Now entering Bitch Island
I'm usually too busy yelling at kids to get off my lawn to follow MySpace and YouTube celebrities, so Chris Crocker has flown under my radar until now. Reading a profile of Crocker in Seattle's The Stranger makes it clear that I should start paying attention to Crocker's video blogging. Crocker lives in a small, conservative town (he refers to it simply as Bitch Island, for anonymity's sake) where intolerance and homophobia are completely acceptable, a place where Crocker had to turn to homeschooling to avoid a constant threat of violence in school. Turning to the internet, Crocker has found a voice and a community that accepts him. There's a lot of anger and a confrontational nature to Crocker's videos. In "Gay People" (language NSFW) the effeminate Crocker rails against the internalized homophobia found in the idealization of passing for straight and "normal" (as one video response tellingly puts it). Crocker displays a similar anger in "This & That" (another video with NSFW language), a response to the homophobic comments he's received. Crocker also entertains his fans with his flair for drama in videos like "Healthy Foods" or his review of the many iterations of the phrase "Bitch, Please." If these videos didn't exist with his frank talk about dealing with discrimination, Crocker might come off as a stereotype. A good part of the power of Crocker's work is that he makes it clear that he's not on MySpace and YouTube existing just to entertain but a fully rounded person. Submitted by on Thu, 2007-05-31 15:04. |
![]() Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|








I loath the gay media's labeling
In this context, though, it seemed apt.
But then why even label?
"the effeminate Crocker rails against the internalized homophobia" Why was there ever a need to place the label? Wouldn't "Crocker rails against the internalized homophobia" be just as appropriate and even more powerful? He's speaking in the video about how there should be no discrimination from gay person to gay person, not labeling him adds to the power of his feelings. If he has a problem with people being called flammer or queeny why label him here? If he is effeminate or masculine it does not matter. I'm very familiar with Chris, I've been a subscriber for months.
But, people have different opinions, neither of us is wrong. I guess I just don't understand.
Context
when it comes to the whole
when it comes to the whole topic of masculine/feminine in the gay community, I understand both sides. I think everyone has the right to express themselves and if they're "girly", so be it. But... I also have the right to prefer masculine guys because I would rather be the more "feminine" presence in a relationship (I'm not really effeminate, but I'm the one who is more emotional, into cooking and cleaning and grocery shopping, etc...). Awhile back, I had a date with a guy who turned out to be a drag queen (something he didn't bother telling me until after we met, he was out of drag when we met tho). He seemed to like me a lot but then suddenly made it out like I'm the bad guy because I knew it wouldn't work out with him because I'm not attracted to femininity... my opinion is, if I wanted a girl, I'd be straight. Now I'm with a man who loves me and is willing to be the man I need him to be and vice versa.
I think people get way too defensive about the way gay men look down on more flaming gay men... the fact of the matter is, if you're attracted to masculinity, they're more than likely not going to be your type.