Sunday, August 03, 2003
(9:18 AM) | Adam Kotsko:
Sometimes Maureen Dowd doesn't suck
Although normally I hate Maureen Dowd, her column this morning brings up an interesting point, albeit somewhat subliminally. The public face of male homosexuality is not a series of deviant sex acts, but rather a certain aesthetic stance, one that has been significantly adopted by straight men (who are sometimes called "metrosexual"). I've talked to several people who object to the show "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," and I frankly couldn't wrap my mind around the idea that it was promoting "homosexuality." Instead, it is promoting a certain aesthetic, which essentially amounts to a renewed emphasis on men's fashion and on cultural literacy.
I have not watched this show, so I cannot say for sure, but I notice a pattern with these kinds of things. The gay guys come from the margins to educate the straight men in their ways, and the straight guys adopt those ways for completely heterosexual ends: to attract women or to please the woman they've already attracted. The more outlandish aspects of gay culture, such as the distinctive nasal voice or the excessive comfort with physical contact, are not adopted, because, you know, we don't want to look gay or anything. Rather than confirming homosexuality as "normal," such shows reflect and confirm its marginality. Saying that "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" promotes homosexuality is like saying that Elvis Presley promoted being black. What the show really promotes is scrapping gay culture for parts that will assist men in their quest for female affection in a changing sexual landscape.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
(Note: As always, reading New York Times articles requires a free, one-time registration process.)
