reached the point where we now have enough gay content that we are now in a position to be a bit choosy. I cannot speak for others, but I don’t have a lot of free time for TV as it is, so I do have to aim for quality in what programming I do watch. Especially since I also fit in non-gay content like documentaries and shows like CSI. On the McCain front, we may well be screwed. The selection of Palin was a masterstroke, because she’s obscure enough that a lot of women don’t know that she’s almost the opposite of Hillary Clinton politically-speaking. But since she’s a political newcomer from the most remote state in the Union many people won’t see past the fact that she’s female and looks like Tina Fey to realize that she is way to the Right. McCain’s hypocrisy here is really disgusting though. Especially since he makes asinine statements like claiming that she has foreign policy and military experience from being in charge of the Alaska National Guard, which as far as anyone can tell she’s never even organized in a parade. McCain’s only two criteria in selecting her was that she’s a woman (and Condi Rice didn’t want to run) and she’s a Christian Conservative and would appeal to the Religious Right which didn’t trust him. The sad part is that she's boosting him merely because she's photogenic. And mean, Don't forget mean.Submitted by
dgchgo (1472 points) (280 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 12:30.That was an unexpected bonus. And it's working like lipstick on a pig.
Mean, mean, meanSubmitted by
db (3165 points) (658 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 13:26.The Republican convention was so weird--the most offensive thing was Guiliani mocking Community Organizers--WTF? I mean, kicking people for working to better their communities--and no one in the media seemed to comment on it. I thought the whole tone was just nasty--especially that Palin woman.
ThanksSubmitted by
GeoNorth (613 points) (122 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 12:11.Thanks for the poltical rant. I think we're all just in disbelief right now that they might get away with this. I like to think I have more faith in my country than this. But its getting tougher every day. Canada should really consider making a play for America's best and brightest. Make some sort of immigration window to draw in some of America's most important resources, smart educated people. Those teeth were pearly whiteSubmitted by
dkellergrl2001 (1363 points) (276 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 12:53.Those teeth were shining. :D What a funny, interesting and truthful blog (especially the rant on politics). Love hearing both of your thoughts about things and I'm definitely interested in what you guys think about the upcoming episodes of Hollyoaks and the exit of John-Paul's character (James Sutton) from the show. Love me less, but love me a long time - Les Chansons D'Amour Also SkinsSubmitted by
Whitetee (3088 points) (666 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 13:09.Is Brent still resisting the show?What would be Michael`s take on the Maxxie episode?I`m really curious.
I'm happy to hear it out loudSubmitted by
David E is a Fraud! (315 points) (162 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 14:38.It's great to hear out loud that we don't have to like everything just because it's 'gay'. Now if we couid also get it into our heads that naked bodies are wonderful, but they don't have to be the featured so often... I wonder how many 'gay' shows would still be on the air if the nudity (even the bare-chested scenes) were removed? _________________________________________ -Sibelius "It's curtains for you, Dr. Horrible. Lacy, wafting curtains..." Obama/McCainSubmitted by
Samuel Gillespie (1090 points) (206 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 17:50.While I obviously cannot condone or support McCain's or Palin's stance on gays, I cannot support Obama's rather incredulous statement that the Government is "Brother's Keeper", or understand why increasing the tax burden on Corporations to support a tax cut to the middle and lower classes would work to keep corporations from sending jobs overseas. The parties are not the same. At all. But I cannot vote for Obama. His plans scare the bejesus out of me. Oh, LordSubmitted by
Look, if the Republican party hasn't already lost you by: (1) giving massive tax cuts to the richest Americans while massively expanding the size of government, turning the country's biggest surplus into the country's biggest debt; (2) deregulating everything and causing the mortgage crisis and the coming banking crisis; (3) turning from terrorism to online porn in early 2001, allowing bin Laden to attack us on 9/11, and then; (4) responding to that attack by attacking a different country than the folks who attacked us, letting the real culprits get away and reform; (5) THEN completely screwing up the unnecessary war on Iraq on virtually all fronts, emboldening terrorists all over the world and making the rest of the world hate us after everything they warned us about turned out to be dead on; and (6) spurning civil liberties and the rule of law, imprisoning citizens without charges or recourse to the courts, destroying 200+ years of Constitutional protections, and totally blurring the line between church and state, not mention breaking the law to institute torture (and then lying about that fact); and (7) pitting American against American and America against the world for political purposes in a time when we're supposedly in a "war on terror" and unity is more important than ever... If you've already swallowed all THAT bullshit and still want more, well, there is absolutely nothing I can possibly say to keep you from voting for McCain. Go right ahead. But for the record, it's not Obama's tax cuts on the middle class that are going to keep corporations from shipping jobs overseas; it's his health care plan. The Republican have allowed health care costs to explode, with most of the money going to, yes, corporations. This is the where the money that used to go to workers is going...and it's why corporations are now going overseas (that and the fact the our education system sucks, which McCain wants to gut further). Obama would start to solve the health care crisis; McCain would do more of the same, making it worse. Like I said, vote for McCain because Obama "scares" you. If you haven't been "scared" by the last eight years, you live in a different reality than the one I live in anyway.
Read my books! Explore "Brent's Brain" at http://www.brenthartinger.com Average (8 votes): Wordy word WORD!Submitted by
Knickie (4010 points) (818 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 22:44.Wordy word WORD!
Do we have to watch something because it's gay?Submitted by
seanID22 (280 points) (56 posts) on Wed, 2008-09-10 19:28.No, absolutely not. Much of it is terrible. I can't figure out exactly why it's all so awful, but it is. On the other hand, when I was younger I got into all the old camp classics, all the divas, etc. just to see what older gay guys were talking about. And I think I'm the better for it. I think one should have a good grounding in gay history and gay entertainment before you reject it wholesale. Yeah Brent & Michael!Submitted by
Todd (37 points) (8 posts) on Thu, 2008-09-11 11:12.First off, let me say you two are too cute for words!
On watching something because it's gay - I work at a video store and make it a point to watch everything we get in that is gay oriented... Why? Well, there is so few movies that do come out (pardon the pun) as gay movies, that I feel I should watch what's out there to tell my customers what is good or not. And there is really very little out there that gets a strong vote - and if I have to watch one more movie from Toby Ross/Hornbill Films or the gawd-awful Ariztical Entertainment, I think I would rather have my eyes poked out with a giant stick! However, every once in a while there is a great film like "Shelter" or a little-seen, low-budget indie like "Blue Citrius Hearts" or a stunner like "Mysterious Skin" that grabs me and makes me quite proud to be gay. On McCain - I really don't see how any self-respecting person, let alone gay person, can vote for him EVER! Thanks for the great vlog!
Todd
Eleventh HourSubmitted by
mst7883 (188 points) (38 posts) on Thu, 2008-09-11 05:42.Great vlog as always; Brent, I damn near shivered at "so GODdamn cynical!" (and Michael, that was a sweet look of concern when he mentioned getting sick to his stomach). But this is truly the most important time NOT to give in to despair. Are you:
1) working for the campaign?
2) volunteering to get out the vote? (some folks just can't get to the polling place alone)
3) encouraging all the younger people (who overwhelmingly support Obama and who notoriously sit on their hands during elections) you know that their votes count and they'd better BY GOD get registered and get to the polls?
P.S. If that doesn't work... I'll get us ALL into Canada (I know people...)
"Does this cocktail glass make me look fat?" I worked for the KerrySubmitted by
I worked for the Kerry campaign, but have only donated to Obama so far. But you're right, I should (and will)!
Read my books! Explore "Brent's Brain" at http://www.brenthartinger.com no votes |
![]() Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|






















OMG you guys are finally back on the vlog!!
we weren't gone THAT long....
Read my books! Explore "Brent's Brain" at http://www.brenthartinger.com Average (1 vote):
Just noticed