TV: It Gets Better — But Also Much Bitchier
Submission by Stewart, TNG contributor
It gets better. That, at least, is the promise of the video project started by Dan Savage in response to the recent rash of suicides by youths believed to be the victims of anti-gay bullying.
To say that something gets better, however, is not quite the same thing as saying that it gets “good.” And if we’re going to be honest — and now I’m speaking as one gay man to another — I expect most of us would admit that the world we’ve managed to create for ourselves here in the great gay ghettos of America can be every bit as hateful and cruel as anything we experienced in high school.
The only difference is that the bullies we face now are not jocks, but bitchy queens. And their weapon of choice is not the fist, but the tongue.
On the off chance you haven’t encountered that cliquish, sarcastic, dismissive, gossiping, ostracizing, eye-rolling creature known as the bitchy queen, watch an episode or two of Logo’s “A-List: New York.” The new reality series — which purports to follow “the most envied and sought-after men of New York City as they live the high life hopping from boardroom to benefit to beach house to bedroom” — offers a surprisingly accurate portrayal of the bitchiness that infects so much of urban gay life.
In the words of one of show’s characters, “The A-List is a crowded room. If you don’t have a pot to piss in, you probably shouldn’t be there.” You also shouldn’t be there, we are told, if you’re only average looking. This is so even if the purpose of the occasion is to celebrate gay pride. “Only sexy people,” one character insists, without any hint of irony, as he makes up the invitation list for a party. “It’s Pride!”
Examples of Logo’s A-gays gone bitchy could be multiplied at length. Suffice it to say that, however sexy their world may be, it isn’t very pretty. Think Mean Girls meets Gossip Girl, only with more facial hair and decidedly less wit.
Indeed, if anything could undo the progress of the gay rights movement — if anyone could persuade Americans that any further liberation of gay men would almost certainly harm the body politic — it isn’t Glenn Beck or Maggie Gallagher or even Pope Benedict XVI. It is the self-absorbed and self-promoting cast of The A-List. Them, and to the extent that our own behavior mirrors theirs, every single one of us.
One might respond that gay men living in a society as homophobic as ours have every right to be bitchy. Perhaps we do. But that doesn’t explain why we turn our aggression inward. This weekend we could all be out storming any and every last Bastille that keeps us in chains. Instead we’ll end up at some dinner party or nightclub cruising boys as we gossip with our “gurrrls” about how so-and-so did or said or wore such-and-such. The question is why.
The answer almost certainly has something to do with the social isolation that traumatized most of us as kids. As sexual minorities, we grew up on the outside, desperately trying to fit in, but never quite succeeding. Some of us became the victims of bullies; others just felt different, apart, queer. Perhaps for this reason the social pathology peculiar to us will always involve some sort of subconscious attempt to re-create the social strata of high school — if only to give popularity, and the sense of belonging and self-worth it promises, one last shot.
Neurobiology may play a role as well. A growing body of research shows that the brains of gay men and straight women share a number of physical traits in common (just as the brains of lesbians and straight men do). Perhaps one day we’ll discover this explains why our aggressive behaviors so closely resemble those of women, or, more accurately, those of adolescent girls.
As researchers have shown, although boys “typically engage in aggression that involves a direct physical and/or verbal assault (i.e., hitting and yelling),” the aggressive behaviors of girls tend to involve such indirect tactics as “gossip, ostracism, breaking confidences, and criticism of a victim’s clothing, appearance, or personality.”
It should surprise no gay man to learn why girls say they act out in these bitchy ways. In the words of anthropologists Nicole Hess and Edward Hagen:
Aggressors’ motives included retaliation, acquiring or maintaining a position in a group, getting attention, creating excitement, alleviating boredom, and avoiding victimization. Jealousy over physical appearance, grades, friends, and boys frequently triggered this aggression.
The embarrassing truth may be that, on some level, all gay men are just vulnerable teenage girls on testosterone. But admitting this fact about ourselves should also give us hope. Hope that one day we, too, will grow up and learn, if not quite to love one another, then at least to treat our friends, our acquaintances, and even our enemies with a little more civility and respect.
Either that, or we will wake up someday to find that we have graduated from the ranks of bitchy queen to bitter old queen. And none of us should want that.
First time here? See what we're all about... Get involved... Send us a tip!...
Awesome post. Clearly over-done in terms of your characterization of all of us as acting a certain way. But still something that needed to be said.
And honestly, as much as I try to think that “I’m not like those guys on A-List” some of the shit they do is frighteningly familiar. Sometimes it’s just cute stupid stuff that only gays would be caught doing — like Reichen and his boyfriend catching a quick sniff of each others armpits, oh god help us — but yeah there is definitely something about the biting lack of mutual self respect that really seems dead-on true about the general urban gay life.
In recent years, I have at least tried to think of myself as a gay man, as trying to redefine what it really means to be a man. And I hope not to step on the toes of any of the awesome women out there, but I think that our culture desperately needs to come up with a way to promote a healthy masculinity — instead of just trying to tear the whole thing down because it’s currently flawed. Yes, gender for some may be fluid, and we should allow everyone the freedom to be who they really are, but I still think that there is something about “being a man” that needs to be dealt with whether we like it or not. So, I’ve tried to come up with some of my own ideas about what a “real man” is, and I’m fully prepared to take any critique anyone might want to offer. A real man (in a gay context, but not limited to that):
- Doesn’t get caught up on the little problems in life, because he focuses on addressing real problems head on.
- Says what he means.
- Respects the basic dignity of all people, regardless of how they self-identify
- Works hard at something, anything — it doesn’t have to be a paid job, but he puts effort into something he cares about.
- Stands up for his friends and family, in the literal sense, and also in the larger sense of our “community”
- Has the courage to speak up when someone is being hurt emotionally or physically
- Isn’t afraid to own up to a mistake. (Everyone knows when you’re avoiding responsibility anyways, we’re not stupid)
- Takes care of himself. This doesn’t mean you need to look perfect, but that you have a basic sense of self-worth, and at least try to do what’s healthy for you. Too many of us just give in completely to drugs, cigs, and truly reckless behavior (including steroids).
- Pushes the envelope. Not meant to undo the last point, but we do have more social privileges to make a move in the world — we just need to put that privilege to good use. I’m reminded here of the kind of priests who get arrested for civil disobedience… since they don’t have families to take care of, they’re able to take greater risks for the sake of justice.
- Puts our competitive drive to good (or at least neutral) ends. Instead of competing in a way that tears each other down, he competes in a positive way — whether through sports, academics, etc. The end result of competition should be that we’re all the better for it when it’s over.
These are the qualities that I look for in a boyfriend, and that I respect the most among other men. I know this isn’t a complete list, and I am in no way saying that women aren’t capable of these things either. I just think that we need to assert a new understanding of masculinity, if for no other reason than there already is a current idea of masculinity — and it sucks balls.
Interesting points. But I think this article places too much emphasis on The A-List (and in a broder sense all reality shows) as examples of real life. The cast of the A-List was not assembled because they accurately represent the Gay Community (despite what Reichen believes…), they were picked exactly because they are bithcy, catty queens. And frankly, I think that was a smart decision.
While I would enjoy seeing different perspectives on Gay Life out in the media, I don’t believe that a casted, concept reality show about priveleged gay men should be taken as Logo’s idea of what gay men are.
To the point of gay men needing to really assess their community, I would say that it is healthy to reflect on your community values from time to time. But to then project a stereotyped image of gay culture on to all of the gay male community is just not accurate.
It is OK to be gay and be queeny. It is OK to be gay and be flamboyant. It is OK to be gay and honestly abhor fashion. It is OK to be gay and really only listen to country music.
It is not OK to be gay/straight/indifferent and be mean-spirited, angry, or bitchy. In the real world. But television, even “reality” television, is not the real world, and some times entertainment is just meant to be entertaining. Sometimes it fails to be entertaining, and sometimes it becomes outright offensive. I don’t think A-List is offensive, and I happen to be entertained by it although I can understand why others may not be.
So while I think you may some valid points, I don’t think they are presented well in this article.
Dickie, the problem is two-fold:
1) Many people who’ve explored mainstream gay culture have found it to be just like the A-List, but with less money and less hot guys. The A-List didn’t make up these personality stereotypes. It might be magnifying them a bit, but they’re omnipresent in lots of gay spaces.
2) Logo is perpetuating these stereotypes, teaching the untainted gays across the planet that this is how successful gay men act.
The fact that the first commenter had such a positively strong reaction to the post indicates that the author isn’t way off base.
Well MH. Maybe the straight world is as bitchy if you only spend time with its most superficial crowd. The straight worlds we often know from growing up cannot be compared to the circle in which we ended.
I read a really interesting article about white privilege and privilege denial, and although I am white, one of the points that really stuck was the idea that, for example, straight white males never have to worry about being lumped together if another straight white male does something. 19 Muslim extremists blew up the twin towers, and now EVERY Muslim is treated as a terrorist. A few black people may be bad swimmers, or like fried chicken, and people assume ALL black people share these traits. Any minority group has to constantly fight off these generalizations being applied to them simply because of the errors of a few individuals who are NOT representative of a community.
What does that mean for queer people? Even if the community is incredibly diverse, we are still a minority and we will still be generalized in that same way. Think of a reality show that focus on a group – housewives, guidos, etc. – and you probably subconsciously carry the idea that all members of that group are like that, even though you consciously know better. The A-List isn’t representative of everyone, and we know it and a large percentage of the population knows it as well, but as a minority, the presented stereotype is going to become fact for most people. We DO NOT have the privilege to distance ourselves.
No matter what you think about the relative entertainment value of The A-List: New York or the incredibly small, stereotypical sliver of the rainbow it manages to broadcast, there’s something more dangerous going on here. A number of the cast members in this program aren’t just modeling stereotypical behavior; they’re modeling dangerous behaviors that keep the rest of the world fearful of us.
Take Austin: the other cast members are right to be skeptical and circumspect about him. A starfucker turned unemployed model who seems to live well, either because he mooches off the visible cast members or because he continues to exploit unseen figures in the world they all inhabit, he plays to everything that straight people think we do. From selective truth-telling (e.g., keeping a “fiance” from the others while chasing after Reichen with a raging erection), to lies that are impossible to disprove (e.g., how DOES he own a house in the UK?), individuals like him who engage in these behaviors are what the straight, middle American fears of gays are based on. To have it served up for entertainment’s sake on a reality program (which, frankly, comes off as having a soft-scripted component not unlike what I’m told The Hills did) is to move the fully-scripted nighttime soap closer to what reality actually is. There’s nothing wrong with that, as long as folks are critical and self-aware enough to see how reprehensible his behavior is and then not repeat it themselves.
The scariest thing, though, comes from an offhanded comment that passed between Rodiney and Ryan during a recent episode. The set-up: mistrustful Rodiney breaks into Reichen’s iPhone, reads and interprets found messages, and decides that Reichen’s flirting with other boys, and possibly more. How does he address this problem? By talking to his boyfriend openly and honestly? No. Instead, he sends texts posing as Reichen, and weeps about intimacies to an acquaintance-become-”friend” by virtue of the show. Leaving aside how they probably needed to define their relationship, its degree of openness, and how lying is generally bad for people’s emotional well-being, the truly staggering thing is that he admits to Ryan that he and Reichen have been having unprotected sex, even though he’s afraid that Reichen has been cheating, at a mere seven months into the relationship. Given that the conversation stopped, or was edited, to just this side of graphic, we can’t know what kinds of activities were undertaken and how they fall on the scale of risk. That said, if you have a relationship of assumed monogamy, wherein you don’t iron out the parameters by talking, and then that monogamy is disrupted by even the shadow of a doubt, anyone with enouh wit to come in out of the rain would know to insist on protected sex thereafter, in order to minimize the potentially damaging health consequences for the two of them and all their extracurricular partners. That it was just glossed over with a quick, “Oh honey, you have to protect yourself and your health,” either suggests we’ve become complacent about how impactful contracting STIs, including HIV, is, or that the so-called A-Listers live in a rarefied world where they are an abstraction, dealt with by writing a check or holding a pseudo-benefit.
Say whatever you want about their vulnerability clad in Mean Girls-style bitchiness, entertainment value, and the threat we pose to ourselves (all of which points I agree about, Stewart), but doesn’t Logo have a responsibility to take a more thoughtful approach in dealing with salient issues in its programming, especially if, as I suggest, the “reality” in this reality is as real as the plumpness of Derek’s collagen-injected lips?
Leave your response!
Recent Coments
Most Commented
Most Viewed - 30 Days