(OKLAHOMA CITY) On a google group I subscribe to there was a discussion of how aggressive an Oklahoma-based GLBT online news page should be in its reporting of GLBT news in Oklahoma and whether the depiction of straight women as stereotypes with photo-shopped pictures is appropriate.
I would like to suggest that whatever is developing in the way of a "non-controversial"alternative to www.Gossip-boy.com
is not some extension of the fawning obeisance to religion that passes in Oklahoma as "progressive politics". I appreciate the no-holds-barred attitude of Gossip-boy.
Those who object to the treatment of straight women on Gossip-boy should, it seems to me, be objecting as well to the depiction of drag queens as an icon of our community. Drag is not a barb to women but represents the playing out of the stereotyped belief of many straights that most gay men want to be women. I get the symbolic nature of the impersonation even though I find it personally belittling to gay men who haven't the faintest desire to cross-dress and are secure in their own egos. But that's an exercise in diversity, isn't it?
My point is that are we going to use all the tools we can legally, or are we going to wring our hands and worry over being seen as rude?
I ask that we not confuse the hard news section of Gossip-boy with the satirical Smack column written by "Hunter". The news articles give us information about the machinations and backstage plans of the homo-haters that the main stream media in Oklahoma, or nationally, will never touch. I'd put Gossip-boy's investigative success up against that of even Rachel Madow any day, any time.
By devoting itself to Oklahoma, Gossip-boy is able to put the magnifying glass on the legislative and social labyrinth that is working tirelessly to put us either back in the figurative old closet or in a literal new grave.