All Your Criticisms, Answered
Posted on August 16th, 2010 in Uncategorized |
Commenters on my post below about Steven Slater said, variously:
1) Who knew that he was gay, and who cares?
2) Why bring race into it, and you’re wrong anyway?
3) How dare you call him a fraud.
Let’s take these in order.
1) The gay thang: If you couldn’t tell Steven Slater is gay from the second you saw his MySpace photo, below, then you have not been to a major city lately. Or watched a reality TV show. Or flown on an airplane.
In any case, Google “Steven Slater gay” and you’ll see that most of the world had no trouble picking up on this. Here, the GA Voice debates whether Slater is good or bad for the gays. (They say: Good. I say: Terrible.) To those who allege homophobia on my part, I answer: Nice try. My point was that Slater played into unflattering stereotypes of gays: That they are melodramatic, bitchy, moody divas. (As portrayed on reality TV.) Slater did every professional gay man a disservice.
But then, some gays, like the GA Voice writer, embrace the stereotypes:
If you didn’t already know, stressed gay men will pop off at the mouth in a moment’s notice. …Slater didn’t go to work on Aug. 9 expecting to become a gay stewardess icon, but here we are, on Aug. 10, seeing his mug all over the news….
2) Back in black: I posed the question, “Would America have reacted differently to Steven Slater if he were a straight black man?” If you don’t believe me, I said, ask a black guy if he thinks that’s a crazy question.
The responses were generally, it wouldn’t make any difference, and why would you ask that question in the first place?
Here the blog “Chocolate City,” which describes itself as “the best African-American blog,” asks the question, “What if Steven Slater was a Gay Black Male?” (I took it up a notch.)
Would you have started a defense fund on his behalf without knowing anything about him? Would you have started a Facebook page for him? Would you have become one of his fans, or Would you have instantly passed judgment or condemned him and probably referred to him as a “crazy n*&&#@”?
(To be fair, the post is a little vague, and may be condemning homophobia in the black community. But…the point remains that perceptions of Slater would be different had Slater been black.)
3) Is Slater a faker? The answer looks like yes; not one of the passengers verifies his account, some of the passengers say he had a cut on his head before the flight started, and he’s admitted that he’d dreamed of popping out the chute for years. (Calling Dr. Freud.)
There’s a decent chance that Slater was actually drunk.
The guy’s a scam artist. And so our culture does what it does for all scam artists: It offers him a reality TV show.
Which is to say that the scam worked. And that an action which was probably shaped by images of the world on reality TV, and propelled by a desire to be on a reality TV show, now comes full circle. Artificial reality becomes real life becomes artificial again.
It’s a good thing no one died from that chute….

6 Responses
8/16/2010 11:22 am
I find it sad that you don’t know how deeply offensive you are. It really is a shame.
8/16/2010 12:21 pm
First of all, as a years-long reader of this blog, I say Richard is no bigot at all.
But (second) when he offers his rationale I wonder if he notices the echoes that I have inserted in CAPS:
“To those who allege ANTI-SEMITISM on my part, I answer: Nice try. My point was that JACK ABRAMOWITZ played into unflattering stereotypes of JEWS: That they are SHIFTY, MONEY-GRUBBING, ETC. (As portrayed on reality TV.) ABRAMOWITZ did every JEW a disservice.
8/16/2010 12:38 pm
I do indeed notice the echoes, Anon. I don’t really know enough about Jack Abramowitz (didn’t follow it that closely) to go along this completely. And I didn’t say “every gay person,” I said professional gay men.
But…so? We are certainly uncomfortable reading something like the above, but where exactly lies the problem?
I don’t think that acknowledging that those stereotypes (regarding gay men) exist is problematic; they certainly do.
My original point was more narrow, remember: That Americans felt comfortable turning someone who, in my opinion, is no hero into a hero because his actions seemed innocuous, almost funny—but that their perceptions of what he did were shaped by the fact that he played into certain non-threatening and theoretically amusing gay stereotypes, even as other stereotypes/prejudices could have made Americans see his actions in a very different light.
8/17/2010 8:17 am
Richard,
You’re conflating a couple of different arguments there. To say that the country was willing to see Steven Slater as a hero because he isn’t black is very different from saying that they (we?) are willing to see him like that because he is gay. If Steven Slater is so famous because he’s gay, that means that changing that fact about him–and only that fact–would make all the difference. I don’t believe that for a second. A straight white man would have been treated the same as he has been.
In fact, the blog post that you cite makes my point for me. If it were Slater’s gayness that made America comfortable with him, then it wouldn’t matter whether he were black or white. It’s the fact that he’s white that has allowed him to be a folk hero, not the fact that he’s gay.
8/18/2010 2:30 pm
that picture is hilarious!
8/21/2010 2:03 pm
This whole topic makes my head spin.
What if he were a gay black man? Or a straight white man? Or a straight black woman? Or a gay white woman? I wouldn’t have know he is gay (is he?) before stumbling on RP Yet again. What if he were Roman Polanski?