Kevin Naff wrote a response to our GLAAD/Thomas Beatie story. The gist: “The only criticism I have for GLAAD is that it couldn’t suppress the Beatie story.” [Washington Blade]
Reaction.
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
yaksha2
Oh yeahh, I forgot. Politically active identity-based groups are not supposed to build on controversial representation but suppress the forms of diversity they see as counterproductive to their widely discussed and agreed upon image.
How dare Beatie and his family decide to milk their “original” situation in order to pay the bills! They should just go into debt so that product approved Queers can get the spotlight.
That totally makes sense.
PalePhoenix
Well, ja, yaksha2…though your derision of their limelight-stealing, coupled with what I think is disdain for Naff’s similarly questionable stance, pretty much typifies the whirlwind of emotions a person in this ‘position’ stirs.
Quoth the Queerty (in the referenced article):
“…an anonymous activist close to the matter informed us that some leaders are shying away from the Beatie story because they don’t want his story to be representative of the entire movement.”
I agree that GLAAD is making a mistake here. They should embrace diversity, regardless of its ‘motives.’ This is a most uncommon situation (though I keep thinking it couldn’t possibly be the first). Not wanting him to be ‘representative’ of anything more than himself is baldly hypocritical, since this movement of theirs/ours is chiefly about visibility and inclusiveness, even if Beatie doesn’t consider his a queer voice.
For my own, if you want to be a man, then we either have to recalibrate our expectations of manhood, or the current consensus needs to be given its due. We humans with the external genitals don’t get pregnant. An evolutionary oversight, perhaps, but I’m happy with it (and a tad grateful).
yaksha2
PalePhoenix:
I’d be worried if people didn’t react to Beatie being on Oprah, of all things, considering how mainstream media currently codifies our gender and sex “consensus” in this country. However, for GLAAD to say that Beatie doesn’t represent “our movement” is to imply that:
1. It’s clear to all self-identified queer people what our “movement” consists of or should consist of representation wise,
2. That somehow shying away from Beatie and his family’s story (which is definitely not the first. Hello Patrick Califia!) doesn’t imply that some of us are still freaks that don’t deserve the same opportunities of exposure and milking it
3. That inclusive, respectful Queer groups know what people deserve representation or that somehow non-normative messages will initially be represented respectfully and accurately without follow-ups
For GLAAD not to see Beatie as “an object of knowledge for others,” as Foucalt put it, and try to spin his appearances as a focal point for inclusivity and respect messages is asinine and just reaffirms their commitment to “bend-over” compromises resulting in power dilution.
I’m all for groups of people who integrate shame fantasies into their sex lives, but for GLAAD to do so politically sets “queer” people farther back than Beatie ever could.
PalePhoenix
I guess it depends whose “shame fantasy” we’re really talkin’ ’bout tho. Have you seen this? If it’s the same guy I noticed three years ago, that’s one long-ass pregnancy, and I don’t even have the patience to figure out how they “hoax in” a placenta on what is basically an ectopic…but I digress.
Foucault is brilliant, but I think he’s a little beyond the pale here, in a situation that marries sensationalism with sexual identity issues. Gender, sexuality, these things are constantly fodder for the tabloids (albeit, not always for Oprah, who’s more often fodder, herself).
With questions of diversity and visibility come concerns of representation. GLAAD is trying to think for us, and that’s inappropriate. However, I’m the only 6’6″, gay, right-handed, blue-eyed jew I’ve ever known in my whole life (seriously, if you know a doctor or a lawyer version…), but being such a ‘unicorn’ only points up the fact that if we look closely enough, or choose only one characteristic, we’re all a bit queer…or rather ordinary. So where’s “my” representation?
As I’ve been fond of saying, “Everyone else is unique…I’m just strange.” Mr. Beatie…well, he’s just momentarily unusual. Two and a half months, and we really won’t care unless he and his wife keep fobbing their child off on a bewildered and largely disrespectful public.