Friday, July 01, 2005

Logo: First American Basic Cable Channel Devoted to Gay Programming Launches Tonight

This is a good move to increase positive representation of homosexuals during a repressive period.

In regards to the article I can sympathize with Monica Mehta's enthusiasm, but it is kind of naive to state that this station is the "kind that doesn't have any 'agenda'"? Doesn't it seek to portray homosexual populations in a positive light? Isn't that an agenda?

Merriam Webster
Main Entry: agen·da
Pronunciation: &-'jen-d&
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, neuter plural of agendum, gerundive of agere
1 : a list or outline of things to be considered or done {agendas of faculty meetings}
2 : an underlying often ideological plan or program {a political agenda}

Mehta just because you think that Logo is a good idea, doesn't mean that Logo does not have an "agenda" and by stating that it doesn't we are misleading and easily dismissed as liars.

I'm tired of the fake bullshitting that has been going on at all levels of our society, demands that we should honor the rules of polite society and lets keep that for a time when the children aren't around (or for many people groups of people that they may believe lack mature sense: e.g. women, poor, minorities, etc...) The hell with that, look people in the eye and state yes we do have an agenda (if you have faith in your cause, state what it is--even when your cause is simply to entertain gay people). Tell people what it is and why you believe it is a positive agenda.

As for this polite society crap... don't get me started!

A small complaint in regards to an otherwise good posting.

Gay channel comes out tonight

For a more in-depth look at the new cable station and its surprising founder (what a long strange trip its been?), check out Adam Sternbergh's piece in New York magazine:

I Want My Gay TV

and if you are at all confused why I believe this channel is a good development:

Being Gay Is Just As Healthy As Being Straight

It is ridiculous at this point that we have to sit down with adults and explain this to them--look at the language in that last "positive" article which by implication of associating heterosexuals as "straight" it implies, still, even while telling us that they are healthy and well-adjusted, that homosexuals are "crooked" or "bent" (still considering the history of DSM tests and psychology's demonization of homosexuality, this can be viewed as progression?)

One more thing, since I'm ranting, when are we going to evolve to a point where sexuality is viewed as a positive force (while not ignoring its negative impulses) in society that needs to be seriously discussed, represented and studied... as opposed to being kept behind the curtain, exploited for profit and to be used as advertising fodder? I view the repression directed toward homosexuality as just one part of a larger move toward controlling our freedom of creative expression--one of the most basic and powerful is our expression of sexuality identity...

No comments: