'Kids React to Gay Marriage'

I chose to look at a video entitled ‘Kids React to Gay Marriage’ made by TheFineBros, Benny and Rafi Fine, two brothers who are online producers, writers, and directors who are known for their successful ‘React’ videos and have been creating content online since 2004.

In said episode TheFineBros interviews thirteen children between the ages of five and thirteen from California who discuss the sensitive subject of same-sex marriage within the United States. The video notes, “The opinions of children about these issues can give incredibly valuable insight into where our society currently stands and where we are headed as people. It's important to discuss these topics openly in hopes of a better tomorrow through dialogue and conversation." The video begins with the kids watching two different viral videos of same-sex marriage proposals and then a Q&A about their opinions about marriage equality.

Most of the children’s reactions to the videos and the concept of gay marriage are positive and hopeful, which suggests that with this view towards rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans, there’s the possibility that the issues involved could be dissolved for the next generation. Although the video does not give an explicit stance on the issue of gay or lesbian identity in the United States, I think one can assume that the video is pro-LGBT.

Therefore, I think the video depicts that issues with gay and lesbian identity are definitely not what they once were as the video promotes the view that we should be accepting of the LGBT community and support equal rights for everyone. As one child states, “If one person should be able to do something then everybody else should be able to do it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TJxnYgP6D8 

Gay TV On The Go - American Studies Blog: Sexual Identity

American Studies Blog: Sexual Identity

From Youtube (embed please), post and analyse any video which promotes gay or lesbian identity in the contemporary USA.  What issues of identity appear paramount today?

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTqCueFaumo

            Gay TV On The Go is a national web-based TV network geared towards the LGBTQ community. It aims to provide its viewers with insights into the real lives, real issues, and real communities of LGBTQ individuals across the country. In addition to its national stations, it also has several regional stations that cater to the need of different LGBTQ communities, by focusing on local issues within each region. This particular video was broadcast by the national station on the 12^th of November 2013, and highlights several contemporary issues concerning LGBTQ individuals in general within the United States today. 

            There are several points that are highlighted by  the video. One is that current issues regarding LGBTQ identity differ clearly from those that were central to the gay rights movement of the 1970-80s. For example, the key aim for a member of the LGBTQ community of the 1970s, as described in Carl Wittman’s “Gay Manifesto”, was an individualized one; to be accepted by openly declaring one’s sexual identity. Current issues, by contrast, focus on the concept of equality and address topics such as same-sex marriage and discrimination. To illustrate this point briefly, the video reports on the imminent passing of the SB10 bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the states of Illinois and Hawaii, whilst also noting the passage of a bill in the Senate to end discrimination within the job sector. This reasons for this shift of focus on issues regarding LGBTQ identity become a little clearer when one examines Livingston’s article more closely and find that we can infer that gays/LGBTQ no longer have to campaign for the acceptance of their identity, and that they have attained a certain degree of freedom and choice. Livingston is therefore able to claim that they no longer feel the need to ally themselves with a gay/ LGBTQ culture, and that current issues are not the common concern of all gay/ LGBTQ communities, but rather reflect the beliefs of certain individuals or communities within the broader LGBTQ movement.

            Another observation that can be made after viewing the video is that just as in the 1970-80s, politics, or if to be more specific, Republicans, still play a huge role in preventing LGBTQ individuals from attaining equal rights. Just as Reagan tried and often succeeded in preventing gays from being accepted as healthy, legal citizens, by depicting them as mentally ill patients, we can still see today that Republicans, under the banner of “traditional values”, attempt to sabotage any moves made by the LGBTQ community to establish equal grounding with “normal citizens.” This is made explicitly clear in the reference to an article from the Washington Times which reports Republicans as declaring that “the discrimination bill is going nowhere”, suggesting that despite the Senate passing it, they will continue to prevent the bill from reaching the floor of the House. In light of this, it could be said that without radical changes in the political sphere, LGBTQ individuals will continue to suffer in terms ofissues such as those raised within the video.

A criticism that could be levelled at the video is that whilst highlighting certain issues pertaining to LGBTQ communities, it offers no arguments or concrete evidence to its viewers as to why they should be entitled to rights such same-sex marriage or freedom from discrimination in the job sector. This is in stark contrast to the feminists we studied last week, who appeared to be more vocal and assertive in their attempts to prove why the discrimination and stigmatization of women were unfounded. Surely, if the purpose of the network is to inform its viewers about the issues facing LGBTQ communities, it would be in their best interests to expand upon concepts such as civil and constitutional rights in order to garner their support. This failure could be attributed simply to the way the network operates, in that it may purely want to pursue a format similar to that of a news broadcast, but nonetheless it does raise the question of whether the network truly considers the issues it mentions as paramount/important in furthering LGBTQ identity within America.

To conclude, we can say that in recent years there are several issues that have come to be considered of importance to gay identity. However, there is also evidence to suggest that such issues are not seen in the same light across the entire LGBTQ community, with some giving more consideration to certain areas than others. This, as noted above, can be attributed to some individuals feeling relatively content with how they are currently treated by society. In addition, we can also say that without some form of political reform LGBTQ communities will almost certainly continue to suffer in a manner similar to how they do today. Finally, it is interesting to note that the network appears to adopt a generally positive attitude towards recent developments regarding issues of central concern. This suggests that it wants to encourage its viewers to be optimistic, and to send out the message that despite full equality not having been achieved yet, steps are definitely being taken to ensure that this will happen at some point in the future.

Other Source: http://www.gaytvonthego.com/gaytvonthego/

GLAAD President: Gay Identity Involves "Inviting People to Understand"

GLAAD stands for Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, and is a US non-government organisation founded in 1985 which helps to promote the image of LGBT people in the media. They have stated their mission as to give voice to the LGBT community, with the empowering use of real stories and holding the media accountable for the words and images they present, and helping grass-roots organisations communicate effectively. Their motto is "To promote understanding, increase acceptance, and advance equality."



The president of GLAAD 2011, Jarrett Barrios, talks in this video about his own life, about his sexuality as well as his ethnic background. He identifies himself as a Cuban-American, and talks at great length about the struggles he found when coming out to his family and being accepted as a minority-minority, someone who is not just a member of a minority ethnic group but also being gay. He talks about his work ethic, and acknowledges that you have to word extremely hard for equality, not just for the LGBT community, but for everyone in every aspect of society. He explicitly says that "you can't take justice for granted, but you have to work for it." This is shown in his life as he was the first member of his high school to get into Harvard.



The main issue with sexual identity which appeared in this video is how hard it is to not only be ethnic, but to also be gay. Barrios talks about how ethnicity is easy to spot, by last names and having an accent, or even looking a certain way. He says that sexuality is much more different, as it isn't shown in your last name or accent, and can only be identified by telling people. He recognises that yes, people can be discriminated against because they can be perceived to be gay, but that this is not the point. He says that it is different because you have to announce your inequality, and that the crux of the argument is that you have to "invite people to understand". This is paramount, as because sexuality isn't obvious, you need to be able to say it, and identify yourself as not a member of the majority before others can see your inequality. The main issue is the ability to freely be able to say what your sexuality is without the fear of prejudice and discrimination, and that it is not easy to be associated as gay as ethnicity is, because sexuality is inside of you often with no recognisable visual  traits.

________



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLAAD

http://www.glaad.org/

"Gay Men Will Marry Your Girlfriends" Gay Marriage campaign video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-YCdcnf_P8

When looking for a video promoting gay or lesbian identity in the USA, it was difficult to find one that expressed a clear idea of identity as well as the issues the community faces. At first the video Gay Men will Marry Your Girlfriends didn’t seem like an appropriate source to analyse, but when looking at it further, it is an openly pro-gay marriage campaign video that uses humour to get this message across.

The video satirically threatens straight men that if they do not approve of same sex marriages then gay men will get revenge by stealing their girlfriends from them. This is based on an old idea that gay men have far more in common with women and would make better partners than straight men, consigning to the stereotype that was introduced by the TV show Will & Grace. Although it is light-hearted and shows hugely clichéd representations of not just gay men, but heterosexual relationships, the issue raised of same-sex marriage resonates throughout the video. Compared to more serious campaigns, this video is a more memorable and more popular source. Just looking at the YouTube page it is on, shows over 8 million views, with a largely positive reception on the comments and approval section. This I find surprising to come out of a country where the issue is fiercely debated; yet because the video plays to the sitcom style stereotype that we have become used to, we can laugh along with it and spread it over social media, therefore spreading awareness.

It is clear that this is the major issue that the gay community are fighting for today and this is something that is important to their identity. However the video unfortunately goes against another issue of identity that is apparent in modern America, of consigning to a stereotype. The video has aggravated gay men as portraying them as this way and also women too. For a start there is no mention of lesbian marriage, only gay men are included in this campaign. To create this light-hearted humour, they have actually given into using fairly masculine and sexist portrayals of women, pandering to the straight male market and not the female market. If this were a video of straight men talking about how their girlfriends always want to go to the theatre and talk about their ‘problems’, then it would be slated as anti-feminist. It is difficult to find a modern American video that objectifies women more than this, making them out to be gullible and easy to get into bed. It never occurred to them that women might want to “marry – or don’t marry — whomever the fuck we want?” (feminspire). When you consider that the feminist movement was one of the most important allies to the gay rights movement in the 60s and 70s, this video is quite a hypocritical remark on their own struggle.

Sources

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nico-lang/gay-male-misogyny-goes-vi_b_2481769.html

http://feminspire.com/women-will-marry-whomever-we-want-a-response-to-gay-men-will-marry-your-girlfriends/

Lesbian identity in contemporary America

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/BMYwKVQZTTo?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/BMYwKVQZTTo?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

The video I chose to look at was made by Moushumi Ghose, a therapist, and Jenoa Harlow, who is a lesbian actress and activist. In their video they give advice for woman who have identified themselves as lesbians, but then find a man that they are attracted to. Their appearance and way of speaking is very modern and they do not fit the stereotype of what lesbians look like, as they are both feminine and have long hair. This suggests that contemporary lesbian identity has moved on in America, allowing women the choice to be gay and not feel as though they have to conform to the stereotype appearance.

Jenoa talks about "earning the gay" by coming out to friends and family, which shows that although more accepted now than at the beginning of the gay rights struggle, it is still a difficult identity to own. In fact, it is an identity that has to be earned, which has connotations of struggle and having to fight for the identity one has chosen. It also ties in with "gay pride", which encourages homosexuals to feel proud of their sexual identity, rather than ashamed.

Mou then goes on to say that perhaps this is a slightly outdated view of sexuality, that the 'proud' identity is perhaps too rigid. She supports a more fluid idea of sexuality. Similarly to feminism, it needed the almost dogmatic nature of the first and second waves to achieve equality, before it could settle down into something that embraces the plurality of modern Americans. It looks as though the same thing is happening with the gay rights movement; evidence that things are more equal for lesbians now than they ever have been. They no longer have to fight for their right to exist, they can now examine what their identity means. It has become about embracing the right to choose one's identity. This echoes writer Pual Livingston's reaction to Wittman's 'Gay Manifesto', in which Livingston wrote that the gay struggle for liberation has changed into a "struggle over the right way to be gay".

Mou and Jenoa accept that rights aren't completely equal in contemporary America, and that is why if a lesbian decides that she likes a man, she will most likely face backlash from the lesbian community because they will feel as if she is  turning her back on the struggle. However, they are also optimistic for the future and believe that in time full equality will have been achieved, and labeling sexuality won't matter as much anymore. They say that the future for equality is in the hands of the new generation, who are already growing up with a more fluid idea of sexuality than that of older generations. This is evidence that there is not a gay/straight divide, that people are more complicated than that. Although the divide can be useful in gaining rights, it cannot be maintained as it does not realistically reflect the way that people are.

CWA (Concerned Women for America)

http://www.cwfa.org

I chose the website CWA (Concerned Women for America) as a company who is devoted to women issues that originated in 1979 in San Diego, California.

Although the website claims that it is for women issues and fights for the feminist movement, I believe many would disagree with their interpretation of feminism because of the morals and beliefs the organisation promotes. The website states that their mission is “…for women and like-minded men, from all walks of life, to come together and protect and promote Biblical values among all citizens — first through prayer, then education, and finally by influencing our society — thereby reversing the decline in moral values in our nation.” The website then goes on to state their seven core issues which cover the sanctity of life, defence of family, education, religious liberty, national sovereignty, sexual exploitation, and support for Israel.  

The founder and chairman of the organisation, Beverly LaHaye, refers to an interview on television between Barbara Walters and Betty Friedan; “Realizing that Friedan claimed to speak for the women of America, Beverly LaHaye was stirred to action. She knew the feminists’ anti-God, anti-family rhetoric did not represent her beliefs, nor those of the vast majority of women.” Judging by this quote, I think the views on issues that are expressed by this website would be perceived as highly debatable in reference to feminism.

The general perception of feminism is that it is for the women’s freedom and opportunities, not to further restrict and delegate which rights women are allowed to have, an example of this on the website is the debate amongst abortion, the website states “CWA supports the protection of all innocent human life from conception until natural death. We also support alternatives to abortion and healing for mothers suffering from the results of abortion.” Which clearly affects women’s rights of her body and what happens to her body. Thus, speaking from a typical feminist perspective I would adamantly disagree with the attitude that the CWA expresses towards women and women’s rights and would find them to be unsupportive of the feminist movement.

NOW - National Organisation for Women

Website - http://now.org/

"As the grassroots arm of the women’s movement, the National Organization for Women is dedicated to its multi-issue and multi-strategy approach to women’s rights. NOW is the largest organization of feminist activists in the United States, with hundreds of thousands of contributing members and more than 500 local and campus affiliates in all 50 states and the District of Columbia." - NOW website. 

Founded in 1966, NOW have been actively aiming to bring equality for all women, and claims to be a leader, not a follower of public opinion. Co-founder Betty Friedan was one of the first women to create a backlash at the adverts at the time, which promoted the idea of women staying at home and working in the kitchen. She felt this domesticated way of life was not all there was for a woman to aim for, so she went on to create the "second-wave" of feminism as her way to demonstrate that a woman can aim to be whatever she pleases, and that women could do the jobs just as well as men could. 

NOW hold events and campaigns to highlight the issues they feel are in society. One of the big issues they discuss on the website is that of body image. Under the tab "Love your body", they discuss how there is a lot of pressure for women to look a certain way, and have a certain body type. They feel that this is ridiculous, and that these pressures in society cause a lot of harm to individuals who go to extreme lengths to reach these ideals. NOW promote the idea that the female body is beautiful in all forms, and aim to remove the pressures from society, most particularly in the media. 

NOW claim to be a multi-issue and multi-strategy organisation. They prioritise winning economic equality and equal rights for women, and hope to secure this by amendment to the U.S Constitution. They also aim to work on abortion rights, reproductive freedom and women's health issues, opposing racism and fighting bigotry against lesbians and gays; and ending violence against women.

The website is an interesting one, as it gives the option to donate to the foundation. The website includes a blog called "Say It Sister!", which I found interesting as I felt it encouraged a kind of sisterhood between all woman, uniting them all together under this cause. By giving this sense of community, it encourages more people to get involved with their campaigns, which therefore in turn means that they can accomplish more and have a larger voice in society and can make a bigger change.