NBC’s sitcom The New Normal breaks new ground this week as the first mainstream show starring same-sex parents — two gay dads. ABC’s Modern Family, which features two gay dads in its ensemble cast, won an Emmy for Outstanding Comedy Series last year. Yet these shows, for all the tremendous good they are doing to raise the visibility of lesbian and gay parents and our children, follow a tradition of mainstream depictions of LGBT parents as upper middle class and white. When will we see LGBT parents of color, or LGBT families in lower income brackets?
Most of the best-known regular or semi-regular gay and lesbian parents on TV are white and at least reasonably well off. They include: Melanie and Lindsay of Showtime’s Queer as Folk, Michael and Ben of the same, Carol and Susan of Friends, Leslie and Maureen of Showtime’s Nurse Jackie, Abby and Kathy of ABC’s NYPD Blue, Laurie of Ellen (the ’90s ABC sitcom), Fran and Kal of the HBO movie If These Walls Could Talk II, Janine and Sandy of the Lifetime movie What Makes a Family, and Nora and Anne of ABC Family’s The Secret Life of the American Teenager, as well as Cam and Mitchell of Modern Family and Bryan and David of The New Normal.
The new lesbian mom on TV this fall, Anne of NBC’s Go On, is dealing with the death of herpartner — a fresh and worthy plotline. But she, too, adds no color to our palette.
We have seen just a few lesbian and gay parents who are people of color or multiracial. They, too, are always solidly middle class — and always one half of a couple with a white person: Sandy and Kerry of ER (Sandy is Latina; Kerry is white), Callie and Arizona of Grey’s Anatomy (Callie is Latina; Arizona is white), Keith and David of HBO’s Six Feet Under (Keith is black; David is white), Bette and Tina of The L Word (Bette has a white mother and a black father; Tina is white), and Hiram and LeRoy (Rachel’s dads) of Glee (Hiram is white; LeRoy’s race is never specified, but actor Brian Stokes Mitchell, who plays him, is African-American, German, Scottish and Native American).
Gay and lesbian parents in mainstream movies are also a white bunch. They include Nic and Jules of the Academy Award-nominated The Kids Are All Right (2010), Robert of The Next Best Thing (2000), Armand of The Birdcage (1996), Renato of La Cage aux Folles (1978), and Tick of The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (1994). A rare exception is Wai-Tung of The Wedding Banquet (1993), who is Taiwanese (but whose partner, Simon, is white).
The only fictional same-sex parents on TV who are both people of color are Kima and Cheryl of HBO’s The Wire and Eddie and Chance of Noah’s Arc. Noah’s Arc did not run on a general-interest network, however. It was broadcast first on LGBT-focused network Logo and rebroadcast one summer on BET J, a spinoff of the Black Entertainment Network.
The truth is far different. Researchers at UCLA’s Williams Institute have found that black and Latino/a individuals in same-sex couples are roughly twice as likely to be raising children as white ones. (There is little data on transgender parents or single gay and lesbian parents.)
And children being raised by same-sex couples are twice as likely to live in poverty as children being raised by married, opposite-sex parents. We rarely see those aspects of our community on TV or film, however.
On a possibly promising note, though, singer and actor Jennifer Lopez is producing The Fosters, a pilot for ABC Family that features a lesbian couple with a “multi-ethnic mix” of four foster, adoptive and biological kids. It is unknown what race or ethnicity the parents are. Lopez, who is Latina, will not be one of them, but perhaps her influence will mean they show some variety. Deadline.com has also reported that one of the mothers is a cop, and the other is a private school teacher — moderate-paying jobs that could mean it is hard for them to support their large family.
The problem, of course, is not just with depictions of LGBT parents, but of LGBT people in general. But gay and lesbian parents are a hot item right now, as witnessed by the success of The Kids Are All Right and Modern Family, and the buzz about The New Normal and The Fosters. I hope their success leads to more new shows — shows that highlight even more facets of real LGBT families.
I welcome The New Normal and know it will help people continue to see lesbian and gay parents as part of the tapestry of American life. Such representation is vitally important. But until mainstream America can see LGBT people in all our diversity — and not simply as LGBT reflections of the White, upper-middle-class American ideal — we will not have made progress toward true equality for our whole community.
In fact, insofar as media images of LGBT parents continue to reinforce being white and upper-middle-class as the ideal, they may be hindering progress towards the broader goal of inclusion for all people.
The problem is not with any one show or film — but collectively, they create an image that is not that of our multiracial, multiethnic, economically varied America.
Dana Rudolph is the founder and publisher of Mombian (www.mombian.com), an award-winning blog and resource directory for LGBT parents.
This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition September 14, 2012.
So I finally got around to watching the pilot episode of “Hollywood Exes” and let me say, zzzzzzzzzz.
Bore-ring! This show lacks all the waywardness and flat out ratchet-ness we have come to associate from a reality show on VH1. There are no fistfights. There are no petty fights and name calling (thus far). No former strippers turned bougie housewives. And more importantly, the show has yet to exhibit the negative stereotypes of us that many black women have cried foul of as of late. That might be a good thing. For the most part, Nicole Murphy and the crew are pretty tame and chill. Yet, strangely I don’t care about any of these women – well, not enough to watch their boring lives play out for an hour on television.
Anyway, I’m like five minutes into the show and Kells’ (R. Kelly) ex-wife is in her bedroom, talking about her big move to LA. She’s meandering about with her personal assistant – a bald headed gay black man. As they fold clothes and pack stuff in suitcases, the man listens to how Andrea wants to start over and get an image away from Kells and how excited she is about…zzzzzzz. Now there is nothing out of the ordinary about two people sharing a heart to heart with one another, even if it is with a “personal assistant.” But I’m sitting here, watching their interaction, thinking to myself: Why does everyone have a gay black man BFF? And why are all of their gay black BFFs in service to them in some way?
I mean, am I the only one who has noticed that most of these women-led reality TV shows features the quintessential gay manservants? These men do everything: furnish apartments, do hair and makeup, personal shop for clothing, carry purses and luggage and act as a shoulder to cry on. In most of these situations, we know nothing about the gay black man other than that he is sharp-tongued, stereotypically effeminate, and basically says “Gurl” and “Chile” a lot. Oh, and he is a loyal worker to his woman. Evelyn Lozada had one to help run her TV shoe “store.” Tyra Banks had an army battalion of gay men to help her weed through her search for the next top model. And on the “Housewives” series (pick one, any one), there are like 2.5 gay sidekicks to every female character, doing makeup, training them at the gym and tossing their wigs for them. It’s like the gay sidekick has become hot new accessory on reality TV – like the new pocket dog or a Louis Vuitton knockoff.
Source: blogs.cofu.edu
Heck, I’ll even go as far as to say that the gay black man has become the new housemaid “Mammy” to these women’s Scarlett O’Haras. Think about it for a second: most of these gay characters harken back to a time in cinematic history where the white rich women in the antebellum South needed their “sexually non-threatening ” black female maids to nurture and basically make them feel good about themselves. If the black maids weren’t “fussin’ after the mistress of the house, making sure her dress fitted properly and her hair was tight, she was in the kitchen, dancing, smiling and singing Go Down Moses as she whipped up for her mistress a big ole’ mess of her famous fried chicken and sweet potato puddin’. The gay male characters of today act very much in the same vain. But instead of shucking and jiving for the approval, and favor of rich white women, these gay best friend characters trade on their non-sexual “companionship” for heterosexual legitimacy.
In real life, it is not uncommon for homosexual men and women to make friends. If two people, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, share the same personality trait than there is no reason why they shouldn’t form a bond. The issue I have with these characters is that more often than not, it is assumed that since the men are gay, he is there for the sole purpose to entertain or serve these women in some way. I have watched on several of occasions, characters from these shows not only proudly proclaim their affinity for “The Gays” but then go on to declare the gay character as “one of my girls.” Well they are not girls. They are men, albeit gay, but still very much intact with their men parts.
Moreover, on these shows, ALL gay men are into the same thing (i.e., fashion, hair, makeup, electronic music and listening to the women banter about their heterosexual sex life). And because all of these gay male characters are the same, it gives an unfair expectation of how gay men are in real life. I mean, what is to happen to the straight-laced gay guy that rocks tailor made suits, a briefcase, has a boring 9 to 5 like an accountant or lawyer and doesn’t speak with a lisp? I tell ya what happens: he is unfairly stereotyped into the roll of what society, and more accurately television, says a gay man is supposed to be.
Like so many other reality TV show watchers I have began to notice the casting on these shows seems to be on reinforcing our expectations of a certain group. The loudmouth, angry black woman is probably the most notable – if not talked about – of these memes. But there are many, many others, including the non-threatening gay sidekick, which are just as pervasive. The irony is that the gay male sidekick is supposed to show how progressive and completely accepting of homosexuality these women are. However, watching these reality TV show characters tote these men around on their arms like latest handbag would be just as bad as watching a character in an old black and white film, saying that she loves Negro people because, “I have a Black maid.”
It is tokenism at its most egregious. And even Andy Cohen, Bravo TV executive and creative force behind the Housewives series, acknowledges as much in an interview, when he stated that while the gay sidekick character on his reality shows are his favorite, he could never see them headlining a show of their own as, “I think it could be a little relentless. I love them, you know, but I think sometimes when a sidekick gets their own show it becomes too much.”
Too much for who? Those who can’t seem to see people outside of what they feel comfortable with? Outside of a few drinks at the latest posh nightspot, what real connection do we ever see with their gay companions? They don’t champion causes. They never ask them about who they are seeing or their families. Heck, we are not even invited into their homes. Another irony is that rarely, and I mean almost never, will you see a woman befriend a lesbian. I guess that would mean being a little “too” accepting of homosexuality.
By James MacPherson, APJamie Kuntz, posing for a photograph Tuesday at a football field in Dickinson, N.D., says he was kicked off the North Dakota State College of Science football team because he was gay. School officials say he was dismissed from the team for lying to a coach.
Jamie Kuntz, posing for a photograph Tuesday at a football field in Dickinson, N.D., says he was kicked off the North Dakota State College of Science football team because he was gay. School officials say he was dismissed from the team for lying to a coach.
Sponsored Links
DICKINSON, N.D. (AP) — A concussion kept Jamie Kuntz from suiting up for his first college football game. A kiss from his much-older boyfriend at that game led the freshman linebacker to be kicked off the team, he said.
North Dakota State College of Sciences in Wahpeton acknowledges Kuntz was disciplined by the team, but says it wasn’t because he is gay. Football coach Chuck Parsons told Kuntz in a letter that he was removed from the team for lying about the kiss.
Kuntz, 18, and on a partial football scholarship, left the college in southeast North Dakota this month after his dismissal from the team.
“Football didn’t work out, so there was no reason to stay,” said Kuntz, who lives with his mother across the state in Dickinson.
Kuntz said he and his 65-year-old boyfriend were in the press box at the game against Snow College in Pueblo, Colo., over Labor Day weekend. Kuntz was videotaping the game for the team. His Wildcats were down by more than 40 points when “the kiss just happened,” he said. The team would eventually lose 63-17.
“People around here aren’t exposed to it,” Kuntz said of homosexuality. “People expect gays to be flamboyant, not football players.”
A teammate apparently saw the kiss and told coaches, Kuntz said. When Parsons confronted Kuntz on the bus ride back to North Dakota, Kuntz told him the man he kissed was his grandfather.
“I lied,” Kuntz said.
Later, he felt guilty about lying and came clean to his coach.
In a Sept. 3 dismissal letter obtained by the Associated Press, Parsons told Kuntz he was being ousted from the team under the “conduct deemed detrimental to the team” category outlined in guidelines in the team’s player’s manual. Parsons specifically noted the manual’s section on “lying to coaches, teachers or other school staff.”
“This decision was arrived at solely on the basis of your conduct during the football game; and because you chose not to be truthful with me when I confronted you about whom else was in the box with you,” Parsons wrote. “Any conduct by any member of the program that would cause such a distraction during a game would warrant the same consequences.”
Kuntz doesn’t believe he was dismissed simply for lying.
“I know if it was a girl in the press box, or even an older woman, nothing would have happened,” he said. “If it was an older woman, I would have probably been congratulated for it from my teammates.”
School officials told the AP that they were investigating whether this was the first such instance of someone being kicked off the football team for lying.
John Richman, North Dakota State College of Science president, said other players have been kicked off the team for various reasons, though he couldn’t say whether any before had been booted specifically for lying.
“I don’t know of every single case where coach Parsons has had to discipline a young man,” Richman said.
Other behavior that the player’s manual says could lead to dismissal includes criminal violations, fighting and repeated absences or tardiness to class. Richman said he believes Kuntz’s case was handled “fairly and consistently” by the athletic department.
“I’m very confident that with the information that’s been provided to me by our football coach, Chuck Parsons, by our athletic director, Stu Engen, that the thought process, the facts that were reviewed, have led them to an appropriate and the right decision in this case,” Richman said Tuesday in an interview at the college.
Parsons recently joined the school’s diversity council as a faculty representative, according to Sybil Priebe, an English and humanities professor who heads the council. Its programs include events for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students. Priebe said Tuesday she had not heard much about the incident with Kuntz.
Kuntz said he told his mother that he was gay at the same time he told her he was kicked off the team.
“I’m struggling with it,” said Rita Kuntz, choking back tears. “I love Jamie and I’m proud of him, but I know what the school did was wrong.”
Rita Kuntz said she has accepted that her son is gay, but she believes he was taken advantage of by his boyfriend, who is more than three times her son’s age.
Jamie Kuntz said he met the man online more than a year ago. Kuntz said the man, whom he would not identify, lives in Colorado and the two have met there a few times in recent months.
As far as his football career, Kuntz says he’s not giving up. He may pursue it as a walk-on at another university outside North Dakota.
“I miss it already,” he said.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Yes, that is either Williams showing affection, or her trying to steal Mouratoglou’s wallet. We like to think she is doing alright for herself and hardly needs the money.
So consider this an amorous expression.
Before you go on thinking this is an all-play and hardly-any-work relationship, theDetroit Free Pressreport reminds us just how successful Williams’ coach has been.
She hired the French Tennis Academy coach after she was ousted in the first round of the French Open. Since that time, she won Wimbledon and most recently the U.S. Open.
Oh, yeah: She also managed to win a gold medal in the London Olympics. That would be 3-for-3 in majors plus Olympic competitions since the two teamed up.
If that weren’t enough, the report gives us this little tidbit: “Bruce International Properties, the storefront at which Williams and Mouratoglou are gazing, sells property on the French Riviera.”
When normal people begin a relationship, they take a nice little day trip somewhere. When you are a world-class athlete, you flirt with the idea of buying a vacation spot along the French Riviera.
I’m not sure the tennis world stands a chance against this dynamic duo.
Toronto’s black community has a serious problem with gang crime. There is no need to lie about it because the recent shootings in Scarborough this summer where two innocent young people died was pernicious. In addition, the shocking shooting at Eaton Centre in June is terrifying because violence can occur anywhere in the city of Toronto.
There too many young black who are so apathetic to the concerns of others. My question is, why are young black men getting involved with crime? What has happened to these young black men that they don’t value life or care about the well beings of others? Now, I know these young black males who get involved in crime have parents, families, siblings. So what happened to this generation? What went wrong?
Now, essentialists are going to make racist assumptions that it has to do with the “essence” within black males which causes some to commit crimes. The other possible explanations are poverty, unhappiness, despair, lack of education and employment opportunities leads young men to crime.
However, the white Canadian media never look beneath these surface explanations. Perhaps it is time for Toronto’s black community to not be so reticent and acknowledge there is a serious problem here?
There are programs for at risk youth, basketball camps, after school programs to assist children that are in danger of entering into crime. I believe these programs are important but are also band aid solutions to a deeper, more subliminal problem.
I can understand why some black people are irritated and annoyed by the media whenever gun violence occurs. Why should black people who are hard working and good citizens care about the bad behaviour of others? Why should the actions of a few tarnish the reputation of an entire race? It is ludicrous that people of colour are generalized in this manner.
Are white men generalized as psycho murderers like James Holmes shoots up a theatre in Aurora Colorado? Are young white men demonized in newspapers are psychopaths and killers?
Recently, a white supremacist murdered innocent people in Michigan at a Sikh temple. Are the media pathologizing young white men as being violent? Is there an essence to these young white males whiteness which causes them to go psycho and shoot and kill innocent people?
There questions are never asked in the mainstream white media because we live in a white society.
White privilege allows whites to generalize the actions of some in the black community yet the mirror image is never reflected at the majority.
Remember, white people control the Canadian media, the news which is broadcast on television, in the newspapers, and on the internet is based on white privilege. An editor decides in an editorial meeting what is the news. What sells more papers? What gets people talking? The media has a critical role in how race is shaped and constructed in Toronto.
In the classic 1988 essay, Peggy McIntosh a white feminist wrote an article called White Privilege The Invisible Knapsack. McIntosh’s article was groundbreaking because she is a white woman and she acknowledges the privileges she has simply because she was born white. According to McIntosh, whites are conditioned by the media and white society to ignore their privilege. Just like men ignore our male privilege and the freedom we have to walk freely in society, white people don’t have to think critically about race. A white person can live his or her’s own life in North America and not think about how race affects their lives.
People of colour we don’t have the luxury of not having to think about race. Race is in our face every single day of our lives whether we want to admit it or not.
It is understandable that some in the black community are angered that when crime occurs suddenly the entire race is to blame for some idiots dangerous actions.
Why are blacks generalized for the actions of a few? Why should I personally care if a black man shoots someone just because we are the same race? I don’t shoot anybody, I’m a citizen minding my own damn business.
The counter argument is, the white press in Toronto claim that black people need to become more vigilant and just trust the police force. The quandary is, a lot of black people in Toronto do not trust the police due to strained race relations.
Another point to consider is, some black people are terrified and afraid they don’t want to be the next statistic and get shot. It is a vicious circle that seems to be getting worse in the city of Toronto. There is a lot of bad feelings, anger, resentment.
It is disconcerting to see young black men shooting and killing innocent people. I think something has happened to the minds of these young black males who get involved in crimes.
Frantz Fanon the black psychiatrist and author of the book Black Skins, White Masks argues in chapter five called The Lived Experience of the Black man that the psyche of black males are shattered due to racism.
The black man sees himself in the third person he does not see himself as a three dimensional human being because the white man has the power to control the images and representations of the black man.
Now some people might argue that the city of Toronto is a multicultural paradise where racial harmony exists.
The danger of multiculturalism which the Toronto media engenders is it ignores racism and pushes it beneath the surface. Racism is a serious problem in Toronto yet Canadians like to pretend it does not exist.
The power structure in Toronto is still based on white privilege. For instance, Toronto has an idiot white mayor Rob Ford he’ is obnoxious, pathetic, unprofessional, and abhorrent. However, Ford is praised by the white right wing media in Toronto. The mayors of Toronto and all the police chiefs are white people. Even though, the city of Toronto has a very large non white population the people in power are still white.
The Toronto police force is also a problem there aren’t enough black officers on the force in positions of power. Real change needs to occur inside the police force in order for racism and barriers of indifference to break down. Why would a black person suddenly trust a white police officer in crime ridden neighbourhoods? The so called anti racism policies are a farce. The question still remains, why do people still not trust the police to inform them about criminal activity? Why are people so afraid to speak out?
The media is also to blame because the real subliminal problems that are not visible are not discussed in the public sphere. Serious and hard questions about inequality, racism, and discrimination, are not brought to the surface. Canadians still have an apathetic attitude towards race which is disconcerting.
In America, despite the race relation problems between blacks and whites they are more honest about racism. In the United States, people are not afraid to discuss race.
CNN, ABC, Fox News, NBC, and the major American media outlets constantly discuss racism in the public sphere. Americans are aware of racism in their country they don’t hide and pretend it doesn’t exist. By contrast, Canadians believe in the illusion of multiculturalism which is dangerous.
In order for Canada to progress, people need to stop being afraid to discuss race, inequality, white privilege, and other social problems in the public realm.
A scene from “Venus and Serena.” (Clive Brunskill / September 11, 2012)
By Steven Zeitchik September 11, 2012, 11:22 a.m.
TORONTO — In an about-face, Venus and Serena Williamshave chosen not to attend Tuesday’s Toronto world premiere of the documentary “Venus and Serena,” which they authorized and participated in for the past 20 months, because they are reportedly unhappy with the finished product.
As recently as several days ago, the tennis superstars had planned to come to the Toronto International Film Festivalto support the movie made by veteran broadcast journalists Maiken Baird and Michelle Major, according to a person familiar with the Williamses’ plans who asked not to be identified because the person had not been authorized to speak on their behalf.
But a disagreement between the sisters and the filmmakers over the movie’s content — particularly the portrayal of the sisters’ father, Richard Williams — has led to a reversal, the person said. The movie is at Toronto seeking distribution.
Festival organizers and the filmmakers confirmed that the sisters would not be attending. “It’s disappointing to us,” Major said. “We have a lot of respect for them and think their story is very inspiring.” She declined to elaborate on the reasons for the Williamses’ change of heart.
Venus Williams‘ manager Carlos Fleming and Serena Williams’ agent Jill Smoller would not comment on their clients’ decision.
The news comes just two days after Serena Williams won her fourth U.S. Open singles title, which was expected to give the premiere a celebratory air; indeed, Serena Williams has been making press appearances in the wake of the tournament, on Monday appearing on NBC’s “Late Night With Jimmy Fallon.”
Festival organizers had scheduled the premiere after the tournament to allow the sisters to attend.
The movie has been a watershed event for the Williamses, who are famously guarded about their private lives. Baird and Major, who met while working for ABC News during Peter Jennings‘ tenure, have long been fascinated by the Williamses as tennis and public personalities.
After being wooed by the Baird and Major for nearly four years, the sisters agreed to participate in the documentary. In January 2011, the filmmakers began following the sisters around the world, having been granted intimate access to the cloistered stars as well as to their friends and family members; they shot more than 450 hours of footage. Major said that neither sister asked for any preconditions before filming began.
The finished film looks at the rise of the two Compton natives to the pinnacle of their sport, their lives behind-the-scenes and the colorful personalities who have guided them or been part of their rise. It is largely complimentary to the sisters, showing their work ethic and their humor.
But it does explore some of Richard Williams’ foibles, from his out-of-wedlock children to a 78-page manifesto he had plotting out his daughters’ success at a very young age. That angered the sisters, particularly Venus, according to the person with knowledge of the disagreement.
After viewing the film in August, Venus Williams had an extensive conversation with filmmakers raising her objections over how her father was portrayed. Though some small tweaks were made, they were not sufficient to change her mind.
The filmmakers said they were saddened by the Williamses’ response and could only hope for a change of heart down the road. “We think this is an important story, and
Photo Credit: PKTennis
Photo Credit: PKTennis
Gayblackcanada 