Is Morning Sedition Homophobic?
On my way to work this morning, I was listening to CNN trying to catch up on the daily news. Pretty much the same old stuff; Iraq is still going to crap, President Bush “accepts full blame for misinformation that took us into the war in Iraq, but...”, etc....
I switched to a different channel. I tend to channel surf a lot to try to get a different take on things from different news sources. I somehow think that will give me a more well rounded view of the world. But lately, everything has been pretty much the same. Iraq is going to crap, more people are dying, Iran wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth (which the Bush Administration is quick to respond, “SEE!!! THAT is why they must never have nucular [sic] weapons!”), and yet, we wonder why they are hanging gay people in Iran. A strange world.
I grew tired of all the news propaganda (these days, that seems to take about 10 minutes). I switched over to Air America Radio. You know, the place where “enlightened people” talk; a place where our “friends” talk. They are on XM Satellite Radio (XM channel 167). I only listen to XM now for pretty much everything. The program on this morning was “Morning Sedition”, with hosts Marc Maron and Mark Riley.
They were responding to a call left on their answering machine concerning a remark they made yesterday concerning “Bareback Mountain”. They were making a remark about the new movie that is out called Brokeback Mountain, and they made a reference to it as “Bareback Mountain”. The message on their answering machine said that the remark was very insensitive and homophobic.
Marc and Mark said that they were not homophobic and that the term “bare back” is used to describe two people, homosexual or heterosexual, who have sex without condoms.
In all my years, I have never once heard the term “bare back” used to describe any sex act performed by a heterosexual couple. It is always used in terms of two gay men (to my knowledge). And, it is often used to describe men who still have multiple sexual encounters who get a thrill from having unprotected (no condom) anal sex (hence the term “bare backing”) with their partner. Most of the time, neither one knows the HIV status of their partner. Of course, this is highly risky and dangerous business. I’m not going to comment on it further, because I could devote an entire entry to just “bare backing”, and what I think of the practice. That is not the point with this entry.
The point is, when heterosexuals have sex without a condom, it is called “unprotected sex”. That same term is also used for homosexual sex. But, the term “bare backing” has only been used to describe gay men having sex without a condom.
This all leads up to the argument that the hosts of Morning Sedition were trying to make, that 1) they are not homophobic, 2) “bare backing” is a term used regardless of sexual orientation, and 3) people are too sensitive and that the real problem is that people take ownership of terms so it’s really impossible for radio hosts not to offend someone these days.
Point 1 - they are homophobic:
Yes, the comment was homophobic, so yes, at some level, they are homophobic. Whether or not they want to own up to that is doubtful. They pretty much tried to dismiss the comment left on the phone as some wacko making a stupid comment. Basically, they tried to get away from making a crude joke at the expense of the gay community. For this listener, they aren’t going to get away with that. If the movie was about a heterosexual couple in love against all odds, their comment about “bare back mountain” would have made no sense to any listener. They therefore, if they are being honest about it, would not have used that term.
Point 2: “bare backing” is a term used regardless of sexual orientation:
Not true. As I just mention, if the story was about a heterosexual love story, the comment would have made no sense to listeners. The comment holds no merit.
Point 3: People are too sensitive and that the real problem is that people take ownership of terms so it’s really impossible for radio hosts not to offend someone these days:
We have “taken ownership” of some terms, but not by our choice. I sometimes call myself “queer” or “fag” or “gay”. I suppose I have taken ownership of the terms because that is often how this fucked up society has chosen to describe people like myself - as a way to put us in our place, I suppose. Society still has the need to put everyone in a category. Terms such as “faggot” is still used freely in society to describe us in derogatory terms. African Americans still have labels. They are called “African Americans”. The term “blacks” is less acceptable now and the “‘N’ word” is always referred to as the “‘N’ word”; not an acceptable way to refer to people of African decent, but we all know what they really mean. It’s just makes the racist comment a bit more sanitized. And for the record, in terms of being derogatory, the “‘N’ word” = “faggot”.
So yes, I have taken ownership of the term “faggot”. On average, I get called the term 5-6 times a year, along with “queer”. It used to be much more often so I suppose that society is making some progress in terms of our community if you can go by that. I don’t bother countering it because quite frankly, it’s no longer worth my time. Also, by not countering it I take away the homophobes’ power in using the word. It simply is beneath my dignity to respond to the comments with a response.
But, that does not make the comments right. The fact that I have accepted being called these names does not make it “ok” to call gay people these names. And, when I’m paying for a radio subscription, I’m not paying to hear my community being patronized and used as the punch line of some crude, cheap joke.
I changed channels and just chalked it up to ... “morons”... and decided that for me, I will avoid “Morning Sedition” from now on.
In contrast, Randi Rhodes makes absolutely no excuses for bigotry in any form. She openly attacks homophobia and racism for what it is. I like her show a lot. I just wish that other “enlightened people” (which Air America claims to be made up of) would exist across their spectrum.
For Morning Sedition, this is sadly not the case.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Is Morning Sedition Homophobic?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://billandkent.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1812
7 Comments
Leave a comment
It may be that simple to you, fucking cry babies, but I see it a whole lot differently.
There have been, and still are, plenty of unjust laws on the books that were purely prejudicial in nature. The most obvious of course was slavery. For a time, the majority accepted those ideals, and allowed them to continue, but that doesn’t make it right.
Either through the acts of the voters, (as they became wither more educated, or less fearful,) or by men like Abraham Lincoln, those old illegal laws were swept away, and progress has been made in accepting all races as equal in this country.
What Bill does here isn’t “whining”, it’s taking action against an unjust, and illegal, set of laws the preclude gay people from enjoying the same rights afforded to straight people. Bill is exercising his right of free speech against a system that consciously and deliberately acts against his community. Just because of sexual orientation.
To me, Bill is a hero. Bill is a person who stands up for what he believes in, and actively participates in making a change in how people see him, his community, and the injustice of how our country treats selected citizenry. That is bravery, not “whining”.
As for barebacking etc., I guess I am a naïve straight guy because I have never heard any straight person use either of those terms except in the context of horse riding. I guess some straight people do, I just have never heard them.
Interesting posts.... one and all!
ok... for the record "fucking cry babies"...
I AM GOD HERE!!!
That being said, YOU are coming dangerously close to being permanently banned from this site. Why? No, it's not because I don't allow opposing view points, because I do - in fact, I invite them.
You will be banned because you seem to have no way to make your point without putting people down and calling them names. IT WILL NOT BE ALLOWED ON THIS SITE. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A POLICY ON THIS SITE AND WILL BE ENFORCED! IF YOU HAVE A POINT TO MAKE THAT IS VALID, YOU WILL MAKE THAT POINT WITHOUT RESORTING TO PUT DOWNS AND INSULTS, OR I WILL MAKE DAMN SURE THAT YOU MAKE NO COMMENTS AT ALL.
As such, I will not be deleting your post. This is your SECOND AND FINAL WARNING (yes, I know you were the one who made the other post).
Now, the response to your post....
- Thank you for pointing out the spelling error. It has been corrected.
- I wasn't aware that straight people called it "bare backing" as well. I learn something new every day. Thank you for sharing that priceless bit of information with me. However, that is not how Morning Sedition meant it, and you know that.
- I never claimed to be "special". Never. Not once. I do claim to be entitled to all the fucking rights that you have and I WILL GET THEM EVENTUALLY even though people like you will be doing everything in your power to keep them from me. Why will I get these rights? Because we do live in a democracy and the U.S. Constitution will not accommodate the notion of second class status. I know - sucks for you. Get used to it. See, I said all of that without calling you a "fucking moron" or accuse you of "whining". It can be done if you just put a bit of effort behind it.
- I am happy that you find me annoying. It means that at some level, I'm making you THINK. Stimulating, isn't it?
- I am not a "fucking pussy". In fact, I have never ever touched a "pussy". Your comparison is inaccurate. That being said, I'm glad that you are "strangely drawn" to my blog (I think). And no, in anticipation of your next question, I will NOT have sex with you!
- As a matter of fact, there are a LOT of things I don't like about what is happening in this country. And, I'm not "whining". I am doing something about it. I vote. I protest. I write letters to my representatives (they know me by name). I call them. I join political action groups. In short, this blog is the VERY LEAST of what I do to get involved in this country to stop all the lame ass politicians in power now that will sell their country down the river for a few lame ass votes from people like you.
- Maybe YOUR United States is not a democracy, but mine is and we will eventually reclaim that democracy. You know very little about the history of this country. As Fritz suggested, try reading a bit. Are you a "ditto head" by any chance? The rhetoric that you put out sounds a lot like Rush Limbaugh. It also sounds as if you think about as much as he does, when he's not on a drug high.
- Finally, I want to thank you for reminding me just how much the United States needs people like me. I honestly was thinking about moving to Canada at one point but, because of people like you who seem to think the eroding of civil rights is just fine, I'm staying put. The eroding of civil liberties is not fine. Not on my watch. So yes, in your words...
I'm going to keep "WHINING". If you don't like it, go somewhere else! You can understand that, right? This is a democracy after all. You have that right. :-)
And learn to use spell check--it's "people", not "ppl". I hate laziness.
What an idiotic troll!
I am so tired of reading the same old "the U.S. is not a democracy" crap. It is the rhetoric of the uneducated.
Take a Poli Sci class for cripes sake!
America is the birthplace of modern democracy. What the Founding Fathers created back in 1776 isn't classical democracy. Our modern democracy is based on the Hellenic, but it was created as a representative system with federal, state and local constituencies.
Any citizen can petition to get something on a local ballot. And, you don't see any local dictatorships participating in the Republic. Our Constitution guarantees democracy and non-democratic governments are against federal law.
Here's a typical definition of the term "democracy":
democracy (noun)
1. free and equal representation of people: the free and equal right of every person to participate in a system of government, often practiced by electing representatives of the people by the majority of the people
2. democratic nation: a country with a government that has been elected freely and equally by all its citizens
3. democratic system of government: a system of government based on the principle of majority decision-making
Suggested reading for all of you morons who think the U.S. is not a democracy:
- Articles of Confederation
- The Bill of Rights
- A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1873
- The Constitution of the United States of America
- The Declaration of Independence
- Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789
- Emancipation Proclamation
- The Federalist Papers
- Code of Federal Regulations
- United States Government Manual
Happy reading!
Straight ppl call it barebacking too. and raw-dogging, and many other things. You're not special, you just whine a lot claim to be put upon. STOP WHINING! And learn to use spell check--it's 'dying.' Fuck you are annoying, yet I'm strangly drawn to your blog to see what a fucking pussy you are. If you don't like something, either do something about it, or STOP WHINING! Whining never solves anything. Know what's the great thing about a representative republic? (Oh, and yes, the US is a representative republic, not a democracy...do you vote on every law?) That the majority rules, and if straight people decide we can't marry, we can't, it's that simple.
I guess, in summary, you should move to canada or STOP WHINING! Possibly both.
I was watching my local morning news a couple of days ago and heard the newsanchor say the following:
"...Brokeback Mountain, the cowboy romance starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath...er...Heather Ledger..."
Then, she called Heath Ledger "Heather" a second time. Obviously, she read "Heath" and assumed it had to be a typo on her teleprompter. After all, how could it be a romance starring two men?
For many people, like this idiot newscaster, the possibility that homosexuality can be romantic just doesn't register in their tiny little pea brains.
bj...
I completely agree with you. We all have prejudices - all of us. But when I'm confronted with my prejudices, I honestly try to understand why I have that prejudice and if there's any rational reason for it. I try to isolate my brainwashing of the issue (society) and get to my "real" issue with it (my baggage).
It drives me nuts that people make homophobic comments and, when someone brings it to their attention, they try to make it look like the person bringing the issue up is a nut case, or "too sensitive". It's never their problem.
while not being familiar with the show, nor having heard the specific incident, i still tend to agree with you that it was a homophobic remark. The problem with prejudice is folks seem to think it's an all-or-nothing state of being. Take Bill Maher - clearly a homophobe as the man can NOT talk about gays EVER without dirty sex talk. He may well beleive what he says about equal rights, non-discrimiatinion, same-sex marrige, but the man clearly has "issues" with gayness and it makes him uncomfortable. You can still bleeive in equality for all but still have fears, prejudices, etc - for me the problem is when you are BLIND to this, and won't accept repsonsibility when you show that part of you - hell, we all have prejudices, but its how we deal with them that matter, to me, anyway