Okay, I vented a little bit about Michael Lucas's Advocate column, but what was the point of that thing anyway? The reason I read the damn thing in the first place is because this gay blogger linked to it. (I have no free will, just as Galen Strawson says. I see link. I must click to it. Mongo just pawn in game in life.) The majority of the impetus was the word "supergays": I decided to see what this word could mean, and found that Lucas didn't know what it meant either. It seems to work sort of like "Politically Correct," or "You think you're so smart! You think you know everything!" In this case, "These Supergays and Superlesbians think they're so special, but they buy my porn!" (Do superlesbians buy his porn?)
The blogger, one Joe Thompson, provided the following poll:
It seems to me that these options, dumb as some of them are, probably are an accurate reflection of many people's reaction to the article. (Especially the last one.) What stuck with me here was "Porn stars should not represent us." Who said that Lucas represented gay people, or wanted to? His column was about personal slights he's suffered, which he blamed on the very real and troublesome PR obsession of certain subgroups of American queers with respectability, flag-waving, and hypocrisy.
Some of the comments posted to Lucas's column sank below even that, though, like the one (4/5/2010 3:36:58 PM, no permalink) which began, "Well, the truth of the matter is, Lucas, that you are a whore. And you like it. But, as it has been true throughout history, people may like whoring but not be seen with one in public." I presume that the commenter is a queer, and likes it, and as it has been true throughout history... Another (4/5/2010 1:53:52 PM) admonished Lucas that "you're a porn 'star', not Nelson Mandela. ... So until hell freezes over you'll just need to deal with the fact that your chosen profession as a porn 'star' doesn't make you a front man in politics or entertainment. " I don't see where Lucas claimed to be Nelson Mandela in his column, or even demanded to be a "front man." Some commenters (for example, 4/3/2010 1:45:29 AM) speculated that he may have had trouble at logo because of his vehemently anti-Muslim views, and that wouldn't surprise me, though from the look of things, Lucas could get more mileage by waving the flag, brandishing a crucifix, and claiming that he's being discriminated against because he stands up for America against the Mohammedan barbarians.
If he had somewhere claimed to speak for all gay people (as opposed to all of us, which is different), I'd object, but he hasn't. He says he has been "invited to speak at some pretty prestigious institutions, including Yale, Rutgers, Stanford, and Oxford, among others. The mainstream press has written numerous articles about me. I have been profiled in New York Magazine and The New Republic. And I have appeared on TV channels from HBO to NY1"; it would be interesting to know why.
Michael Lucas doesn't represent me, he's too dumb. But then, neither does The Human Rights Campaign. Neither do the Log Cabin Republicans, or gay Democrats for that matter. I don't know of any gay organization that does. Neither does Dan Choi, or Rosie O'Donnell, or Don Kilhefner, or Canon Mary Glasspool. I speak for myself. I have not delegated anyone to do that for me.
Who does speak for "the gay community"? None of us, and all of us. As I remember with some embarrassment, we who were openly gay in the early 70s sometimes at least talked as though we thought we spoke for all gay people. We didn't, but we did speak for ourselves, which not many gay people were willing to do in those days. One of the best things we did was to provoke them to do so, even if it was in the form of "Hey, wait a minute -- these guys don't speak for me! I'll have to stick my head out of the closet for a minute and speak for myself!"
I can say, "I'm a gay person, and I think ..." with perfect validity, though, not because I speak for other gay people, but because I am one of the individuals who make up "the gay community", and no statement about that vast nebulous abstraction should be taken seriously unless it takes me into account. And you. And Michael Lucas, and the Christian-Right wannabes he calls "supergays."
Showing posts with label supergays. Show all posts
Showing posts with label supergays. Show all posts
Unclean! Unclean!
Okay, I vented a little bit about Michael Lucas's Advocate column, but what was the point of that thing anyway? The reason I read the damn thing in the first place is because this gay blogger linked to it. (I have no free will, just as Galen Strawson says. I see link. I must click to it. Mongo just pawn in game in life.) The majority of the impetus was the word "supergays": I decided to see
Unclean! Unclean!
Okay, I vented a little bit about Michael Lucas's Advocate column, but what was the point of that thing anyway? The reason I read the damn thing in the first place is because this gay blogger linked to it. (I have no free will, just as Galen Strawson says. I see link. I must click to it. Mongo just pawn in game in life.) The majority of the impetus was the word "supergays": I decided to see
It's a Bird! It's a Plane! It's ...
Over the weekend I came across (ahem: minds out of the gutter, please!) this article by Michael Lucas, self-described "adult performer and entrepreneur" who complains that he has been disrespected by "supergays" and "superlesbians." He's not much of a writer, in fact he's pretty bad, but I agree with a fair amount of what he says. It's packaged as though it were somehow cutting-edge, daring, out-there commentary, but it's all pretty standard middle-of-the-road stuff. You'll hear assimilationists say similar things, right down to the obligatory tribute to the drag queens who led us at Stonewall and the clarion call to diversity. Le yawn.What I don't get is "supergays" and "superlesbians," terms he uses repeatedly and casually, as though their meaning was well-known. For a moment I thought it meant something like A-gays, given their clout and ability to get photos of Lucas removed from a news site, though Lucas himself evidently knows some "GLAAD donors" whose calls caused the pictures to be replaced the next day. Does that make him a supergay too? Are we witnessing a Clash of the Titans at the pinnacle of supergaydom? Does the earth, like, tremble as these colossi contend?
The Urban Dictionary entry was no help. Neither definition it supplied seemed to fit Lucas's usage, though they fit with the way "supergay" is used by other people. Maybe it's this guy?
Naw, too foofy.I'd just about concluded that Michael Lucas decided that "supergay" and "superlesbian" would be totally cool insults to hurl at Homo-Americans who disrespect him, at least when he found out that the Advocate wouldn't let him call them "poopy faces." But then I found this in a book I was reading today, LGBT Issues: Moving Beyond Categories, edited by Rebecca L. Jones and Richard Ward (Dunedin, 2010). In the book's opening chapter, Phil Eaglesham, a Scottish activist, public health advisor for NHS Health Scotland, and academic, discusses competing labels for the LGBT community, including these:
Table 1.5: Terms used in American social marketing theory to target LGBT people(For perspective, compare this headline of another report from the Oracle, February 4, 2008: "A New Poll by New American Dimensions Finds that Only Half of Hispanic Immigrants Feel that the United States is Ready for an African American President.") It's good to see that market researchers still have their fingers on the hot, throbbing pulse of GLBTQ America (he's dead, Jim), and I'm wouldn't be surprised if an entrepreneur like Lucas had picked up the term here, even though it doesn't really fit the tantrum he's throwing.
‘Super Gays’ – most aware of gay identity and the most conscious of anti-gay discrimination
‘Habitators’ – in long-term relationships and are primarily concerned with domestic issues like children and health care
‘Gay Mainstream’ – mix their interest in gay issues and media with mainstream concerns
‘Party People’ – the most cutting edge and urban in their tastes and the most likely to spend money on personal pampering
‘Closeted’ – older, living in small towns and aren’t likely to have many gay friends or belong to LGBT organizations
(New American Dimensions / Asterix Group (2007) ‘Real World Lesbians and Gays’)
Oh well. There are some things that Man was not meant to understand.
It's a Bird! It's a Plane! It's ...
Over the weekend I came across (ahem: minds out of the gutter, please!) this article by Michael Lucas, self-described "adult performer and entrepreneur" who complains that he has been disrespected by "supergays" and "superlesbians." He's not much of a writer, in fact he's pretty bad, but I agree with a fair amount of what he says. It's packaged as though it were somehow cutting-edge, daring,
It's a Bird! It's a Plane! It's ...
Over the weekend I came across (ahem: minds out of the gutter, please!) this article by Michael Lucas, self-described "adult performer and entrepreneur" who complains that he has been disrespected by "supergays" and "superlesbians." He's not much of a writer, in fact he's pretty bad, but I agree with a fair amount of what he says. It's packaged as though it were somehow cutting-edge, daring,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)