Stating the Obvious
Published
by
�
I was just reading a new article on Pink News about comedian and TV presenter Paul O’Grady possibly moving to ITV from Channel 4 due to issues about the budget for his show. I was not entirely surprised to see that the very first two words in this article were ‘openly gay.’
A link at the bottom of the page to an old article about Graham Norton possibly taking over O’Grady’s Channel 4 slot begins with the same two words ‘openly gay’.
A few days ago the same two words ‘openly gay’ opened the first paragraph of the report on the tragic death of singer Stephen Gately.
On the same day an article about Stephen Fry’s TV series Kingdom being axed began with the words ‘gay broadcaster’.
Two weeks ago, there was an
article about John Barrowman that spawned all kinds of criticisms
and comments. The headline of the article was ‘Gay Dr Who and
Torchwood Star…” And in the links below was another article about
John that opened with “Gay actor…”
At this point let me quote John Barrowman in a Times article marking the anniversary of the Stonewall riots which makes the same point.
“If there’s one thing that annoys me it’s the media that calls me “gay” as a prefix to everything….”
See, even he’s noticed.
Looking further back in the Pink pages I came across further examples of this lazy journalism. These three were one after the other.
“Gay comedian Matt Lucas….”
“Openly gay fashion designer Tom Ford….”
“Gay illusionist Derren Brown….”
And then Graham Norton and John Barrowman popped up again, both still openly gay. As if we didn’t know that. If you took a poll in any high street and asked people to name two gay celebrities chances are those two would be mentioned. Nomad tribes deep in the Sahara who don’t even have a word for gay know that John Barrowman and Graham Norton are gay. Ok, I exaggerate. But you get the point. They’re gay. We don’t need to be told they are every time their names are mentioned in the press.
And it’s the same for the women.
�“Lesbian rock icon Melissa Etheridge…”
“Bisexual singer Lady Gaga…”
“Bisexual actress Megan Fox….”
Has anyone ever seen an article that refers to “openly heterosexual actor Brad Pitt” or “completely straight singer, Beyonce” or “pathologically non-gay politician’s wife, Iris Robinson…”
Heterosexual people are not defined by their sexual preferences. Why are gay people?
Why, especially on a website specifically for the LGBT community, is it necessary to keep using phrases like ‘openly gay’ to describe the subjects of the article?
Even if the article is about the fact that the person is gay, such as the recent one about John Barrowman that we all had such fun with, ‘openly gay’ don’t need to be the first two words in the sentence. They don’t need to be in the title. The subject matter speaks for itself.
It is even less necessary when the article is nothing to do with the subject’s sexuality. Paul O’Grady is not moving to ITV because it is a more gay friendly channel. Graham Norton isn’t going to Channel 4 for that reason, either. Kingdom was axed because ITV has budget problems, not because Stephen Fry is gay. And Stephen Gately, bless his poor soul, didn’t die at the terribly young age of 33 because he was gay. The lazy journalism that pigeon-holes people so conveniently seemed all the more annoying in the articles that covered that tragedy.
If gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transsexuals are to have a truly equal place in society with everyone who doesn’t fit into one of those categories, then we all have to stop using easy labels, and it ought to start with the people who write the news, especially those who write the Pink News.
Stating the
Obvious
I was just reading a new article on Pink News about comedian and TV presenter Paul O’Grady possibly moving to ITV from Channel 4 due to issues about the budget for his show. I was not entirely surprised to see that the very first two words in this article were ‘openly gay.’
A link at the bottom of the page to an old article about Graham Norton possibly taking over O’Grady’s Channel 4 slot begins with the same two words ‘openly gay’.
A few days ago the same two words ‘openly gay’ opened the first paragraph of the report on the tragic death of singer Stephen Gately.
On the same day an article about Stephen Fry’s TV series Kingdom being axed began with the words ‘gay broadcaster’.
Two weeks ago, there was an
article about John Barrowman that spawned all kinds of criticisms
and comments. The headline of the article was ‘Gay Dr Who and
Torchwood Star…” And in the links below was another article about
John that opened with “Gay actor…”At this point let me quote John Barrowman in a Times article marking the anniversary of the Stonewall riots which makes the same point.
“If there’s one thing that annoys me it’s the media that calls me “gay” as a prefix to everything….”
See, even he’s noticed.
Looking further back in the Pink pages I came across further examples of this lazy journalism. These three were one after the other.
“Gay comedian Matt Lucas….”
“Openly gay fashion designer Tom Ford….”
“Gay illusionist Derren Brown….”
And then Graham Norton and John Barrowman popped up again, both still openly gay. As if we didn’t know that. If you took a poll in any high street and asked people to name two gay celebrities chances are those two would be mentioned. Nomad tribes deep in the Sahara who don’t even have a word for gay know that John Barrowman and Graham Norton are gay. Ok, I exaggerate. But you get the point. They’re gay. We don’t need to be told they are every time their names are mentioned in the press.
And it’s the same for the women.
�“Lesbian rock icon Melissa Etheridge…”
“Bisexual singer Lady Gaga…”
“Bisexual actress Megan Fox….”
Has anyone ever seen an article that refers to “openly heterosexual actor Brad Pitt” or “completely straight singer, Beyonce” or “pathologically non-gay politician’s wife, Iris Robinson…”
Heterosexual people are not defined by their sexual preferences. Why are gay people?
Why, especially on a website specifically for the LGBT community, is it necessary to keep using phrases like ‘openly gay’ to describe the subjects of the article?
Even if the article is about the fact that the person is gay, such as the recent one about John Barrowman that we all had such fun with, ‘openly gay’ don’t need to be the first two words in the sentence. They don’t need to be in the title. The subject matter speaks for itself.
It is even less necessary when the article is nothing to do with the subject’s sexuality. Paul O’Grady is not moving to ITV because it is a more gay friendly channel. Graham Norton isn’t going to Channel 4 for that reason, either. Kingdom was axed because ITV has budget problems, not because Stephen Fry is gay. And Stephen Gately, bless his poor soul, didn’t die at the terribly young age of 33 because he was gay. The lazy journalism that pigeon-holes people so conveniently seemed all the more annoying in the articles that covered that tragedy.
If gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transsexuals are to have a truly equal place in society with everyone who doesn’t fit into one of those categories, then we all have to stop using easy labels, and it ought to start with the people who write the news, especially those who write the Pink News.
Comments
Top Authors
Subscribe
Click here to sign up now.
7 Comments
Well, for one, gay isn't just a lifestyle. it is a state of being. For another, no, I think it serves to seperate gay people from those who don't need any qualifier in front of them. It says this person is 'not normal' he is 'gay'. And that has to stop. Especially when there are newpapers like the Daily Mail around!
Rose dear, a splendid blog. But don't you think that by stating the obvious, they are projecting 'Gay' as a word that needs to be instilled in the public phsyci in order to make them say 'Gay' without attaching even any sexual connotation to the word. Gay should simply mean 'Lifestyle' period.
thanks for that, Will.
Nice blog Rose, you make a good argument here.
And Stephen Gately, bless his poor soul, didn’t die at the terribly young age of 33 because he was gay. Apparently a Daily Mail article disagrees with me. She's wrong.
darling, i am still playing catchup. But the one thing I DO know how to do is string words together into sentences. This issue has been bugging me for a while and the O'Grady article was just the last straw. The easiest bit of research ever was tracking back through the last few weeks to find these repeated examples of lazy journalism in Pink.
Hi Rose, Youi can no lomgr make me believe you are naïve and/amateurish. This blog belies your modesty, honey. Most intersting observations and gre-e-at photos. As fo the way PinkNews composes it s headlines, I truklt believe Jessica Geen deserves to know your opinion: She is an intelligent woman and has always responded politely to my comments and questions: jessica.geen@pinknews.co.uk lotsa hugs JP