The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) is speaking out against popular television show American Idol after judges Simon Cowell and Randy Jackson made some less-than pleasant comments.
On Tuesday's show, seen by a Nielsen-chart topping 35.5 million viewers, Cowell told one male contestant to "wear a dress" and Jackson asked another, "are you a girl?""The real offense here was in the producer's decision to add insult to injury by turning a contestant's gender expression into the butt of a joke," said Damon Ramine, a spokesman for GLAAD, in a statement posted on the group's Web site.
That’s shitty, but should we really expect any better from a show that keeps contestants that beat up their girlfriends but expels those who pose for topless photos?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: American Homophobe Idol?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/1529
Perhaps Randy shouldn't have asked but that one contestant, Zarchary, did look like a girl and he sounded like one too. There's no way he doesn't face that quite a bit. He was also dressed like a girl in what looked like girl's jeans and belt. I wasn't sure myself.
However, Simon was downright cruel to the rather soft voiced guy whom he told to shave his beard and put on a dress. That guy may have some gender issues but I am not quite sure he is ready to tackle them and Simon humiliated that poor child.
I also read that they played theme music from "The Crying Game" (a film about the murder of a transwoman) as the contestant exited. Hilarious.
This is entertainment for vast swaths of middle america, if you did not realize it making fun of gay people or making them out to be nuts is all in good fun...
What about the portrayal of the "gay brother" in wedding crashers? i for one found that to be in poor taste and offensive, but i never heard a peep about that. yea it was a dumb comedy designed to be in poor taste, but you knwo we have moved away from thinking making fun of some things in that way is really acceptable, have we nOT??
The capacity of a company to think from a conceptual and not a product point of view opens out possibilities. For instance, Camper shoes developed the hotel Casa Camper in Barcelona because, as they note, they are into comfort, not shoes. The comfort platform gives Camper a far wider range of possibilities to invent products well beyond shoes (clearly having a brand name helps). The most innovative companies then align their skills with others without wishing to control the complete chain.
The same should apply to cities when assessing their production possibilities. Like Camper, they may ask themselves, ‘What is the essence of what we know?’ rather than focusing on the particular application they have, which could be mining or textiles. For instance, mining could be seen less as a mineral extraction sector and more as an opportunity to develop software for accessing hard to reach places.