Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, September 9, 2009
City / Homo / Visual Art Just A Reminder
Posted by Jen Graves on Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:15 PM
You want to vote YES on Ref. 71.
The artist Chris Rollins, now showing at Some Space downtown, provides a helpful reminder.
2
Why do homosexual women always seem to get left out of this discussion and its various visual depictions?
3
I think Jen's just using the show to draw attention to R71 - the show itself doesn't seem to have any political motivation.
6
@2: Well, it seems it's taking old-school images of male heroes and juxtaposing them in t-- you know what? Nevermind. The only contextually relevant images would be Rosie The Riveter holding the hand of a Housewife.
And lesbians get plenty of airtime and much more as the days go on. For My Wife is a really important film in the GLBT rights movement. To say they aren't represented in modern art is a bit disingenuous and sounds like concern trolling to me.
And lesbians get plenty of airtime and much more as the days go on. For My Wife is a really important film in the GLBT rights movement. To say they aren't represented in modern art is a bit disingenuous and sounds like concern trolling to me.
7
but apparently I have no place correcting others when my own grammar is so wretched. Correction: Technically, it should say: "You want to vote APPROVE on Ref. 71."
8
@6 You've noticed, I'm sure, that opponents of homosexuality often focus on male-male images.
For whatever reason, male-male images seem to evoke a more visceral reaction in homophobes.
For what it's worth, limiting positive imagery of homosexuals to male-male depictions seems to cater to the opponents of the movement, rather than the people who make up the movement.
Call that concern trolling or whatever you like.
For whatever reason, male-male images seem to evoke a more visceral reaction in homophobes.
For what it's worth, limiting positive imagery of homosexuals to male-male depictions seems to cater to the opponents of the movement, rather than the people who make up the movement.
Call that concern trolling or whatever you like.
9
@6 My apologies if my point seems heavy-handed. I totally dig your style of activism and the frequent updates, inputs, and points you make regarding Ref 71 and WFST.
By "this discussion," I was referring to how this topic is handled by the gay-white-male-dominated Stranger. Not the rights movement, as a whole.
By "this discussion," I was referring to how this topic is handled by the gay-white-male-dominated Stranger. Not the rights movement, as a whole.
10
The "gay-white-male-dominated Straner"? I love it! Watching the left splinter into identy-politics dominated squabling is so entertaining! Maybe the Stranger needs affirmative action for straight black females. Oh, a don't forget non-jews; IIRC Jews are way over-represented at the Stranger.
11
I kinda feel bad for the old people who might get dicked over by a bunch of homophobes if this goes down. Is there anything out there that visually connects R-71 approval with the seniors who also would have domestic partnership rights affirmed by R-71?
12
@8: Be that as it may, it still misses the point of the artwork itself. The point is fairly clear, and very well tuned to its intended audience with enough of a plausible deniability that you could easily deflect any hijacking as taking it too seriously. The art is innocuous to a fault and painfully derivative but it goes no further than that, really.
In terms of what produces the worst reaction out of homophobes, though, who cares? I think as a movement, we've gotten to the point that we fear retribution where there likely is none. Just as the far right eagerly pushes the buttons of the left on health care, for example, the left shouldn't be too bothered with the reactions it gets when it pushes the far right's buttons. For example, Poe's Law notwithstanding, going toe to toe with Loveschild (regardless of whether she's real or not) is a good idea because it forces the rationale behind a lot of these anti-equality arguments out into the open and forces people to actually defend or show that their points are indefensible.
Similarly, imagery like man-on-man action might be a powerful psychological truncheon, but that effect wears off. Afterward, it begs the question as to why people are offended and to what limits they went to to actually be offended. Did they do it to be offended on purpose? Did they purposely hunt down this imagery? Are they finessing context to suit their purposes?
If the far right is terribly preoccupied with man-on-man, then why not give it to them? Create more safe space and private events and then basically let everyone know the lengths these people go to to actually get these images. It's the main reason gay pride parades are not the mood killer they used to be, and it's the main reason Folsom doesn't have much reach outside of the gay community and the bay area.
Wholesome images of loving female couples are everywhere, but the GLBT community and allies are just too caught up in the man-on-man themselves to actually realize this. Look at Porti DiRossi and Ellen, for example. Or the aforementioned film For My Wife.
More...
In terms of what produces the worst reaction out of homophobes, though, who cares? I think as a movement, we've gotten to the point that we fear retribution where there likely is none. Just as the far right eagerly pushes the buttons of the left on health care, for example, the left shouldn't be too bothered with the reactions it gets when it pushes the far right's buttons. For example, Poe's Law notwithstanding, going toe to toe with Loveschild (regardless of whether she's real or not) is a good idea because it forces the rationale behind a lot of these anti-equality arguments out into the open and forces people to actually defend or show that their points are indefensible.
Similarly, imagery like man-on-man action might be a powerful psychological truncheon, but that effect wears off. Afterward, it begs the question as to why people are offended and to what limits they went to to actually be offended. Did they do it to be offended on purpose? Did they purposely hunt down this imagery? Are they finessing context to suit their purposes?
If the far right is terribly preoccupied with man-on-man, then why not give it to them? Create more safe space and private events and then basically let everyone know the lengths these people go to to actually get these images. It's the main reason gay pride parades are not the mood killer they used to be, and it's the main reason Folsom doesn't have much reach outside of the gay community and the bay area.
Wholesome images of loving female couples are everywhere, but the GLBT community and allies are just too caught up in the man-on-man themselves to actually realize this. Look at Porti DiRossi and Ellen, for example. Or the aforementioned film For My Wife.
13
Man-on-man has historically been the worst of two evils as far as homophobic POV is concerned. Several countries have laws where female-female sexual interaction is legal, male-male is illegal.
That's just Patriarchy for you, honestly. Even now we focus on male-male because it elicits the strongest homophobic reactions (for reasons I'm still curious about). Few are concerned about lesbians because they are, well, female. Since when have females been a threat?* Hell, the only thing better than one girl to a straight man is two girls. And then three. etc etc.
*Certainly not my own words, just speculation of other viewpoints!
That's just Patriarchy for you, honestly. Even now we focus on male-male because it elicits the strongest homophobic reactions (for reasons I'm still curious about). Few are concerned about lesbians because they are, well, female. Since when have females been a threat?* Hell, the only thing better than one girl to a straight man is two girls. And then three. etc etc.
*Certainly not my own words, just speculation of other viewpoints!
14
uh, this is an individual (gay male) artist's work showing at a gallery that JG chose to illustrate her post...it's not a commissioned series for a political movement, (that I'm aware of).
And, Baconcat can kiss my big fat ass...Chris Rollins simple clean lines are great!
And, Baconcat can kiss my big fat ass...Chris Rollins simple clean lines are great!
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
State Legislator Testifies That His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Came to Him from a Commercial for Jack in the Box by Christopher Frizzelle
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
"I don't know if I want to be here [if gay marriage passes]," by Republican State Senator Jay Rodne of North Bend by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (14) RSS