Slate says that Super Bowl halftime shows can be gay and straight, and I have a problem with that. As “gay culture” becomes more and more mainstream, yes, the LGBT community may lose a bit of our history and become another part of the great melting pot that is America — but that should be neither cause for worry nor cause for segregation — and that’s what Slate does, thanks to its partnership with (of course!) Gawker Media, and Tom Scocca, managing editor of Gawker’s Deadspin.
So, I’d like to know what you think. Frankly, I’d like to simply think of this as harmless good fun — and I’m certainly not offended. But I think finding ways to categorize people and cultures — minority, oppressed cultures, especially — can be dangerous, and leads to, of course, the “that’s so gay” comments that are so hurtful and damaging, especially to our youth.
Besides, while I confess I’m no sports fan (unless we’re talking about the “sport” of politics) there are a great many gay people who are. People like Rachel Maddow, for example. Not to mention a great many famous LGBT sports figures.
So how can you say a Super Bowl halftime show is “gay”? Or, “straight”?
Slate/Socca writes:
Like humanity itself, the Super Bowl halftime show falls on a continuum between straight and gay—and sometimes goes off the continuum entirely. Here’s a breakdown of all XLV halftime programs according to Alfred Kinsey’s scale of human sexuality, from 0 for exclusively heterosexual (Paul McCartney, 2005) to 6 for exclusively homosexual (Gloria Estefan with figure skaters, 1992).
Seriously?
Is this a sharing of our history, a sign of acceptance, or just unintentionally divisive rhetoric? For mew, this isn’t about not being able to embrace our past, it’s about looking to the future and saying, “that’s so gay” is just so wrong.
I’d like to hear your thoughts — put ’em in the comments!