My Links

Syndication

 
Listed on BlogsCanada
Posted by eleanor

Too sexy for the printed page

The Ryerson Review of Journalism has an interesting piece on the evils of the "hyper-sexualized" major gay media in Canada. There are some interesting things here, but this piece could have been so much more... it actually ends up sounding rather prissy and right-wing, instead of approaching the topic in a way that's more truly engaged with the community. But I'm biased: I was interviewed for the piece, and my comments not judged to be useful enough to be included (grin). I do have concerns about representation in the gay media (and longtime readers will have already checked out this analysis, written for Press Pass Q -- click on the "commentary" section; this analysis is based not on the idea that sex or sexy is bad, but that internalized homophobia might be skewing visual portraits away from real intimacy).

Ryerson reporter Maya Saibil writes: "I became aware of how obsessed gay media are with sex when a salacious headline was tacked on to a profile I wrote for Xtra this past October. The story was about an Aboriginal woman and the challenges she had overcome in her life. The headline was 'I'm a slut.' And while my subject did say that and I included it in my story, her sluttiness was not the focus of the piece."

A few thoughts: racism has completely desexualized Native people, and to play on the fact of a Native woman's sexual nature might well be a good thing that smashed a stereotype. And another: boring headlines make many community newspapers the most tedious reads of all time. I've just read too many headlines like "Activist has worked hard" and "Lesbian speaks out."

What do regular readers of the queer media think of the quality of what's out there?


ADDENDUM 10:35 am: Okay, the sentence about the de-sexualization of Natives was a smart ass point, but it avoids the reporter's thesis. Sigh. "Hypersexualized" gay papers do it to everyone. Should black men be hypersexualized when racism has turned them into being perceived as mindless sex machines? I'd say yes, because the alternative is to sexualize everyone but black men -- which is just as awful (no sex for you!).

Comments

# Sexing it up
May 1, 2005 12:40 PM
# re: Too sexy for the printed page
April 28, 2005 4:29 PM
Bert Archer, an editor at Toronto's Eye magazine and author of "The End of Gay (and the Death of Heterosexuality)" wrote the Ryerson writer a note which he's kindly forwarded to me:

"It's not very good though. Your article really begs its own central
question. Explicit sexuality makes for bad journalism/writing. fab and
Xtra have explicit sexuality in their copy, therefore fab and Xtra are bad writing/journalism.

The fact that you were miffed by a headline choice on your own submission to Xtra does your credibility no good in this instance. You seem to have gone into this looking to prove something very particular, letting no evidence or interview material stand in your way. Some evidence of bad writing or journalism, taken from some of the articles [of Xtra editor Paul] Gallant or [Xtra publisher Pink Triangle Press president Ken] Popert or [fab editor Mitchel] Raphael held up as examples of quality, would have gone a long way.

Bert Archer
-