 by Michael Jensen
Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Who's onlineThere are currently 48 members and 1803 guests online.
|
Nigel Lythgoe issues apology.
Yesterday afternoon, AfterElton.com received the following from Fox concerning Nigel Lythgoe's comments during Thursday night's episode of So You Think You Can Dance. (GLAAD also received the same apology.)
As far as apologies go, it's not as godawful as Fox's non-apology apology, but like Fox's first statement, Lythgoe doesn't seem particularly sorry for what he said, but just for upsetting people. He also swears he isn't a homophobe (because most homophobic people are so upfront about that, no?) But he does say he made mistakes that he must learn from. Hopefully, that does indicate some true awareness that his attitudes are not okay. [Editor's update: After reading some of the comments below, I re-read and reconsidered Lythgoe's statemement and don't think I gave him enough credit for his apology. My apologies for that.] What's your reaction? Submitted by on Sun, 2009-05-24 10:38. |
 Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|
Welcome to AfterElton.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media
It's better than Fox's, but
i believe he is sorry...
but like Fox's first statement, Lythgoe isn't sorry for what he said, but for upsetting people.
^ sorry, got to disagree here. i think he IS in fact, sorry for what he said.
I sincerely regret the fact that I have upset people with the poor word choices and comments I made both during the taping of the "So You Think You Can Dance" audition and on my personal status update. I am not homophobic and it was extremely upsetting for me to be classed as such.
I have been forthright and consistent with my opinion, as a judge, that professional male dancers should move with strength and agility -- like Gene Kelly and Rudolph Nureyev. I now realize how this could be misconstrued.
^ i think he understands as a result of what he said, people were offended. I think he is sorry for saying those things.
I actually meant to say he doesn't seem particulary sorry
well, i think...
i think i would be upset and sorry if i realized that my words deeply offended people and gave out a wrong message, especially if that was not my intention.
i would be sorry for offending people and also sorry for what i said. i think he is particulary sorry for both. the two go hand in hand, IMO.
I agree but shouldn't he
I agree but shouldn't he also understand why he should be sorry in the first place. Maybe he is contrite. His comments on twitter, however, indicate an extreme lack of understanding of the nature of his offense.
Michael "Perez" Jensen
"at least its an apology"
He issued some sort of apology in which he not only mentions male dancers should be more strong and agile (i.e. not effeminate) and that he is being victimized as a homophobe. The old wrap yourself in the victim blanket routine. Not all apologies are created equal, this one is barely an apology.
Also, Michael is a damn fine good editor of this site! How dare you compare him to Perez. "Innuendos" about Adam Lambert? Huh? You are completely mad. If you do not like this blog site, there are plenty of others I am sure to your liking (or disliking). Move along, Troll.
I agree completely. He
I agree completely. He twittered that feminine male dancers essentially prevent masculine men from entering the profession, that the gays(or at least the obvious ones) scare away the straights. Sorry, but I don't see how that isn't homophobic.
Re: Previous Post
@Michael Jensen
I see you made a correction to your editorial. I did not see this until just now and it was after my previous post was made. I wish to apologize to you for the harshness of my post. The wording and characterizations I used were disrespectful. Sometimes people read things online and interpret and misinterpret things they read, people say things meaning one thing, and people interpret it a totally different way, and can take offense. I really could have expressed my disdain in the previous post in a much more appropriate way. I will try to choose my words more carefully in the future.
Personally, I don't care for this Nigel guy, and maybe he is sorry, maybe he isn't. But we won't know unless we at least give him the oppurtunity to prove himself. We want tolerance and acceptance, so we should set an example. He could just as easily have told us all to go **** ourselves. As for those posters here who say he only apologized because he was pressured. Well, isn't that the point? He had to be showed the error of his ways, and he was, hopefully. If not, I'm sure GLAAD will continue to try to correct him. It goes back to the whole point of what kind of apology would make people happy. Obviously, for some people, none. I say we give him the chance to make amends, if he continues to do it, that is another matter. But everyone 'screws up' once in a while. Just look at me, should I be crucified, never mind, don't answer that - I don't think I want to know.
For the most part, "Ugh!"
For the most part, "Ugh!" is all I can say to the majority of your post.
As to your claim that Fox attempted to give Adam and the others "some modicum of privacy", I call bullshit. Adam was the judges and producers favorite. Outing him would have destroyed his chances. It's more likely that the producers told him to play coy so as not to ruin his chances of winning. If you think that AI was just being considerate you know nothing of the machine that is AI. A show attempting to give a modicum of privacy to its contestants would shove dead wives and the struggles of the blind down our throats.
And how dare you compare this site to Fox News. This site was supportive of Adam to the nth degree. He brought in more gay viewership and support than any contestant to date. You sound like one of those ridiculous fantards who blame the world for his loss. Get over yourself.
From what I have read
@ziggy
Please don't hate on Michael Jensen. He is a top notch editor and reporter and equating him to Perez Hilton is just disgusting. Perez is a bottom feeder and does not hold a candle to Micheal. He is not even worthy to lick Michael's boot.
As far as Lythgoe goes you should be equating him to Perez. I don't think his apology would have come if there was no backlash for his statements. He is just reacting to the negative press just like Issiah Washington. He knows if he doesn't apologize he will be booted from the show and not be hired for anything else.
His remarks should never have been uttered in the first place. There is no excuse. He is just a bitter old man who is jealous of the younger dancers and his homophobia is so appearant that you would have to wonder if he himself is closeted. Personally I would not want him in the "family" so to speak.
Again please post an apology to Michael since it was not very mature of you for that attack on Michael's character.
Live Long and Prosper
Re: @Ziggy
I apologized to Michael, and not to be rude, but I want to assure you of something. With all due respect, I did not apologize to him because you asked me too. I don't know you, and I don't apologize for something I'm not sorry for, I don't care who asks me. That's how I am. When I apologize, it is with sincerity. I apologized to him for two reasons. The first being that Michael obviously was aware enough that part of his editorial was being misinterpreted so he edited it. Second, after I posted my entry it was bothering me so I came back to the site and that is when I noticed his change. I knew I was harsh and really should have thought more about my words. So that is why I did what I did. Now, I would have apologized even if he hadn't made the editorial change. But I pointed that out, because it showed good judgement on his part.
As for your comments about Perez, I completely agree with you, and equating him to Michael was very poor judgement on my part. Apples and oranges. I do however have to disagree with your equation of Nigel and Isaaih Washington. Washington I believe is a homophobe, he used an expletive repeatedly. This guy, Nigel hasn't, to my knowledge. His culture may be different, apparently, but that doesn't make him a homophobe.
On a final note, I want to thank you for at least being able to maintain a modicum of decency in your response to my previous post. Kudos to you for that. I'm glad that at least you were able to, and that is why I replied back. And my explanation of my apology is not meant as a slam, by merely an explanation of principle. Thank you.
Anybody notice any age-ism in these posts?
Pope Skippy XVI
"bitter old queen"? "bitter old man"? "Jealous of the younger dancers"?
In the process of calling out my online school on their depiction of an advertising campaign targeted at GLBT auto buyers, it is surprising to me to see how quickly things turned to being not young enough to lighten up. Would almost give you whip lash.
"Old" is certainly not a requirement for "bitter," nor vice versa.
It seems that Nigel, like Simon, has it in his contract to be an unfeeling butthead, just as Mary is obligated to be far too loud, and Paula is encouraged to be, well, unfocused. But even admittedly gay authors of books like "Idol Worship" or "Hollywood Babylon: It's Back" talk about the perception of what a man is supposed to be and the change from Valentino to Gable. Nuryev probably was more butch than Nijinski, and dance--especially since Gene Kelley, IMHO--has taken on a more athletic aura. I'm not sure that how someone presents themselves is an indication of orientation, though. (Rock Hudson fooled lots of people for a very long time. I'm pretty sure there are some contemporary examples.)
AGEISM Works both ways here
People of any age can be bitter and we shouldn't be disparing folks based solely upon their age group.
That said, there is think kind of resentment of youth thing that happens here particularly when discussing issues of masculinity, gender expression and presentation and style.
Sometimes I feel like men (straight and gay) just have no patience for young men who don't experience their sexuality or sense of masculinity in the same way as the older guys did (or had to). It's like they want young guys to continue to have to cultivate this hyper-masculine attitude and behavior because they had to when they were younger (or maybe they just don't ever like seeing what they perceive as femininity in men, who knows)
If you look at the overall landscape of young men in popular culture, what is or isn't "masculine" for men has changed. It just has. That is inevitable.
Young men (unless they come from a fundamentalist background of some sort) are just less bothered about being perceived as "masculine" and I think that definitely plays out in style and behavior and even in their fluidity around being open to different sexual experiences and they'll wear nail polish or throw a kilt over jeans more easily with it having nothing to do with sexual orientation.
If you lined up a bunch of young male celebrities (gay and straight) from across the arts, you'd be hardpressed most of the time to tell who's gay or straight but not because they all look butch or femme but because they all kind of blend on the scale.
Even the super wholesome Jonus Brothers throw on eyeliner and polish from time to time and rock the glamrock look occasionally.
That's the reality. I see it with my college students and boys in my community.
It may be just an urban big city thing but I don't think so.
Skinny jeans, nail polish, floppy sixties hair, that's why young "hip" guys look like. And I say "hip" only because it tends to be a youth trend kind of thing. It's very androgynous and very much frowned upon here on AE.
I guess my point is just that I feel like older men just dismiss any young guy who they don't perceive as being very masculine (gay or straight) in this way that seems incredibly intolerant and a lot of that sentiment is embedded in Nigel's comments (even before this episode) and in a lot of the comments folks make here.
I think even if those dancers had had absolutely perfect technique and form, they would still have been ridiculed for being guys dancing together.
I think younger gay men these days (and I don't mean drag queens or guys who do drag) are much more likely to tell straight folks to kiss their arse then they are to change the kind of clothes they want to wear or butch it up for the status quo. (check out 5awesomegays channel on youtube which my nephew follows religiously)
And a lot of the time the response from older men is just so "How dare you be so blatantly non-masculine!!!" that it's very off-putting and maybe does seem old fashion.
I know most folks on AE don't feel that way but the way a lot of older men very heavy-handedly throw around the phrase "stereotypical gay" on this site with such contempt and disgust is just so out of proportion to what's actually going on in pop culture today that it is not only disheartening but I think it feeds into the kind of crap Nigel L spews.
"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)
Not sure
I think someone at Fox realised that they managed to alienate a big portion of the show's audience, so they told him to apologise. He probably is sorry that people felt hurt by what he said, not sure he's actually sorry for saying the things he said.
I agree with Randy's comment, this is very similar to the I. Washington situation.
different kinds of homophobia
I've been wathcing the show for years now, and Nigel has bothered me for most of that time for a number of reasons, most importantly because, I believe, he is a homophobe. I do believe him when he says he isn't (I think he is homophobic, but that he sincerely believes he's not). I expect that he has lots of gay friends, and that he gets on fine with them (which he's stated, and rings true for the industry he has worked and thrived in). I believe he believes that sexual orientation shouldn't have anything to do with job status. I believe he is not the kind of homophobe who would be involved in gay bashing. I beleive he's not the kind of homophobe who would be against gay rights. But there are other ways to be homophobic.
Here in this incident and in all the years I've watched the show (despite Nigel, NOT because of him--he's a pompous bore in addition to being homophobic) he has talked about the need to get straight (or at least straight acting, straight passing) boys into dance. He talks about how hard it is to convince dads that dance is OK for their sons. But here's my issue--his response is to say "It's not just for gays! Look, I'm straight and it's been my career... There are lots of straight men in dance..." That, to me, is highly offensive. That's what I don't think he gets--that is homophobic attitude. "God hates fags" homophobic? No. But just because one isn't a rabid homophobe doesn't mean one isn't a homophobe at all. If he weren't a homophobe, he would respond "So what if there are a lot of gays in dance? There's nothing wrong with that, there's nothing wrong with being gay, period, and you shouldn't let your homophobia get in the way of your son's interest." But no. He validates the homophobic attitude that dance needs to be *protected* from the image (the misperception, he would say--he does say) that it's only for gay guys. The only way dance needs defending that way is if you believe that to be gay is inferior. That is homophobia, in my opinion. Not the worst kind, sure, but still, not what I want to see on TV.
When someone thinks something needs to be protected from being associated with me, I find that attitude offensive. Going way beyond this particular incident, this man has demonstrated that attitude consistently.
So I'm glad Nigel apologized. I'm glad he is seeing that his remarks were hurtful. I give him credit for looking at his words and actions and stating publicly that he is sorry for them. But I'm still never going to watch the show again. Unless he comes out with an apology for way more than making some bad jokes, I don't believe he has looked deep into his attitudes about what it means when he crusades to defend dance from the image that it's only for gay men. I don't believe he really understands that his championing of the rigid patriarchal gender roles that are involved in traditional mixed-gender partners dance is... well, it's my value judgment, but it's wrong. I think it's wrong. He's free to disagree. He is the expert, the careerist in the field, and the one with the TV show. And I'm the one with the DVR that won't ever be set to record that show again.
All through each season of the show, they have dancers perform in pairs (as well as in large groups, but those performances aren't part of the competition). They are all female-male pairs until the very end when there are two dancers of each gender left. For that last performance show, they have them dance in all possible combinations by twos. Each year, I have felt very uneasy about the ways they have choreographed the male-male performances. They bend so far over to make them non-sexualized that it's... I don't know, creepy. It's really nagged at me as an irritant. It's so clear that they are so afraid of being tarred by the queer association that they will do that American/British stick-up-the-ass "we're not touching! We're not gay... If we touch, it's just to push each other around" kind of bullshit. Anyway, the point is, this homophobic attitude (subtly homophobic, but still, "to be gay is bad" attitude) runs very deep in this show. It's just reared its ugly head with this particularly obnoxious display on last week's show, but it's always been there and I think will continue to be.
Sorry, that's really long... Summing up: I don't like Nigel, and, although there are a lot of reasons I've watched and enjoyed the show, the pervasive homophobia that I perceive to be there (particularly visible in Nigel's statements) is driving me away for good.
Also, I agree with others singing Michael's praise. Consistently fine work--not everyone will agree with everything all the time (duh), but this is a man of integrity and an open mind, and this blog is a great resource, one I love.
What is bashing?
Asking what is bashing
abuse
Pope Skippy XVI
I agree. It's like the famous definition of pornography, where I can't define it but I know it when I see it. Having returned to university later in life, I frequently bucked up at hurtful speech in the classroom. When asked what is meant, I always said it's like telling kids about "good touch/bad touch." You feel it when it happens.
You said, "But no. He
You said, "But no. He validates the homophobic attitude that dance needs to be *protected* from the image (the misperception, he would say--he does say) that it's only for gay guys. The only way dance needs defending that way is if you believe that to be gay is inferior."
It's not really the gay vs straight thing he was referring to. He takes issue with feminine male dancers. That to me is more offensive than blatant homophobia. He tries to cloak it and qualify it...I'm down with the gays, as long as they act like straight men.
Fine. But he's being criticized for the wrong thing.
His comments (and those of the other judges who agreed with him, but for some reason aren't being criticized as strongly) weren't homophobic per se. They basically weren't about sexual orientation at all (except insofar as some gay men are somewhat effeminate and some gay women are somewhat masculine, but then so are some straight men and women).
But his comments were really fundamentally about gender stereotyping and gender expression, and were discriminatory against any man gay, straight, or otherwise who isn't sufficiently butch for the judges' tastes, as well as any woman regardless of orientation who isn't sufficiently feminine in their eyes.
And personally, I think everyone, regardless of their orientation or where they fall on the butch/femme/androgyne spectrum SHOULD be offended at the judges' comments.
A good dancer, like a good actor, should be able to be as masculine, feminine, or ambiguous as the role they are currently dancing warrants according to the choreographer.
And in the case of the piece in question, the whole point of the choreography was to challenge the traditional notion of the gender roles in ballroom dance. And as such, with the exception of falling on their asses, was quite successful.
The choice of playing "It's Raining Men" was just sophomoric.
mostly agree
I think all of what you say is true. But I do think they all displayed a strong "ICK" response *just* because it was two men doing a partnered dance routine that is symbolic of sexual courting. You're right--the gender roles stuff is a major issue, one that's largely being lost in the uproar. You're right--the other two judges were obnoxious and ignorant, too and should be called out. (Although I think Nigel was the worst of the lot, and also as a show producer deserves more blame, that is, he's more responsible, for all of it getting to air.)
I do think there was homophobia, too, though, and not only abhorrent "no stepping out of gender-conformity roles!" underlying the whole episode and its aftermath. But I definitely agree with you that what you point out needs to be part of this discussion and *should* be part of an acceptable apology.
True, you're right.
True, you're right.
I just rewatched the segment, heard the "Brokeback Ballroom" crack, read more about the remainder of what happened, etc., which completely changes my mind about his underlying bias. This was not even subtle; it's blatant homophobia and gay baiting swathed in a cloak of gender expression bigotry (not that that's much better) and cluelessness. See my replies to Nukely below.
coded homophobia
Yes.
Yes.
dpc's comment above made me start to rethink and rephrase my comments on this.
And now, having rewatched the segment, heard the "Brokeback Ballroom" crack, read more about the remainder of what happened, etc., I can no longer give him the benefit of the doubt here. I mean, there's nothing feminine about Jack and Ennis at all, and yet he uses Brokeback to disparage something he claims he only dislikes due to the femininity of the dancers not their purported orientation.
So, while I stand by my statements about dancers and gender expression, and my thinking that one shouldn't be any more tolerant of discrimination based on gender stereotyping than of homophobia, in looking at this specific situation more closely, I agree that these folks are using the former as a surrogate for the latter, perhaps subconsciously, perhaps not, but doing so nonetheless. They (not just he) and FOX should be taken to task for both, as well as for their lack of professionalism.
He's sorry for what?
While I agree that it is very nice to think that bigots will bite their tongue before mouthing off in public, it still doesn't make me warm up to people like Lithgoe after his various comments and the show's ridicule of our community. Yes, we live in a homophobic world and we all have to deal with how we are brought up and straight people like Lithgoe might not "get it," But Lithgoe is someone who works in an industry with many gay people (we aren't talking a rancher from Wyoming, here.) And if he hasn't 'gotten it' by now, I doubt he ever will. He says it was upsetting to be "classed as such", maybe so, but how much more upsetting is it to be "found out as such"?
The ridicule on his show was meant to be direct and derogatory. Lithgoe's comments afterward were callous and coming from someone who obviously really doesn't give a damn about GLBT people. I feel like the only reason that he might be sorry for what he said is that he was caught in public showing his nasty self. I disbelieve his ignorance and his sincerity. He is aware what happened when Leno was slow to apologize, and Lithgoe et al needed to nip this in the bud before it turned into an internet shit storm. This was about saving face and protecting a vested interest, not about what is right or wrong, or giving a damn about the consequences of their words and actions.
The damage is done. Sorry, but a half hearted apology doesn't cut it for me. Millions of people saw that horrid and insulting program. You will never be able to erase the ridicule from their minds. Is it possible that that program leads to a young persons death? I say very much so, not the only thing, but it could easily be a strong contributing factor. We know how this works. Some gay kid who is known in school for worshipping this show, has to face the bullies the day after that show aired. You know the drill from there: "Hey, faggot, So you think you can dance, where's your dance partner?, when are you going to try out." How does Lithgoe's lukewarm apology repair that? It doesn't; it does absolutly nothing but save face.
How can we, people who had to face days like that, stand aside and allow rich and powerful people like Lithgoe and the producers of SYTYCD off the hook so easy? They are the very reason that young kids are hanging themselves. And until they stop this kind of shit, they will continue to be a contributing factor. And as long as we allow them off scott free because they said "oops, I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, I mean I'm really, really, really sorry." As long as we accept that, we are complacent and contribute to the abuse.
SORRY JUST ISN'T FUCKING GOOD ENOUGH IN THIS INSTANCE!!!!!
Poor word choices? Get real. I'm hurt because I've been called a bigot? Grow up.
nukely, i get...
i get your anger and frusteration with all this. I do wanna ask you what should be done in this case if you won't accept the apology. did you want FOX to fire him?
I also was confused at how he didn't get why so many people were offended. I think all i can figure out is he is a straight man and will never really get it. I think when people make such comments as he did, we should call them out and try our best to sit them down and say "look, this is how we all hear it...." and it's educating them. if we don't educate people, however big or small the controversy is....we're not helping ourselves or the person who created the controversy.
Firing is a good idea
But fox does not pay him, at least I don't think so, not in the sence that Fox can fire him. His pay check does not say "Fox" on it. It comes from the production company, which he propably owns or has a huge interest in. Fox hires the production company. They could cancle the show in mid season. Canceling the show would be a proper reaction, IMHO. But concidering Fox's stance on the GLBT community, they probably agree with this type of bigotry. So, we need to boycott the show in light of this.
What should SYTYCD and Fox do?
That would be a start. But the best we can "hope" for is a contrite sounding excuse where Lithgoe defends his statements on the show and plays victim for being called a homophobe "I don't hate gay people." Like the one he just issued, something that makes hime look like the martyr. Neither Lithgoe nor FOX would ever admit to being in anyway participant in the suicides of gay youth. Nor do they give a damn about it enough to care to address the issue in a meaningful way.
But if any of us are serious about doing something about the suicides of gay youth, we can't sit back and allow bigots like Lithgoe get off with an "I'm sorry I hurt your feelings." Lithgoe has a long history of these types of statements. The kind of sit down talk you suggest has had to have happened to him in the past, considering his experience. Don't let yourself be fooled. He is a bigot.
Utill we are ready to take a stand and say enough is enough, nothing changes. It's a hell of a lot easier if the president of GLAAD gives Lithgoe a call, and Lithgoe calls his publicist and says, we have a problem write me up a good apology. Then we can all wash our hands of it.
But the damage is done and nothing is ever done to address the consequences. We all go to bed believing we fought the good fight while some kid in Virginia is laying awake wondering if the clothesline rope will be strong enough.
ok...
ok, i agree with most of your bullet points, yet why would that be any different or as you say less 'contrite' than what has happened? because it's on TV?
But the best we can "hope" for is a contrite sounding excuse where Lithgoe defends his statements on the show and plays victim for being called a homophobe"
"Don't let yourself be fooled. He is a bigot." ---> i don't feel fooled. I've decided that if he makes such comments again, i will not defend him, and i don't think any amount of apology will do next time. Nigel can donate money to causes and sing the gay praises on his show for all i care, but hey....it's when someone makes the same 'mistake' over and over and over again that i can't forgive them for. he screwed up, said his apology...so now, we wait and if he screw up again, well...he's on his own.
It's an escalation, really.
Maybe this is the first time you noticed it, so it is the first time you have had a chance to bestow your acceptance. But this isn't the first time for Lythgoe, it's an escalation of what he has said in the past. What makes it stand out now is the fact that his bigoted comments are paired with the homophobic segment that was produced on the show merely to humiliate gay people. He felt emboldened, I believe, to make the Brokeback comment, because of people like you, who will excuse him yet again. He knows that he will never have to suffer the consequences of his words and actions.
It feels good to forgive someone like Lythgoe. It makes us feel better about ourselves. It makes us feel powerful and worthy and helps us complete our day so we can rest at night. But I sersiously doubt any of our forgiveness means shit to Lythgoe. Our sympathy doesn't make him any less of a bigot, just more of a con man
Do me this one favor Liz, when you lay your head down on your pillow tonight say a prayer for all the 11 year old gay kids out there who are quietly planning their suicide and ask that those kids can forgive Lythgoe and the SYTYCD producers as well, if they had contributed to their strife.
ok, you're...
ok, you're right. i am sure this is not being the first time for him. with that said, the outcry was SO big this time that i hope he has learned his lesson for good. if not, i swear i will not forgive him or excuse him or whatever.
It feels good to forgive someone like Lythgoe. It makes us feel better about ourselves. It makes us feel powerful and worthy and helps us complete our day so we can rest at night.
^ i don't feel "good" about any of this. all we want is respect and if someone offends us, hell yeah we are going to demand an apology. i'm not trying to be mean, but nothing he has said or possibly could do seems to be ok for you. you have already said the damage is done and that part is true. it's out there...we won't forget...we can forgive though and try damn hard to move on. what more can we do? take him out back and kick him a few times?
he could've said "i dont need to say shit. screw you all. you are all just way too sensitive over this and i'm going to tune it out" - - but he didn't. yeah, pressure pretty much made him apologize but i believe the people from GLAAD explained to him how and why his words were offensive.
I won't speak for you and you're good to have your own opinions on him, but i'm willing to move on but that doesn't mean all is dandy with the whole situation.
Words do not make an apology
The subject as posted by Michael was about Lythgoe's apology, not what he should do. When you asked what he could do, I was quick to answer it because I did indeed think about that before you asked. It isn't that "nothing he can do would be okay" with me, I've already said what I think he could do. I don't expect any of that to happen, that's all. I would love to have them prove me wrong. That's the whole point in me writing this, his apology doesn't make up for what the show did and his years of slights.
Liz wrote ... "he could've said "i dont need to say shit. screw you all. you are all just way too sensitive over this and i'm going to tune it out" - - but he didn't."
I think Lythgoe would enjoy being able to say "I dont need to say shit. screw you all." I honestly believe that is where he has always been coming from. But he is a very wealthy and very shrewd (if crude) man, his publicist wouldn't allow it (even though he came close to saying just that in his tweets). And if he had come back at GLAAD or anyone concerned with this matter and said "I dont need to say shit. screw you all." It would have created an internet shit storm and might very well have been the end of his programs and his career. He may be precariously close to that right now which would explain why instead of saying "I dont need to say shit. screw you all." he was forced to choke on his pride and say essentially "I understand you got all up in a tither about what I said and I hate the fact that you think I'm an ass; so in the future when I say 'screw you', I will try to do so with a little more humor".
Lythgoe's apology not necessary..
.. if he hadn't made his comments in the first place...
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
R.I.P. - Heath - R.I.P. - Heath - R.I.P. - Heath - R.I.P. - Heath - R.I.P.
Janus
Having rewatched the segment
I believe him. Now I want him to act
For as Liz says, I think people are sitting him down. I think this because of his TWITTER APOLOGY, which is in a way clearer and better:
"I wholeheartedly apologize for my Brokeback Ballroom Tweet. It was insensitive, ignorant and stupid. I have upset a number of dear friends."
I bet by "dear friends" he means Adam Shankman tore him a new one!
That said, on the "what do you want him to do" front, I want an OPENLY gay contestant on one of his shows, whose partner / family / private life is shown EQUALLY to the straight contestants.
In over 15 years of Reality TV, from TAR to Survivor to Real WOrld, the ONLY 2 SHOWS that have NEVER had an openly gay contestant are Nigel's: American Idol and SYTYCD. Not a coincidence, I think.
here here!
I know people are making noise about the Lambert issue, and of course Simon Cowel's and ryan seacrest's pathetic gay-baiting, but AI has been so anti-gay in other ways.
I remember a few years ago this girl made it into the final 30 or something and she was clearly very tomboyish and butch if not actually a lesbian, she had a great voice but when they were discussing who would move on Simon Cowell was all "she clearly has emotional issues"
I almost broke the TV. I don't know what world Cowell and Lythgoe are from but it's clearly not the one the rest of us are living in.
www.thebittersuite.blogspot.com
simon and ryan....
Brock, you may know this....but has simon or ryan ever been called out by GLAAD or blogs before for their annoying gay baiting remarks?
i only saw season 1 and 2 and haven't watched since, but even so, it's a huge show and i'm sitting here thinking "wait a second....i dont think these two have ever been called out so publically has Nigel has been..."
This
Muddy Waters
One of my biggest frustrations about this is that just about everyone is talking about Lythgoe's comments and not about the segment as a whole.
there are in actuality 2 separate issues here.
1) The comments of the judges
2) How Fox produced the segment
The 2 men were auditioning with a ballroom routine and as people have mentioned before traditional ballroom is steeped in gender roles, and for people like Lythgoe, they can't wrap their brains around it. As I understand it, same-sex ballroom always needs a little explaining because the lead switches back and forth during the routines, which never happens in opposite-sex ballroom. And this seemed to be a big problem for the judges.
Don't get me wrong, I think Lythgoe is a homophobic prat with his insecure whinging about masculine male dancers, but I think there is a real chance Lythgoe is thinking that all the reaction is about his judging comments, which in his mind were "technical" critiques (though clearly there was more to it to that).
The way the scene was produced, with the all the campy music is what takes it over the top and makes it solidly homophobic. What makes Fox's apology particularly repugnant and a non-apology is that they non-apologized for Lythgoe's comments and not their own individual and separate and in no way defensible as "critique" homophobic actions.
Fox needs to understand that it's not just Lythgoe's comments, it's what they did themselves which is offensive in its own right and they need to apologize for that.
www.thebittersuite.blogspot.com
What comes next
One of my favorite shows sits unwatched on the DVR, because I watched these clips online Friday morning. It's not the first time that Nigel has busted out these type of comments, nor is it the first time AE has called him on it. It's just the first time we got loud enough about it that mainstream media picked it up. But I agree with Brock, to a degree, that there are two separate issues here, Nigel's comments, and how the segment was edited (which is likely Nigel's production company, not Fox, if we want to be accurate).
Let's accept, as a premise, for a moment, that Nigel is actually sorry now that he's had his words explained to him. Take it a step further, and hope that they explained to him it wasn't the first time, or that someone else explained to him that it wasn't the first time. Let's assume he wants to change. So what needs to happen?
We've still got a series of pretaped and edited audition shows in the can to get through before we go to the live shows, right? Somebody at Fox or the production company needs to watch the shows, and find the next instance of Nigel's insensitive words - those of us who have watched the show for years can bet that he's done it again somewhere. On the off chance it's not in the edited show, it's on a tape they didn't use. They need to show it, as they originally did the critique, homophobia and all, and then cut in a new segment, with Nigel spending 60 seconds of precious air time looking at the camera and explaining why his comments were insensitive, and why they shouldn't ever come out of someone's mouth.
There's a place in the show, in the pretaped crap we've still got coming, to add in an on air apology/PSA, in context, to use it as a teaching moment. The slurs were seen by millions, the apology by thousands. Redress that, in context, and maybe we're square. As it stands now, I'm not so sure. Scratch that - I'm sure we're not OK. And don't tell me it's too late, the shows are ready to air. If we can do live TV, we can do an edit, cut down on some of the inane critiques, or take out one of the "comedic" auditions, and fit the apology into the venue of the insults. After years of listening to Nigel's insensitive comments, it's the least they can do.
And if not, I say every gay, and gay friendly (I'm looking at you, Adam, Mia, etc) choreographer the show uses owes it to their own self-esteem and the community at large to call their lawyers and find a way out of their contracts, just like we owe it to our own self-esteem to quit watching the show if they don't make it right.
I try not to over-react to these things. I've taken days to post much of anything on the subject, though I've been talking about it elsewhere, trying to figure out what I felt would make it right. And one thing this Angry Homo has decided about these things is that a press release apology over a holiday weekend news cycle isn't enough anymore - you insult me to millions, you apologize to me in front of millions. I've had enough.
On-Air Apology
Doesn't Nigel have a say in
Doesn't Nigel have a say in how this show is produced? You can blame the editors, but doesn't Nigel have to sign off on it? I'm not sure how shows work, but as executive producer, you'd think that he'd have to be involved in the final cut. If that's the case, he's doubly to blame.
It's astounding how cynical
It's astounding how gullible
Adjatives do not content make, unless you're talking a cheap greeting card. Now, what sounds more contrite to you? Using his own words and arguement:
His "apology" is utter bull shit.
When did posing any kind of apology to the GLBT community become like an Absolution issued from the Pope that excuses any manner of bigotry, past, present, and future?.
A CYNIC AND HIPOCRITE
DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT CYNICAL, HYPOCRITICAL MEANS!
PS. standing against a nation wide humiliation fest on tv, because two men where dancing, by fox and the judges, maight not help our cause, but it is the wright thing to do.
apology
i hate this empty apology, but the people i would like an apology from is fox, from the moment they came out of the bathroom and raining men started to play, my friends and i looked at each other went; ooooh boy!
On tv everything is planned, they have a story to tell. (like bikini
girl on the AI finale) they thought they would bring this
same-sex bad dancers humiliate them, so they can put to
the rest the idea of same sex dancing on the show, and of
course, they would let one go to the next round,
so it would be ok to be A-holes!
IS THIS CYNICAL ENOUGH?!
Don't you realise that you
Don't you realise that you two have only just proved my point? 'I hate this empty apology' Saying that Lythgoe's apology really means 'I am wholeheartedly sorry I hit you in the head with a sledge hammer?' This is exactly what cynical means! Look:
1. Distrusting or disparaging the motives of others.
2. Bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic.
I rest my case.
All satire, by it's nature
You've stooped to name calling and have chosen the word 'cynical' as an insult because it is a buzz word since Susan Boyle went on her talent show. It is a lazy word choice and like much of what you write, it's boilerplate superficiality. But since we are
insultingcritiquing each otherscharacterswriting, I'd like you to try on for size: mendacious, perfidious and cowardly? Doesn't that sum up your view on this issue?