Saturday, September 10, 2005
LOGO — Fundamentally Missconceived. Viacom's "LGBT" cable channel is a nitemare. Any gay man who thought he would see his life reflected and feel his heart warmed by a national 'gay' network will be extremely disappointed. Logo is appallingly antigay. It literally speaks with a female voice: essentially all its own promos are narrated by a woman! Why does a "gay" channel speak with a woman's voice? Well, you see, Logo endlessly promotes the lie that homosexuality means "lesbianism"; gay men are only male lesbians; "gay" and "lesbian" are "the same thing"; men are unimportant; and it is better to present "gayness" to the general public as gentle, female-to-female affection rather than as man-to-man sexuality. Logo is, in short, the enemy.
+
I have been checking Logo's schedule regularly from the first nite, and am sad to report that it appears to be 70% female, 10% drag, 10% AIDS, and only 10% non-drag, non-AIDS gay men — some of them nelly, others maladjusted, and few to none manifestly well-adjusted, self-affirming, masculine men.
+
Most of the programming on that dreadful channel is reruns of old straight productions with some gay, lesbian, or transvestite theme or subplot. Logo has shown the grotesque, viciously antihomosexual monstrosity The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, at least 30 times since the network debuted June 30th.
+
What little original programming it offers is campy, c*nty crap. The Canadian fruit, Scott Thompson, hosts a loathsome wedding show which, of course, focuses on women at least as often as on men, and is peppered with fruity remarks. Logo's own website actually promotes that show with a photograph in which Thompson is between two women who are kissing him on opposite cheeks! Very gay, isn't it? Oh, no, that's wrong. Women kissing men is heterosexual, not homosexual — indeed, it is the opposite of homosexual. You'd think Logo would know that. You'd be wrong. Logo is utterly, utterly confused.
+
Logo broadcasts a travel show that employs foreigners, even in segments made in the United States. This is an American cable service paid for by an American company supported by American cable subscribers, but it hires foreigners, so American gay people can't even find work on their own network!
+
That travel show goes way out of its way to point out places of interest to lesbians. In one recent show, the (fruity) host intoned a script that told viewers of places for lesbians only and for both lesbians and gay men together — but, curiously, mentioned nothing for men only. Men, you see, are not important to Logo. We're only the bulk of the potential audience, with the bulk of the disposable income. Why would they want to appeal to or inform us?
+
Logo also broadcasts some music videos and concerts. The videos I have seen have had no apparent relevance to homosexuality whatsoever. They are not of men singing love songs to men. The images are not homosexual but neuter or heterosexual. Or the songs are performed by mixed-gender (heterosexual) groups or women alone.
+
The concerts are overwhelmingly female, hours and hours of Melissa Etheridge, Kylie Minogue, and Sarah McLachlan. PlanetOut.com says in so many words that "Sarah McLachlan is not a lesbian". Nor, apparently, is Kylie Minogue. So why does Logo broadcast their concerts? Well, they're women, and Logo loves women — straight, lesbian makes no difference. They'll put any woman on because Logo loves women. It doesn't much care for men.
+
Oh, there was a Morrissey concert, but he's not gay. A VH-1 bio says he sang one vaguely gay song in his 23-year career (to date), "'Hand in Glove,' a love song filled with oblique references to homosexuality". Oblique references. Not good enuf. Worse, the same bio speaks of Morrissey's "self-proclaimed celibacy in the wake of much speculation about his sexuality." So he isn't gay, his music isn't gay, his band isn't gay, and his lyrics aren't gay. Why was he on Logo? Is there really no openly gay male musician Logo could present?
+
Gay men aren't even to be accorded the dignity of sexual privacy. Logo aired a hideous standup comedy concert by the maladjusted heterosexual loser Margaret Cho, who admits in that performance to one lesbian incident in her entire life and then makes explicit, obscene remarks about her heterosexual activities and talks about watching gay porn! I turned off. How dare she! And why would she watch men, who want no part of women , having sex with men? Because she's insane, that's why, as Logo is insane.
+
An original Logo series, Open Bar, concerns a maladjusted homo only recently out of the closet who decides to open a 'gay' bar/restaurant in West Hollywood, even tho he knows nothing about the business. Instead of opening a comfy little neighborhood place and learning the business over time, he rushes into creating a large and hugely expensive 'destination' establishment, to be called ICandy ("eye candy"). He partners with a straight man whose architect's drawings show lots of women scattered throughout the place — an oddity that even the macho recent convert comments on. But then this maladjusted loser goes out of his way to hire women to tend bar, wait tables, and even co-manage the place! Yes, gay men in West Hollywood all want to look at women behind the bar! Of course. Gay men love to stare at and flirt with barmaids and waitresses! Women are "eye candy" for gay men. Oh. No. That's wrong.
+
The maladjusted loser who is doing all this is still living in his straight-boy frat days. I have seen quite enuf of that series, just enuf to come to hate that guy with a passion and hope he fails miserably and loses everything he and all his investors expend.
+
Viacom does everyone extreme disservice with a single missconceived (no typo) cable network directed to four different audiences: lesbians (first and foremost), gay men, "bisexuals" (a mythical creature), and "transgendered" people (an even more pernicious myth, self-despising, gender-confused lunatics who should be in mental institutions until cured of their delusions).
+
Gay men do not want to watch lesbian TV, but Logo tries to force them to.
+
Lesbians should not want to watch gay men's TV, but I'm not persuaded there really is such a thing as a lesbian. Lesbianism may be an urban legend, referring only to man-hating women who wish they were themselves men and avoid intimacy with men — when they do — only because being naked with a man strips them of their delusion that they are themselves men. The great preponderance of "lesbians" have had a lot of sex with men, and perhaps most have even had children the old-fashioned way.
+
In a mixed gay-lesbian bar (the Townhouse of old, in 1970s Manhattan), gay men had the second floor and lesbians the third. As the nite wore on, more and more "lesbians" would drift down to the men's floor, because they preferred to be with men.
+
"TV's" (transvestites) must hate all 'TV' except drag shows. And "transgendered" people (transvestites with pretensions) are too lost in a world of delusion to be of any value to any advertiser, in part because many of them are unemployed and unemployable — as well they should be.
+
If Viacom is to salvage anything positive for gay men from its Logo monstrosity, it will have to either dump all the craziness and lesbianism, speak with a male voice, and create tons of original programming fit for well-adjusted gay men to watch, or create separate channels for its separate and mutually incompatible audiences, say, Logo 1 for gay men and Logo 2 for lesbians and people who identify as women. Alas, I suspect that if Logo were to be parted in two, Logo 1 would be designated for women — somehow lesbians aren't offended by "ladies first" when it comes to pride of place in the "lesbigay" world — and gay men would at best get Logo 2. If Viacom created four separate channels, one for each of its audiences, gay men would almost certainly be put dead last, in Logo 4.
+
For my part, I'd rather watch well-adjusted straight TV than lunatic "lesbigay" and 'TV'-TV. If you would too, write to the head of Viacom to tell him that Logo is a monstrosity that must be reformed: Mr. Sumner Redstone, Chairman, Viacom, Inc., 1515 Broadway, New York, NY 10036.
+
I have been checking Logo's schedule regularly from the first nite, and am sad to report that it appears to be 70% female, 10% drag, 10% AIDS, and only 10% non-drag, non-AIDS gay men — some of them nelly, others maladjusted, and few to none manifestly well-adjusted, self-affirming, masculine men.
+
Most of the programming on that dreadful channel is reruns of old straight productions with some gay, lesbian, or transvestite theme or subplot. Logo has shown the grotesque, viciously antihomosexual monstrosity The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, at least 30 times since the network debuted June 30th.
+
What little original programming it offers is campy, c*nty crap. The Canadian fruit, Scott Thompson, hosts a loathsome wedding show which, of course, focuses on women at least as often as on men, and is peppered with fruity remarks. Logo's own website actually promotes that show with a photograph in which Thompson is between two women who are kissing him on opposite cheeks! Very gay, isn't it? Oh, no, that's wrong. Women kissing men is heterosexual, not homosexual — indeed, it is the opposite of homosexual. You'd think Logo would know that. You'd be wrong. Logo is utterly, utterly confused.
+
Logo broadcasts a travel show that employs foreigners, even in segments made in the United States. This is an American cable service paid for by an American company supported by American cable subscribers, but it hires foreigners, so American gay people can't even find work on their own network!
+
That travel show goes way out of its way to point out places of interest to lesbians. In one recent show, the (fruity) host intoned a script that told viewers of places for lesbians only and for both lesbians and gay men together — but, curiously, mentioned nothing for men only. Men, you see, are not important to Logo. We're only the bulk of the potential audience, with the bulk of the disposable income. Why would they want to appeal to or inform us?
+
Logo also broadcasts some music videos and concerts. The videos I have seen have had no apparent relevance to homosexuality whatsoever. They are not of men singing love songs to men. The images are not homosexual but neuter or heterosexual. Or the songs are performed by mixed-gender (heterosexual) groups or women alone.
+
The concerts are overwhelmingly female, hours and hours of Melissa Etheridge, Kylie Minogue, and Sarah McLachlan. PlanetOut.com says in so many words that "Sarah McLachlan is not a lesbian". Nor, apparently, is Kylie Minogue. So why does Logo broadcast their concerts? Well, they're women, and Logo loves women — straight, lesbian makes no difference. They'll put any woman on because Logo loves women. It doesn't much care for men.
+
Oh, there was a Morrissey concert, but he's not gay. A VH-1 bio says he sang one vaguely gay song in his 23-year career (to date), "'Hand in Glove,' a love song filled with oblique references to homosexuality". Oblique references. Not good enuf. Worse, the same bio speaks of Morrissey's "self-proclaimed celibacy in the wake of much speculation about his sexuality." So he isn't gay, his music isn't gay, his band isn't gay, and his lyrics aren't gay. Why was he on Logo? Is there really no openly gay male musician Logo could present?
+
Gay men aren't even to be accorded the dignity of sexual privacy. Logo aired a hideous standup comedy concert by the maladjusted heterosexual loser Margaret Cho, who admits in that performance to one lesbian incident in her entire life and then makes explicit, obscene remarks about her heterosexual activities and talks about watching gay porn! I turned off. How dare she! And why would she watch men, who want no part of women , having sex with men? Because she's insane, that's why, as Logo is insane.
+
An original Logo series, Open Bar, concerns a maladjusted homo only recently out of the closet who decides to open a 'gay' bar/restaurant in West Hollywood, even tho he knows nothing about the business. Instead of opening a comfy little neighborhood place and learning the business over time, he rushes into creating a large and hugely expensive 'destination' establishment, to be called ICandy ("eye candy"). He partners with a straight man whose architect's drawings show lots of women scattered throughout the place — an oddity that even the macho recent convert comments on. But then this maladjusted loser goes out of his way to hire women to tend bar, wait tables, and even co-manage the place! Yes, gay men in West Hollywood all want to look at women behind the bar! Of course. Gay men love to stare at and flirt with barmaids and waitresses! Women are "eye candy" for gay men. Oh. No. That's wrong.
+
The maladjusted loser who is doing all this is still living in his straight-boy frat days. I have seen quite enuf of that series, just enuf to come to hate that guy with a passion and hope he fails miserably and loses everything he and all his investors expend.
+
Viacom does everyone extreme disservice with a single missconceived (no typo) cable network directed to four different audiences: lesbians (first and foremost), gay men, "bisexuals" (a mythical creature), and "transgendered" people (an even more pernicious myth, self-despising, gender-confused lunatics who should be in mental institutions until cured of their delusions).
+
Gay men do not want to watch lesbian TV, but Logo tries to force them to.
+
Lesbians should not want to watch gay men's TV, but I'm not persuaded there really is such a thing as a lesbian. Lesbianism may be an urban legend, referring only to man-hating women who wish they were themselves men and avoid intimacy with men — when they do — only because being naked with a man strips them of their delusion that they are themselves men. The great preponderance of "lesbians" have had a lot of sex with men, and perhaps most have even had children the old-fashioned way.
+
In a mixed gay-lesbian bar (the Townhouse of old, in 1970s Manhattan), gay men had the second floor and lesbians the third. As the nite wore on, more and more "lesbians" would drift down to the men's floor, because they preferred to be with men.
+
"TV's" (transvestites) must hate all 'TV' except drag shows. And "transgendered" people (transvestites with pretensions) are too lost in a world of delusion to be of any value to any advertiser, in part because many of them are unemployed and unemployable — as well they should be.
+
If Viacom is to salvage anything positive for gay men from its Logo monstrosity, it will have to either dump all the craziness and lesbianism, speak with a male voice, and create tons of original programming fit for well-adjusted gay men to watch, or create separate channels for its separate and mutually incompatible audiences, say, Logo 1 for gay men and Logo 2 for lesbians and people who identify as women. Alas, I suspect that if Logo were to be parted in two, Logo 1 would be designated for women — somehow lesbians aren't offended by "ladies first" when it comes to pride of place in the "lesbigay" world — and gay men would at best get Logo 2. If Viacom created four separate channels, one for each of its audiences, gay men would almost certainly be put dead last, in Logo 4.
+
For my part, I'd rather watch well-adjusted straight TV than lunatic "lesbigay" and 'TV'-TV. If you would too, write to the head of Viacom to tell him that Logo is a monstrosity that must be reformed: Mr. Sumner Redstone, Chairman, Viacom, Inc., 1515 Broadway, New York, NY 10036.
