Last week when the reports surfaced of actress Nicolette Sheridan filing a lawsuit against Marc Cherry (creator of the show) and ABC because of treatment she received on the set of Desperate Housewives, I shrugged. It seemed like a bitter axed actress who wanted to get back at her former employer for terminating her from one of the biggest gigs in television. Though when I read that part of her lawsuit pertained to reportedly being slapped by Cherry it raised my eyebrow.

I remember hearing rumors a year or so ago about there being a big blow up on set resulting in him slapping her in the face, but it seemed so ridiculous no one believed it. Of course now it seems there may be some truth to it all this time later. Not only has Nicollette cited it in her lawsuit, but former cast-mate Eva Longoria has confirmed that the incident did in fact happen, though according to her not necessarily maliciously.

“They did have a thing on set. I guess it was a couple years ago. It’s so long ago, the actual incident, and I wasn’t on set when it happened. Apparently, this incident had happened, and she felt it was wrong.

Longoria adds the context that Cherry was actually showing Nicolette how to do a scene in which Edie’s husband played by Neal McDonough slaps her.

“Something happened on set regarding them doing a scene. She was doing a scene, and … he was showing her how to do a scene. Honestly, I wish I knew [what happened]. During that time too, I didn’t work with Nicollette’s character.”

She also adds that Cherry “could not harm a fly, he’s just so sweet,” then said, “Nicollette’s a sweet girl, too.”

Then there’s a conflicting article from the NY Daily News where a “source” close to the show indicates Sheridan wasn’t the only woman on the show who had conflicts with Cherry.  Teri Hatcher apparently doesn’t find Cherry’s behavior completely kosher either.

The snitch adds that while Teri Hatcher is equally distressed by Cherry’s overbearing behavior, she’s unlikely to join Nicollette in her fight.

“Sometimes Teri doesn’t appreciate Marc’s ‘humor,’” says the source, while a rep for Hatcher didn’t comment by deadline. “But that doesn’t mean she’s going to get involved with this mess anytime soon.”

The Daily News article also implies that the rest of the women on the show are secretly supporting Sheridan but are afraid to do so publicly for fear of being killed off the program as her character was.

I’m not sure who to believe at this point.  I find the whole thing to be pretty shocking considering Cherry has always come across as cheerful, witty, and personable in all of his appearances on television to promote the program, and has always seemed to have so much respect and adoration for his actresses.  That said, appearances can be just that–appearances.

What I found most troubling out of this whole ordeal, was the strange language used in Sheridan’s lawsuit that seemed to imply she thought Cherry treated her badly because he is a gay man and she is a straight woman.  Which everyone pretty much agreed was about the strangest thing ever.  But after this new article by the Daily Beast where some former producers have broken their silence about Cherry’s treatment of female writers, it might start to make a bit more sense, and be much more angering.

The producers say they cannot imagine Cherry ever being physically abusive with the intention of hurting someone, but the one thing they all agree on is that he creates a difficult work environment especially for women.

One source said:

“He hates women. It’s apparent on set that he’s a fan of cute, gay men, not women.”

Another:

“He will dress you down in front of the staff. He will assault an idea,” said another. “He is very confrontational in this way. He has hissy fits.”

The biggest problem I have is with this part of the article which discusses the unfair way in which female writers were treated on the program.

It’s the more general charges in Sheridan’s suit that are bringing out a chorus of “Amens” among some former staffers, who strongly echo the actress’ claims of gender discrimination and a harsh work environment, saying the conditions are more severe than on other television shows.

Ironically, given the show’s subject matter, female writers on the show get the worst of it, and are mostly kept out of the “polishing room,” instead relegated to their “caves.” This person said that the writing “posse” that Cherry surrounds himself with and most treasures, consists of mostly straight men.

The former staffers also say that while the show tends to deal with issues very specific to women, he listens mostly to the male writers and is incredibly dismissive to the women who write for the program.  The situation is so bad, they say, that they have begun to refer to themselves as “the unwashed”.

The Daily Beast points out that of the 39 different writers who have written for the program since it premiered in 2004, only 14 have been female.  Not only that, but several of those writing stints were short lived.  Julia Sweeney left only a few months after she began to go to SNL.  And Alexandra Cunningham just recently left the program to go develop new shows for NBC (though to be fair, she was offered a huge seven figure deal).

Of course, these statistics for women writers on the show, as depressing as they may be, are much more favorable than the average primetime series is in general.  Which is obviously a travesty in and of itself. Take a look at these stats on the state of female writers in Hollywood.  In 2007 only 24% of the writers in television were female.  Not only that, but there is a wage gap in terms of what the working female writers earn versus their male counterparts.  When women make up more than half of the population this is not acceptable.

And if Marc Cherry is in fact giving preferential treatment to the male writers on his program, he’s contributing to the problem.  Which is not only discriminatory and unfair to these very talented women who deserve better but also detrimental to the quality of the program which is supposed to be about…you know, women.

T

This isn’t the first time that Spike has talked about this issue so I’m not sure why the media is just now picking up on it (though it’s possible it is the first time he’s specifically mentioned Tyler’s name), but I have to say everything Spike is saying is what I’ve been saying all along about this man’s “films” if that’s what you want to call them.

And yes, Ed Gordon is absolutely right. Black people have no one to blame but themselves for these types of movies constantly being put out by Hollywood. It isn’t white people showing up to the theaters giving this man record box office receipts. And I’ll say the same thing I say to feminists who complain about today’s chick flicks. If you don’t show up for the good ones, don’t complain. Where were you when Miracle at St. Anna was released? Where were you when Akeelah and the Bee came out? If no one goes to see these films, Hollywood will not put them out.

There’s so many problems with Tyler’s films I don’t even know where to begin. But this Entertainment Weekly article puts most of the issues quite eloquently.

It doesn’t surprise me considering basically anything that comes out in theaters that isn’t about men going around killing each other or trying to get laid is considered a “chick flick”, which of course has a negative connotation.  Meanwhile women still turn up in droves to see whatever lame ass Michael Bay flick is out this month.

Yet for all the obstacles women’s films have, the ones that do quite well don’t get their fair share of credit.  Even after Juno, even after Twilight, even after Mamma Mia, even after Sex and the City, it’s still a huge uphill battle to get studios to greenlight films with female protagonists.  And as Meryl Streep explains, it’s not just the studios, but also the theater chains who decide which films to carry.

“It’s always a shock to the studio,” Streep says with real firmness, “because men run the studios and live their own fantasies through them. It’s harder for a man to jump inside a woman character’s mind and imagine, ‘This could happen to me’ than it is for a woman to imagine herself as a male character.” But surely the profits count? “They see it and they understand that there is a market and it will make them an enormous amount of money, but we all respond to instinct and it’s their inner boy that jumps up and goes: ‘Yeah, I wanna see another GI Joe’.”

“Parts are rare,” Streep says, “the amount of product is rare. It’s a large machine that markets these films, that makes theatre [cinema] owners commit their theatres half a year in advance — that’s how it works. Are they gonna buy GI Joe or are they gonna buy Mamma Mia!?”

Mamma Mia! did great business, I say. “They’re still not sure,” Streep counters. “You need a good salesman. Those films have done well, yes, that audience is there, but it doesn’t go on the first weekend [which the industry nervously observes].”

In a separate interview screenwriter/director Nora Ephron weighs in on the problem as well.

When she was inducted into the Academy of Achievement in 2007, Ephron said she took up directing because “90% of the men directing movies have no interest in women in any real way, except as girlfriends or wives. They don’t really want to make movies about them, and they don’t.”

They’re both absolutely right.  With Mamma Mia and Sex and the City grossing over a billion dollars collectively worldwide, and Julie & Julia already grossing over $80 million on its way to 90 million one would really wonder why Hollywood isn’t clamoring to cash in on more women’s films.   But as has been stated before, whenever a female film does well it’s always written off as a “fluke” or the the little film that could.  But every time some mindless action film with some “hot chick” running around like a piece of meat needing to be rescued does well at the box office, it’s reason to make 20 more just like it.

A lot of attention is paid to the diversity displayed on the small screen but Entertainment Weekly has an interesting piece discussing the race and gender of the people behind the scenes in the world of television. They mention some of our most successful and celebrated television show creators and producers like J.J. Abrams, Aaron Sorkin, Joss Whedon, Aaron Spelling, David E. Kelley, and the list goes on. Forces to be reckoned with in the television industry who have had a number of successes. But where are the people of color? Where are the women?

Even the shows that are female-centric like The Closer, Desperate Housewives, Sex and the City, –they’re all created by white men. EW cites Shonda Rhimes of Grey’s Anatomy and Private Practice as well as Silvio Horta of Ugly Betty as some examples of non-white and non-male entities but Horta’s only success thus far has been Ugly Betty and Rhimes’ Private Practice’s long term success has yet to be seen.

But there are some up and coming women whose careers seem promising.

There are, certainly, a few up and coming female executive producers these days: Rebecca Sinclair (an alum of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Gilmore Girls), who turned The CW’s 90210 remake around; Stephanie Savage, who’s given both The O.C. and Gossip Girl bite (even though she takes second billing to the more auteur-ish Josh Schwartz);

The L Word’s Ilene Chaiken; and Weeds’ Jenji Kohan. Tina Fey’s one of the few female voices on the Big Four — and she’s clearly one of the most unique (not to mention critically drooled-over). But none of those ladies has gotten the chance to prove she’s more than a one-hit wonder.

Tyler Perry has had much success with his multi-camera sitcom House of Payne on CBS, and as everyone knows, has had enormous success with his feature films, but again, Payne is his only television success and we still have no examples of television giants like the aforementioned who don’t have white skin or a penis.  A few more examples of creative forces of color:

Larry Wilmore won accolades (and an Emmy) for The Bernie Mac Show, but he’s now taken to more freelance work — appearing on The Daily Show, writing for/appearing on The Office, and authoring books.

And in perhaps the ultimate statement on the fate of female and minority would-be auteurs, Mara Brock Akil — who created the long-running UPN/CW sitcoms Girlfriends and The Game, some of the last vestiges of African-American-targeted programming — has joined the writing staff of ABC’s Cougar Town (created by Scrubs’ Bill Lawrence) to make the jokes on the Courteney Cox vehicle more organically female.

This information is troubling but not shocking, as the most recent report on the demographic breakdown of writers in Hollywood was quite bleak for women. According to the Hollywood Writers Report done by the Writers Guild of America, only 28% of the writers for television were female. Does that really make sense to you when more than 50% of the U.S. population is made up of women?

“You can be bi but not gay. Well, you can be gay and funny, like Ellen [DeGeneres] and Rosie [O'Donnell]. It’s really hard to be straight-up gay and serious. We’re still not over that.”

(via Jezebel)

It’s an interesting point, actually, and when I thought about it, it’s something that can be applied to all minorities who were often cast out from the mainstream media. Going as far back as blackface, when actual black performers would take part in the minstrel shows–of course not looking like themselves but dressed up as an exaggerated version of “blackness”. Then look at our most successful black actors. Will Smith, Eddie Murphy, Martin Lawrence, they’re actors that white people feel comfortable enough going to see because they make them laugh. But it’s usually a brand of humor that white audiences would expect of black performers based on common stereotypes.

I’m also reminded of Knocked Up, where, while the female characters are funny, they’re funny because we’re laughing at them, not with them. We’re laughing at them being overly emotional, irrational, killjoy harpies. Whereas when Seth Rogen or Paul Rudd make a joke, we’re laughing with them–we’re rooting for them, we identify with them (or so the filmmakers seem to think).

Gay people are no exception. Pop in Revenge of the Nerds, or My Best Friend’s Wedding, Too Wong Foo and more recently I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry, or turn on the TV and see Will & Grace, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Sex and the City, and Desperate Housewives. All shows where they gay men are meant to be light, funny, and of course, fabulous. Oh wait, but there is that guy Andrew on Desperate Housewives that had some dramatic storylines earlier on in the show. Of course, he was a raging sociopath.

In general, it seems if you’re funny, straight people can accept your gayness because it amuses them. But they become very uncomfortable when the gayness is serious. I remember going to see The Talented Mr. Ripley with my mother and people actually walking out during the homoerotic bathtub scene between Matt Damon and Jude Law (and nothing even actually happened!), and yet in films like Scary Movie, Shawn Wayans can get stabbed in the ear with a penis while trying to suck it through a glory hole in the men’s restroom, and everyone’s hooting and hollering. Hahaha, that silly fag!

Brokeback Mountain was a very serious film that garnered a lot of critical acclaim, but even the supposedly liberal Academy couldn’t given the film the Oscar and many members have since come forward and said they couldn’t vote for it because of the subject matter. To put it simply, straight people can’t deal with gay people that are complex, 3-dimensional, romantic, and human.  They’d much rather just crack the whip and yell “dance, queer! dance!”

But Michelle cites examples like Rosie O’Donnell and Ellen DeGeneres, though I would disagree with classifying the two of them together. People loved Rosie, but her popularity was at its highest before people knew she was a lesbian. After her coming out, and the infamous “dyke-cut” that she sported simultaneously, her public image was on a down spiral, especially given it was at the same time her adversary in her lawsuit was trying to kill her “queen of nice” shtick. It only got worse once she got to The View, as it seemed every other day FOX News especially, but other channels as well, portrayed her as the fat angry lesbian beating up on pretty thin Christian Elisabeth Hasselbeck. Nearly everything out of Rosie’s mouth made news. After leaving The View, she tried doing a primetime variety show, reminiscent of her former friendly image, and it failed miserably.

Ellen on the other hand, while her sitcom was cancelled shortly after coming out, Finding Nemo and  her daytime program The Ellen DeGeneres Show seems to have basically made her the gay, white Oprah in terms of popularity and clout.  But Ellen has a squeaky clean image, is always nice and friendly to celebrities, and rarely talks about being a lesbian on her program (not that she should have to).

I think with Michelle, it also has a lot do with her tough image.  I’ve been writing my senior thesis on male aversion to chick flicks, and in my research I’ve seen articles talking about how the public is very picky about actresses it will accept as action heroines.  Angelina Jolie is one of them, maybe Jodie Foster (though The Brave One didn’t do so well), but overall when a female action flick does well it’s usually considered a fluke.  So maybe that incidicates some sort of uncomfortableness with strong women in film.  And though straight men seem to love lesbians when they’re making out for male pleasure, they don’t seem to like it very much when you’re a lesbian that they think can kick their ass if they try asking for a threesome.

If you’ve seen Girlfight then you know Michelle is actually quite a good actress.   But for some reason Hollywood has embraced other latina actresses like Jessica Alba and Eva Mendes who can barely act their way out of a box.  Is it because of Michelle’s sexuality? Possibly.  I don’t know that her sexuality has even gotten enough coverage for people to really know about it.  Is it because she isn’t prissy enough to fit into tired old romantic cliches so prevalent in film that keep women as helpless damsels in distress desperate for a male hero?  I don’t know.  But I certainly will agree with Michelle that Hollywood like gay people a lot better when we make them laugh.

I admit I’m not the biggest fan of this man’s work. He’s done Jesse McCartney’s “Leavin”, Beyonce’s “Single Ladies” and Mary J. Blige’s “Just Fine”, all which I like. But conversely he’s also done Britney Spears’ “Me Against The Music”, Rihanna’s “Umbrella”, and Mariah Carey’s “Touch My Body”, all which make want to throw up my Mrs. Fields chocolate chip cookies.

That said, there’ve been producers that Christina’s worked with before who hadn’t impressed me with their previous work, yet turned out something impressive when it came to working with Christina. One example is Rich Harrison, who is famous for producing Beyonce’s “Crazy In Love” and Amerie’s “1 Thing”, yet managed to create one hell of a foot-stomping pseudo-gospel tune called “Makes Me Wanna Pray” on Christina’s Back to Basics album that in no way resembles any of his previous work. So it’s possible that while this guy’s catalogue isn’t making me squeal with glee, he could actually end up turning out something relatively unexpected with Christina.

Considering Tricky doesn’t seem like the kind of producer Christina would normally gravitate to, especially in lieu of the more electronic, futuristic sound she’s trying to create for her next LP, it seems as if she’s doing a repeat of her pattern with her second album Stripped. In chronicling the story of Stripped, Entertainment Weekly did a piece in which famous producer Rockwilder talked about the making of Dirrty:

Aguilera told Rockwilder she was looking for a track that would announce to the world that she’s back — but not the same as she was. ”She wanted it to be down and dirty,” Rockwilder says, ”really powerful, really wild, and crazy.’

Basically, Christina had finished the rest of the tracks for the album, and needed something fiery that would get people’s attention and announce she’s back. She did something similar with “Ain’t No Other Man”, a song with bombastic horns and explosive vocals, and an intro that would perk your head up quicker than a fire truck sneaking up on you on a back road. The point is, though Tricky Stewart is miles different from people like Linda Perry, Ladytron, and Sia (all people she’s confirmed to be collaborating with on this album), it’s possible this departure from the “theme” could indicate she very well could be done with the album.

Sia Furler, most known for her song “Breathe Me” which has been featured on the beloved series finale of Six Feet Under and the broadcast of the 2006 Victoria’s Secret fashion show, has already completed her work with Aguilera.  She told Australian publication the Herald Sun all about her experience working with Christina.

‘‘Obviously she likes Breathe Me, that’s the one everyone goes for, but she mentioned seven songs as far back as the first Zero 7 album, and songs like Destiny and Distractions, and a song called Moon from my last album that nobody ever picks as a favourite.

‘‘That won her some points, she’s a listener, she knows my random album tracks nobody gives a s— about. That’s pretty flattering.”

Though Furler was shocked the singer knew who she was, the feeling was mutual — Furler expressing her love of Aguilera’s ballad Beautiful.

And it was Sia’s way with ballads that Aguilera wanted for her own musical DNA.

‘‘That’s why I’m here, that’s my department, I’m from the ballads department,” Furler says.

‘‘We’ve written some really wonderful songs. I would put any of the songs we’ve written on one of my albums. And it’s a total collaboration. There are some artists who walk in and say ‘I want to write a song about a stiletto’, then walk out again.

‘‘You write the song and they take a third. That’s not at all what it’s been like working with Christina. Often she saves the day when we’re stuck.”

In addition to Sia,Christina has been photographed with Daniel Wu of Ladytron as early as December, and according to him, they’ve been working together in the studio as well.

“We first heard that we were one of Christina’s favorite bands last summer. We were thrilled. So we went over to Los Angeles to meet her in December where she identified the type of Ladytron songs that she liked. We were impressed because she had a real deep knowledge of our music – album tracks, not just the singles.”

At this point the album seems well on its way.  And if the choice of producers and songwriters is any indication, it’s piecing up to be just as diverse as her last two efforts.  Which depending on how you look at it, is either to her avail, or her demise.

According to Xzibit, his words were taken out of context.  But more importantly, Clay asks him about homophobia in hip-hop in general, and Xzibit says the environment is a lot less homophobic that people think, that it’s “just part of the landscape”.

“It started as just common place; it was just part of the language. I think the overtones that it creates, is not what really exists. I don’t think if you are gay and you go to a hip-hop club that you’ll get beat up for being gay. That’s not what is going to happen. I think words are the way that people express themselves—just like if you say bitch on a rap record for a long time you can rally thousands of women that will say that’s incorrect. You can’t focus on one single thing or bad aspect of what happens in hip hop and try to blanket it. That’s not the root of the problem. It exists, I think it’s how you portray it, and it’s how you use it. You gotta paint with a broad brush when you talk about homophobia because it’s a lot of things that exist in hip hop that aren’t exactly right, but it’s part of the landscape.”

Strangely, I understand the point he’s trying to make.  The overtones of homophobia in hip-hop or the homophobic language that’s used doesn’t necessarily indicate intense hatred or homophobia.  Calling another straight guy a “fag” doesn’t necessarily mean that you hate gay people or want to do harm to them.

But there’s two problems.  One of which is, while for many hip-hop artists like say, Eminem, homophobia is limited to their language and not necessarily their actions, there are plenty of examples of rappers who are outright explicitly homophobic and have no qualms about saying that they are.

The other is that simply because you don’t outright hate gay people and want to physically harm them does not mean you aren’t homophobic, or that your level of homophobia is acceptable.  I’m reminded of people I’ve actually met who have said things to me like, “Well my dad calls black people niggers but he’s not racist.”  Doesn’t that statement sound absolutely ridiculous to you?  So why is it any less ridiculous to let hip-hop artists (and society at large) use clearly homophobic language and let them get away with it because they essentially say “Dude, you’re a fag.  No offense to gay people, though!”

When are people going to understand that words aren’t just words?  That when you say “You’re such a pussy” when what you really mean is “You’re weak” or “You’re a wimp”, you are being sexist.  Or that when you call someone a “fag” because you want to insult their manhood, you are being homophobic.  When you say that something is “so gay” when what you really mean is that it sucks, or it’s bad, you are being homophobic.  When you incessantly say “no homo” every time you happen to come even slightly in contact with another man (men should never hug! so gay!), or when you eat a banana (phallic symbol), or wear a pink shirt (pink is for girls only!!), because you’re deathly afraid of people even thinking for a second that you might be homosexual, all of these things create a culture of homophobia and misogyny.

This conversation reminds me a lot of talking to naive white people who think that because they have black co-workers or black friends, or because they voted for Barack Obama, or because they watch Will Smith’s movies and listen to Beyonce that somehow that proves they’re not racist.  They think that racism only exists in backwoods southern hicks who wear white hoods and burn crosses.  They don’t understand that there is a spectrum of racism.  You may be someone who wants to drag a black man from the back of a pick up truck, or you may just be someone who clutches your purse a little tighter when you see a black man walking past you.  But either way, it’s still racist.

Homophobia needs to no longer be acceptable in any capacity.

Thursday we watched a film called Tongues Untied in my Advanced Video Production class, and given the subject matter of the film I was sort of shocked I had not only never seen it, but I’d never heard of it either.  In addition to the fact that it was extremely helpful by aiding me in determining how exactly I was going to use mostly stock footage to demonstrate how unequally we judge male and female sexuality, it was an beautiful film that addressed issues of internalized racism and self-hatred among black gay men.

It was made by Marlon Riggs, who unfortunately died of an AIDS related illness in 1994.  He’s a black poet, educator, and filmmaker that went on to make other films like Affirmation, Anthem, Color Adjustment, and Black Is…Black Ain’t (which he unfortunately didn’t finish working on before his untimely death, but was posthumously released in 1995.)  The film is not a typical documentary, in the sense that it has a purpose and it has a topic, but it doesn’t say “I am a documentary and I’m now going to tell you about something”.  It knows its message, it knows its audience, and once it starts it just goes.

The filmmaker himself is present in the film as is a prominent gay black poet named Essex Hemphill whose poetry essentially scores the film.  Riggs’ own personal story of experiencing violent homophobia only to be rescued by a white man acts as a through line for the documentary which features many different types of gay black men, from transvestite prostitutes to stocky middle aged men with dreads (who undoubtedly know how to “z-snap”) to passionate vogue-ers who unabashedly embrace the dance created by gay men in 1930s Harlem ballrooms.  But most importantly, it just shows black gay men, being with each other and loving each other.  Unfortunately, Riggs’ message is one that is missing for an entire generation of gay men of color, who are frustrated with the lack of support they have from either community that they are a part of.

Generally, I think minority communities are less accepting of individuality than mainstream white culture.  Maybe it’s because we’ve been oppressed and thus feel a certain sense of unity and cohesion is necessary to achieve equality.  Black, Latino, and Asian culture is very much about family, honor, and often religion.  Unfortunately according to many people these are attributes that homosexuality negates.  Just ask Will Smith who, when asking for advice from Denzel Washington about whether or not to do a gay kiss in the film version of Six Degrees of Separation, was given a resounding “No.”  Why, you ask?

“Denzel said white people generally look at a movie as acting. They accept the actors for who they are, and the role is separate. But black people, because they have so few heroes in film, tend to hold the artists personally responsible for the roles they choose.You can act all you want, but don’t do any real physical scenes. Don’t be kissing no man.”

This was from an interview in Premiere magazine from 1994.   To give Smith some credit, he later said he regretted not fully committing the role.  Telling Entertainment Weekly:

“It was very immature on my part. I was thinking, ‘How are my friends back in Philly going to think about this?’ I wasn’t emotionally stable enough to artistically commit to that aspect of the film. In a movie with actors and a director of this caliber, for me to be the one bringing something cheesy to it. This was a valuable lesson for me. Either you do it or you don’t.”

Apparently being gay wasn’t heroic enough for Denzel Washington but playing a dirty cop in Training Day (for which he won his second Oscar) was. Why is it that Denzel took issue with will kissing a man on screen, but had no problem with the fact that Will was playing a con-artist? The fact that African Americans’ most prized actors don’t want to touch homosexuality on screen is telling of just how relevant Riggs’ point is.  If this is how the black community feels about homosexuals, imagine how gay people must feel about themselves.  White gay men and women at least have the gay community as their safe harbor, but what happens when you are black and gay?  You are rejected because of the homophobia in the black community, and then also rejected because of the racism in the gay community.

Things have gotten better since Riggs’ released this documentary.  There’ve been portrayals of gay men of color on television and, on shows like Spin City, Six Feet Under, The Wire, Noah’s Arc, My So-Called Life, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, the DL Chronicles, The Real World and American Candidate.  Unfortunately most of these shows are on cable where mainstream audiences may not see them and/or lived a very short life on the television circuit.  None of them are still currently on the air, and I can’t think of many current examples of shows that feature gay men of color beyond The No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency (also on cable) and Logo’s Shirts & Skins.  Note that of all the shows I’ve listed, most of the gay men were black, two were latino.  Asian, Native American gay men–they virtually don’t exist.  Oh wait, there’s Rex Lee’s character on Entourage, Ari Gold’s lackey assistant whom he treats like trash, and basically serves as not much more than a backboard for Ari’s plethora of derogatory gay jokes.

And in film?  You’re not alone if you’re hearing the sound of crickets.  Broken Hearts Club featured a gay black character who was completely inconsequential to the film.  Shawn Wayans played a predatory gay caricature in Scary Movie. Adam Sandler’s I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry featured a gay Ving Rhames, who was of course a hilarious character (clip NSFW) because he’s big, black, scary, and (gasp) gay! He’s not a skinny blow dryer-toting effeminate young white male! The cognitive dissonance is making my brain explode.  Some good examples in mainstream films that I can think of are Collins in Rent (great for liberal Broadway audiences but apparently not so much for the larger American public), and Mercutio in the Baz Luhrrman version of Romeo and Juliet–played as a gay man in love with Romeo.  There’s scatterings of other minor, marginalized characters in films pre-1990s such as Revenge of the Nerds, Torch Song Trilogy, Norman…Is That You, and The Boys In The Band, but three-dimensional, fleshed out lead characters, whose shtick is something else besides the fact that they’re gay? Hm. Apart from 2008’s Noah’s Arc: Beyond The Broom, a limited release based off of a canceled cable TV program, no.

What difference does it make, you might ask?  Everyone knows there are gay people of all colors, shapes, sizes, and socioeconomic backgrounds, right?  It’s just common sense.  Why would people think homosexuality is a trait limited to white people? I’m not sure, let’s ask these children.  In the controversial 1996 documentary It’s Elementary, middle school students who were given the opportunity to speak to young gay people and get any questions answered or misconceptions cleared up about homosexuality that they had.  When the gay activists of color left the room, and the teacher asked the students what they learned, one of those things was that gay people were not all white.

“I thought all gay people were like white.  I mean, you know, I feel bad saying that but they’re not.  That’s what I thought. ‘Cause mostly gay people I see are white.”

Another student says,

That’s where I got it from ’cause talk shows they mostly have white people on there that are gay. So that’s what I thought. So then again that kinda changed my little thinking about it.

This documentary is from 1996, so you could say people’s perceptions of homosexuality and race have changed since then, but let’s revisit the television shows and films I listed.  How many of them are post-2000? Very few.  Gay black representation in the media has dwindled since the 90s, as have the number of heterosexual black lead characters in television and film, and the same for women.  Why is that? I’m not sure.  But I do know in 2004 when MTV had gay men of color, and more than one gay person on The Real World for the first time, I remember a friend of mine at Fordham University tell me she was watching it with her roommate (a white girl) who said to her that prior to seeing Karamo Brown on The Real World Philadelphia, she had no idea that black gay people existed.  At the time, this shocked me to the point that I thought this friend of mine had made it up.  Of course, I was a naive 18 year old who had not yet realized the power of the media to manipulate how the majority of the world viewed those lower than them on the social hierarchy.  Today, I hear things like that and shrug.

I remember being a 16 year old boy and seeing Keith Boykin on Showtime’s American Candidate.  It was almost a religious experience for me.  He was intelligent, well-spoken, well-dressed, charismatic, politically astute, black, and gay.  For the first time in my entire life I felt like I finally saw someone in the media who truly respresented me. At the age of sixteen! I wrote Keith a letter telling him how much seeing him on that show (and frankly, owning everyone on it left and right) meant to me.  It was at that moment that I understood all of my potential could be fully realized.

All of this makes Marlon Riggs’ work that much more important.  It makes his death a lot sadder, and it makes the fact that his film was ransacked by the conservative right that much more angering.  As much of an impact as Tongues Untied had, imagine how much bigger a revolution it could have started if it weren’t blocked from television stations all over the country in 1989.  American Candidate was aired in 2004.  Imagine how much earlier I would’ve begun to love myself had I seen Tongues Untied.  Imagine how many less black online dating profiles you’d see that listed they were only interested in dating white men.  Imagine how many less black men would be marrying women and having unprotected sex with men on the side, telling themselves they’re not gay because they’re on top, and then bringing sexually transmitted diseases home to their unsuspecting wives.  Imagine how many less black gay men would have killed themselves because they were rejected by their families and their churches, and were overwhelmed by the sense of isolation and shame.

A straight student in this class raised his hand and said that he wasn’t gay, but that the way Riggs’ presented homosexuality in the film, he thought gay men were beautiful.  In response to a clip shown in the film of Eddie Murphy’s 1983 homophobic stand-up comedy routine where he not only degraded gay men but repeatedly used the word “faggot”, he said we’d come a long way since then, as people wouldn’t get away with saying things like that on television anymore.  His first and second comment reveal very different realities about the state of homophobia in today’s society.

The first is that it’s incredible to see just how far people have socially evolved, to even be able to use the words “gay” and “beautiful” in the same sentence.  It shows just how effective Riggs’ experimental documentary really is.  The second is that still, too many people are blinded by straight privilege.  While his intentions were undoubtedly good, I found it outrageous that one would think people don’t still say things akin to Eddie Murphy’s ‘83 stand up routine today–both in real life and on television.  The 2000 comedy special The Original Kings of Comedy featured many homophobic jokes, mostly from comedian Bernie Mac who repeatedly referred to his six year old nephew as a faggot.  The word and many others like it are still the premier insult used amongst young people in the Western world.

I, as a gay person, know that the world hasn’t changed that much since 1983, especially when it comes to the black community ant its resistance to addressing homophobia.  For every Barack Obama there are five Rev. Willie Wilsons.  But I can understand why someone who doesn’t have to deal with homophobia first hand, wouldn’t notice it.  The hope is that the issues Tongues Untied discusses are issues that come to the forefront, in both the black community and the gay community, so that finally gay men of color can on a large scale feel a sense of pride and self-worth that they deserve to enjoy.