Subject: MEDIALert! - [A] 03.1.97
From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 04:42:27 -0500 (EST)

------------------------------------------------------------
INDEX:  "MEDIAlert!" for 1 MARCH 97 [Part A] 

-ITEM 1:  "Friends and Brothers" [Laura Ingraham; Washington Post; MSNBC; CBS
News].

-ITEM 2:  "Taxing Homophobia" [National Endowment for the Arts; Women Make
Movies, Inc.; American Family Association; Trent Lott; Newt Gingrich;
American Arts Alliance].

-ITEM 3:  "There, In Spirit" [Camp Sister Spirit; Hattiesburg American].
------------------------------------------------------------

M   E   D   I   A    l    e    r    t   ! 
_____________________________

March 1-15, 1997  Al Kielwasser

[1]

F R I E N D S  &  B R O T H E R S

Laura Ingraham -- political analyst for CBS News and MSNBC -- is known for a
record of commitment to traditional homophobia.  In her recent column for the
"Washington Post" (Feb. 23), however, Ingraham attempts to redefine that
history. . .  in an article headlined:  "What My Gay Brother Taught Me About
Tolerance."

To be fair, Ingraham makes more of an effort than some.  Other infamous
homophobes (like Newt Gingrich or Phyllis Schafley) have given shorter shrift
to their lesbian and gay relatives.  But a comparison to the very worst is,
at best, faint praise.  With minor exceptions, Ingraham's article is
basically an exercise in denial -- a grandiose attempt to deceive herself, if
not her readers.  

She begins, by noting:  "At a fancy inaugural party this January, I found
myself being called a 'bigot' and a 'homophobe' by Rep. Barney Frank.  I had
gone over to him to say hello....  Eschewing cocktail party pleasantries --
not to mention the 'bipartisan' good feelings that saturated the room -- he
began pelting me with unflattering epithets."  Ingraham's objection is
classic heterosexism.

Though they spend their careers attacking "the homosexual community,"
professional bigots are appalled whenever individual lesbians or gays seem to
"take it personally."  Media figures like Ingraham can preach homophobia to
the masses on a daily basis, yet anyone who dares to call them "bigots" is
accused of hurling epithets.

Barney Frank went even further, and "dredged up events from my college days,"
Ingraham whines.  "And when I tried to tell him that just two weeks earlier,
I had been in San Francisco helping my gay brother cope as his partner fought
bravely to stave off death from AIDS, he brushed me off."

In the mid-1980's, as editor of the "Dartmouth Review," Ingraham had indeed
published a grossly homophobic article, which she now admits:  "adopted a
purposely outrageous tone -- occasionally using, for example, the word
'sodomites' to describe campus gays."  But that was then, Ingraham
essentially pleads, and this is now. 

Significantly, Ingraham fails to account for her CONTINUING and CURRENT
homophobia.  At best, she makes abstract references to her "conservative
politics" and "public persona" (which, readers are asked to believe, do NOT
index a "personal" homophobia).

"Yes, I am conservative," Ingraham explains,"...and I do not believe the U.S.
Constitution speaks to the complicated social question of gay rights."
 Moreover, she adds:  "I also reject the idea that disagreement with the gay
movement's political agenda is de facto evidence of homophobia, any more than
opposition to affirmative action makes one a racist."

Of course, the "question" of gay and lesbian civil rights is complicated BY
HOMOPHOBIA ITSELF -- a fact that homophobes typically overlook.  Inasmuch as
the "gay agenda" is one of understanding and equity, any opposition is
necessarily a defense of (homophobic) ignorance and (heterosexist) privilege.
 Only a homophobe could "disagree" with the custody rights of lesbian
mothers.

"In the 10 years since I learned my brother Curtis was gay," Ingraham writes,
"my views and rhetoric about homosexuality have been tempered -- not because
Curtis proselytizes on gay rights, but because I have seen him and his
companion, Richard, lead their lives with dignity, fidelity and courage."  "I
now regret that at Dartmouth we didn't consider how callous rhetoric can
wound... not to mention how it undermined our political point," she says.
 "But Curtis never reproached me about my Dartmouth Review antics...."

Here, as elsewhere, Ingraham argues for a particular TOLERANCE -- which is
far removed from the more-enlightened capacities of UNDERSTANDING or
ACCEPTANCE.  She writes of her brother as other bigots have written of "good
niggers."  Rather than "proselytize," Curtis behaves . . .  according to a
double-standard.

Ingraham, in fact, is a truly aggressive proselyte for special homophobic and
heterosexist rights.  However, her own beliefs are described admirably (with
terms of a professional or intellectual pursuit) rather than dismissively (as
a mere personality trait, ignoble and suspect).

In her approach to "gay people," Ingraham consistently strikes a disingenuous
note -- closely tuned to the "some-of-my-best-friends-are" cliche.  She
writes, for example:  "Friends frequently ask how I, given my politics, dealt
with seeing my brother and his companion, Richard, together for the first
time.  They are surprised when I tell them it wasn't as unsettling as I had
anticipated....  I met their gay friends, and liked them (They, in turn,
seemed taken aback that a conservative firebrand like me could be fun --
especially at a party with a bunch of gay people)."

In effect, Ingraham is making the shocking suggestion that lesbians and gays
should learn to enjoy (or at least respect) the company of homophobes!
 Conservatives may attack homosexuality in public -- on TV, in Congress, at
church -- yet still manage, "gracefully," to socialize with homosexuals in
private.

A self-congratulatory (and heterosexist) stance continues throughout
Ingraham's article.  On the "idea of gay marriage," for example, she says:
 "I am now less dismissive."  And apparently, she expects our thanks.

Such personal growth should be encouraged, of course, but not exaggerated.
 As a professional homophobe, Ingraham is not much better than an anti-Semite
who, after touring Aushwitz, is "less dismissive" of the Holocaust.  Being
"less homophobic" is not the end, after all, but only a means.

For the bulk of the "Post" article, Ingraham details her "courageous"
deathbed observation of "how AIDS ravaged Richard's vibrant body and mind."
 "To me, the incessant calls for more federal funding for AIDS research were
just part of a gay crusade for political affirmation and acceptance," she
writes.  "Now I see that the push for experimental drug treatments and
increased funding for AIDS research is motivated by love and fear....
 Watching AIDS play its evil game of give and take has made me understand why
lobbying for increased research funding should be an urgent priority not only
for the gay community, but for us all."

Among other "insights," Ingraham also notes:  "Until a few years ago, I
hadn't thought about the gay community as setting an example in self-help....
 I wasn't aware, for example, of local service organizations such as San
Francisco's Open Hands, a volunteer group that gives counseling and support
to AIDS patients and their caretakers."

Ingraham is obviously satisfied, posing with her belated "insights," as if
they were they very markers of professionalism.  But what can be said about a
journalist so disinterested in or incapable of any understanding outside her
own, vested experience?  Shouldn't the public media should eschew any
"political analysts" who can only learn -- or only BOTHER to learn -- from
their personal trauma?

If Ingraham had bothered, she could have (and should have) recognized the
need for AIDS funding much sooner.  Rather than perpetuating defamatory
cliches, she easily could have found numerous models of "self-help" amongst
queers as well.  Even now, her approach remains careless (there is no "Open
Hands group that gives counseling" in San Francisco, as Ingraham claims;
apparently, she is referring to Project Open Hand, a food service for persons
with HIV).

Ultimately, what Ingraham fails to consider is why -- on the basis of nothing
but ignorance -- she ever felt qualified or compelled to espouse ANY claims
about "the gay community."  In this, she is no different from other
homophobes . . .  and media pundits.

Journalists regularly treat homosexuality purely as a matter of (personal)
opinion, rather than (social) fact.  As such, the standard practices of news
gathering -- including basic research -- are simply ignored.

* * *  ACTION ALERT!   Send critical comments to Steve Luxenbourg, Outlook
Editor, "The Washington Post," 1150 15th Street NW, Washington, DC
20071-0002, tel. 202-334-6000, fax 202-334-4475, e-mail [email-masked].
 Also, encourage CBS and MSNBC to seek better "expertise" than Ingraham's.
 Contact:  James Warner, President, CBS Television, 524 West 57th Street, New
York, NY 10019-2902, fax 212-975-9387, e-mail [email-masked]; Mark
Harrington, Vice President, MSNBC, 2200 Flethcher Avenue, Fort Lee, NJ 07024,
e-mail [email-masked].  Finally, feedback for Laura Ingraham can be sent
in care of MSNBC, or e-mailed to her directly at [email-masked].

[2]

T A X I N G  H O M O P H O B I A

The American Family Association -- a homophobic media watchdog group -- has
launched yet another attack on the National Endowment for the Arts.  This
time around, the AFA has specifically targeted "lesbian pornography" -- in
particular, the films and videotapes distributed by Women Make Movies, Inc.

In a recent "Action Letter" (March 1997), AFA president Donald Wildmon warns
his flock to "get your blood pressure medicine handy before you read any
further."  For his medicated minions, Wildmon goes on to detail an act of
"obscene waste."  Women Make Movies (WMM) has received "$112,700 in taxpayer
money over the past three years," says Wildmon, and it has all been spent to
promote such evils as lesbian S&M and kiddie porn.  To "prove the point," the
AFA Action Letter dissects WMM's "1997 25th Anniversary Film and Video
Catalogue."

A list of "questionable" titles -- along with "a brief description of the
video taken directly from the Catalogue" -- is provided in the AFA alert.
 Included in this roster of "taxpayer-funded peep shows" are such films as
"Ten Cents a Dance" ("In the first segment, two women awkwardly discuss their
mutual attraction...") and "Seventeen Rooms" ("A hilarious answer to the
question: What do lesbians do in bed?").  Three videos are singled out as
"particularly bothersome," because their subject matter "appears to deal with
the sexual activities, thoughts and/or actions of children" (in fact, these
films -- "The Match That Started My Fire," "Age 12: Love With a Little L,"
and "Hide and Seek" -- all explore lesbian identity in childhood and early
adolescence).

AFA members are being encouraged to sign thousands of pre-printed postcards,
addressed to congressional conservatives Trent Lott (Senate Majority Leader)
and Newt Gingrich (House Majority Leader).  The postcards state:  "Two years
ago the Congress voted to phase out the National Endowment for the Arts in
1997.  Even so, the NEA continues to fund pornography through groups like
Women Make Movies.  I am asking you to help make sure the NEA is closed down
and decent, hard-working Americans don't have to worry about their tax
dollars being wasted on this 'art' any longer."

* * *  ACTION ALERT!   Challenge the AFA's censorious rants, and advise your
Congressional representatives to do the same.  To call your state Senators
and district Representative, tel. 800-962-3524 or 202-225-3121.  Protest
cards can also be sent to:  Sen. Trent Lott, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC
20510-0001; Rep. Newt Gingrich, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC
20515-0001, tel. 202-225-4501, fax 202-225-4656, e-mail
[email-masked].  For more information about Women Make Movies, contact
Debra Zimmerman, WMM Executive Director, tel. 212-925-0606.

Useful information for arts advocates is available from the American Arts
Alliance (AAA), an organization founded to fight censorship and advance arts
support before Congress and other branches of the Federal government.
 Relevant resources include "Advocacy Materials for Arts Supporters" (which
provides tips on writing letters to media and politicians to encourage
support for the NEA) and a background sheet on "Myths and Facts about
National Support of Arts and Culture."  Contact:  The American Arts Alliance,
1319 F Street NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20004, tel. 202-737-1727, fax
202-628-1258, e-mail [email-masked], Website
http://www.tmn.com/Artswire/www/aaa/aaahome.html.

[3]

T H E R E ,  I N  S P I R I T

Camp Sister Spirit -- the embattled lesbian outpost in Ovett, Mississippi --
has issued a call for supportive "letters-to-the-editor."  The camp recently
came under attack in the "Hattiesburg American" (Feb. 23), which carried a
hateful missive from J. D. Hendry, president of Mississippi For Family
Values.

In his letter-to-the-editor, Hendry asked:  "Have the 'Hattiesburg American,'
the local television stations and other media outlets adopted the Camp Sister
Spirit refugees as some type of mascot, or do you just find these social
miscreants an interesting study in deviant social behavior?"  "These women
have whined, fussed, cussed and cried before our Legislature on behalf of all
individuals of the same sex that want to be married," he added.  "Our state,
thank God, will not condone this."

According to Hendry:  "This leaves the inhabitants of the camp in Ovett no
social battles to fight, even though by their actions they have admitted to
breaking the sodomy laws of our state.  Thus, they should move on to other
locales to plead their case and spew their venom.  The citizens of Ovett will
gladly buy their farm....  We will even throw in two one-way tickets to
Hawaii."

* * *  ACTION ALERT!   Drop an open line of support for Camp Sister Spirit --
and let the "citizens of Ovett" know that queers shall not be moved by
bigotry; encourage local media to continue reporting fairly and accurately on
homosexuality and homophobia, in Mississippi and across the globe.  Contact:
 Letters to the Editor, "Hattiesburg American," P.O. Box 1111, Hattiesburg,
MS 39401, tel. 601-584-3128, fax 601-584-3130, e-mail [email-masked].
 Correspondence can be copied to Brenda Henson, Executive Director, Camp
Sister Spirit, PO Box 12, Ovett, MS 39464, e-mail [email-masked].

[End of Part A; Part B posted separately]

----------------------------------------------------------

ABOUT MEDIALERTS

Distributed as a community press service since 1992, "MEDIAlert!" [TM] is a
biweekly, advocacy-oriented column of media criticism, primarily focused on
lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender issues.  Recipients may print, publish or
post this material, in whole or part, under this or any title, without prior
permission.  When appropriate, attribution can be made to "Al Kielwasser"
and/or "MEDIAlert!"  File copies of publications using all or part of any
"MEDIAlert!" are always appreciated.  Next "MEDIAlert!" = March 16, 1997.
  Contact:  A. P. Kielwasser, MEDIAction, 163 Park Street, San Francisco, CA
94110-5835, voice-mail/fax 415-826-5203, e-mail [email-masked].

----------------------------------------------------------

AUTHOR NOTES

Al Kielwasser is the editor of "Gay People, Sex and the Media" (New York:
 Haworth Press).  His media criticism and research have appeared widely, in
both mainstream and academic publications (including the "Journal of American
Culture," "Journal of Homosexuality," "Journal of Popular Culture," and
"Critical Studies in Mass Communication"); he was twice elected Chair of the
Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation/San Francisco Bay Area.