Hey, there! Log in / Register
All those gay couples in the Globe Sunday magazine
By adamg on Tue, 10/24/2006 - 10:55pm
Cranky says he doesn't have anything against gay marriage, but still wonders why recent features in the Globe magazine seem to feature gay couples:
... There is a lot more to worry about in this country, and I'm certainly against any right-wing efforts to amend the constitution to outlaw gay marriage.
But it is clearly obvious that the editors of the Globe magazine are going out of their way to infuse gay culture into the pages in a major way. And even though I am generally liberal, especially on social issues, I still find it strange, and a little manipulative to be reading a mainstream magazine, and find so many what seem forced instances of gay domestic bliss portrayed. ...
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Haha
Mr. (Ms.?) will certainly hear from people on this one.
I'm not sure the editors of the magazine had any hidden agenda - pure circumstance?
If the Globe had run three articles about black or Hispanic couples, would you have said the same thing? Or, would you check your calendar to see if you missed Puerto Rican Day or Black History Month, or something similar?
I noticed it, too, even when reading the stories, online. I found it a bit peculiar, if nothing else.
"Forced bliss"? What the hell does that mean?
Are you sure you're not a bigot?
well duh
Obviously, all gay married couples are in forced bliss because if gays maintain healthy monagamous coupled relationships, the terrorists have won.
No wait...I mean, since homosexuality is unnatural, these couples clearly only THINK they're happy and will only be truly blissful when they've realized how sick and wrong they are.
No wait...I mean, since gay marriage has been imposed on the entire citizenry of Massachusetts, those couples are actually two straight people who have had bliss forced upon them.
No wait...damn, thinking with this kind of logic is HARD.
By forced, I just meant that
By forced, I just meant that including one gay couple in every feature with 3 or 4 subjects, seems like they are forcing the PC diversity quotient a bit of late. I'm not particulary bothered by this, but it is certainly noticable. Yeah, you are probably right that I wouldn't have noticed that race or ethnicity were overrepresented.
It makes sense
Since there was a blackout on ANYTHING gay or lesbian for all the EONS up until now, the media is simply making up for lost time. I support that.
"making up for lost time"?
"making up for lost time"? what class in journalism school teaches "making up for lost time"? that is insane on so many levels, it is not even worth discussing. the globe has tons of gay related stories. i think some people are a little tired of the globe pusing so hard, non-stop, for gay marriage. there are people who are not bigots but are personally opposes to gay marriage.
Maybe we need to start
Maybe we need to start paying reparations to gay couples too.
Gay? Or Not?
I didn't see that issue of the magazine, so no first-hand knowledge. So, are the couples noted as being gay couples? Are there captions saying "Happy Gay Couple so-and-so"? Are they engaging in sex? Perhaps kissing?
Or is it possible that some people have viewed photographs of two men or two women together, for whatever reasons, and have decided that they are gay with no supporting evidence to back up that supposition?
Just asking. I really have not seen the issue.
I assumed that "partner" and
I assumed that "partner" and "husband" means they are a couple.
"I'm not a bigot or anything, but not everyone deserves rights"
So, if you're "personally opposes to gay marriage," then don't marry a person of the same sex.
Except for the case of your own marriage or choice to not have a marriage, it doesn't affect you in the least who marries whom.
If you think that same-sex couples or Thai couples or interracial couples or couples in which one or both folks have a disability are inferior to yourself, then, well, I would say you have some bigoted views.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
i dont believe anyone said
i dont believe anyone said anything about anyone being inferior. that is an assumption you made because you are super-sensitive to the issue. i personally do not care either way about gay marriage. it really has no affect on me, and i hope everyone is happy doing whatever it is they are doing. but people get a little aggravated with the Globe's constant "gay themed" stories, for lack of a better term. they do not write similar articles about any other group of people.
The Globe doesn't write about straight people?
Saying that someone doesn't deserve basic legal rights that other people have is absolutely saying that the person is inferior or less human.
So, the Globe doesn't write stories about any other demographic than those in same-sex marriages? (This isn't the same as people who identify as gay, btw.)
Looking through the Globe right now...
"Quincy Police reach out to Asians."
OMG! ASIANS! Will people stop with all the Asian stuff already?
And what's with all the stories about construction firms? Why do they get special rights?
And politicians. I swear, I can't open up the Globe without hearing about people who are running for office or are in an office. Why does the Globe have to inflict all of this on me?
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
POLITICIANIST
eeka, I'm sure everybody is tired of hearing about your anti-politician agenda. Politicians have the same basic rights as everyone else. You seem to believe politicians are second-class citizens, and I'm here to tell you that politicians are everywhere. You can't avoid them. Why, I'm willing to bet that someone you love is a politician, or at least experimenting with political activism.
gay couples
How the hell do you think we feel when we have been subjected to years of images of breeders in "domestic bliss" (mostly staged if you can believe current figures on divorce)? Its about time we can show our children that being a gay couple in a gay home is every bit as legitinate as your pleated docker-wearing, mini-van driving breeder images.
Whoa there
I don't personally feel the need to insult straight couples as a group; a lot of my best friends and my family members are wonderful straight people. I don't ever think it's constructive to attack a whole demographic just for what they are.
But you have a point. Until very recently, the only couples we saw in catalogs and magazines and TV and newspapers were different-sex couples. If you go to the section on wedding planners and wedding books in the bookstore, there are 30 "wedding planner" books and like 2 "same-sex wedding planner" books. The 30 aren't labeled specifically as "straight wedding" guides, but they're loaded with his-and-hers language and pictures of happy different-sex couples. Same deal if you flip to section about "relationship advice" in most magazines or newspapers. The publication doesn't say across the cover, "Boston Straight Globe," yet the relationship advice is all for straight relationships. How many times is there a letter saying "my boyfriend and I..." signed by initials, followed by advice that assumes it's a woman writing it?
Yeah, I get a little sick of all the heterosexist assumptions and heteronormative illustrations too. This doesn't mean I have any problem whatsoever with people being straight. It just means I'd like to see a real representation of the world in publications that are allegedly for everyone. I don't want to be a separatist, and I shouldn't have to only read GLBT newspapers and magazines if I want to see some articles and images that reflect people like me.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com