Interview With an Agenda

[gehayi]

Yesterday I read an interview in Out Magazine with alex_beecroft and erastes--and a commentary on the interview here.

I'm afraid that the interview and the commentary are not very accurate and are, in some ways, rather offensive. The Gawker article starts off this way:

It's a bit of a joke that straight guys are into "hot girl-on-girl action," but what's new is the

Comments

[ariastar]

I am SO TIRED of this goddamn discussion, possibly because it was the one that fandom was already having with a lot more self-awareness, oh, a decade ago? WE HAVE MOVED THE FUCK ON. And I get that fandom is a subculture and that therefore its understanding of itself is going to be a lot more advanced than it could be to people on the outside looking in, but ... my god, the absurdity of that article. I would really appreciate it if interviewers would check even just a couple of their assumptions at the door.

[gehayi]

I would really appreciate it if interviewers would check even just a couple of their assumptions at the door.

So would I. I get very very tired of interviewers who can't change their minds and won't change the subject. And these charming approaches--"What is wrong with women who write about gay men? Do women have the RIGHT to write about men?"--come up every fucking time one of my friends publishes a m/m book and they have to go about flogging the blasted thing. Invariably, they get interviewed by self-important idiots who know nothing about the genre and who think that taking a radical feminist womens' studies class a decade ago and watching an episode of Dr. Phil turns them into Carl Jung.

[spindriftdancer]

A. Men. ;p

Or, that they *teach* radical feminism, so therefore their opinion is more worthy and weighty.

Even if all it does is oppress others for the benefit of the 'intellectually elite' few to whom that 'feminist' belongs.

What the hell. I'm ditching this account. I'm going to say *exactly* what I feel about this.

[furikku]

Holy irresponsible journalism, Batman!

Side nitpicks:
In fact, almost all romance novels nowadays--straight or gay--contain sex scenes...but no one is describing male/female romance as "straight porn" because of this.
I actually hear romance novels described as "housewife porn" fairly often.

"Why are women fans so alienated from their own bodies that they can write erotic fantasies only in relation to a non-female body?"

I've seen this brought up by boyslash writers as one reason why they prefer doing m/m romance. Granted, it's not so much a solely body thing as it is a general Avoiding Problematic Issues that almost invariably come up when One's Kink and One's Gender intersect, and (of course) is not applicable to every single boyslasher out there. (It also happens to be the only "explanation" I can decently understand, because I just don't get the allure of boyslash.)

But yeah, that's two drops of half-a-point in a sea of WTF.

[furikku]

PS Is it OK to link this?

[gehayi]

Of course!

[furikku]

Thank you!

[spindriftdancer]

I'm glad you're on *our* side, Gehayi ;p Your brain is being used for good, instead of evil.

Plus, #1 and #3 on your list just about destroyed my life. People like them.

[gehayi]

I have no idea why people would like #1 or #3, particularly since they're demonstrably untrue, but it seems very silly for an article in a gay magazine to be evincing either, let alone both!

[lee_rowan]

Let us never forget that 95% of the media in the US (and yes, that includes OUT and many other glbt-oriented publications) are owned by neocon multinational corporations that, when the chips are down, support the right-wing political agenda. We are useful as milch cows, and really, really useful when it comes to getting homophobes and christianist extremists (sorry for the redundancy) to the polls.

Look at what's goin on in politics right now. Isn't it convenient that, when we should be working in concert to oppose the unconstitutional suppression of equal marriage rights... these gay organizations are fomenting adversarial, time-and-energy wasting conflict among the most articulate segment of our community?

Cui bono... and it ain't us. ANY of us.

[lilacsigil]

Ugh, ugh, ugh. How very unpleasant. Straight romance novels are often dismissed as "housewife porn" (like that makes it unworthy or stupid) and I see that these articles are continuing the fine trope of denigrating anything women like, create, or consume. By lying, when necessary.

[gehayi]

What's really special is that it's a woman denigrating other women for being women in a traditionally male field...and denigrating them in the name of feminism. Because women choosing to exercise the talents as they wish to do isn't feminist at all...oh. Wait.