Author and her helpers just wrong
by
besh
07/25/2007, 1:30 PM #
The author makes a big mistake in using the word "gays" throughout the article. This is a HUGE and absurd generalization. Also, is she trying to refer to gay men and lesbians, or just gay men? Can't tell. She describes a phenomenon that has been more a part of the gay male community than of the lesbian community, though that shouldn't be taken to mean that it applies to all gay men. And it doesn't mean that there aren't lesbians who are part of the phenomenon. Read on and you'll understand what I'm talking about.
The author, or perhaps her assistants from the academic world, came up with a lovely and righteous theory, but WHAT was it based on? Surely if any of them had ever spent time watching and/or knowing drag queens, or even knowing gay men or lesbians who enjoyed the drag world, they'd know the real reason Tammy Faye became a figure (icon? not so sure about that) in the gay community. Yes, she was supportive of AIDS work and even appeared at a community event in my town. But BEFORE that, Tammy Faye made an impression because she LOOKS LIKE A DRAG QUEEN! The celebrities who become talked about among those who enjoy the campy, drag queen sphere win that adoration for that reason. Drag queens don't look like the average women. They embrace a stereotyped, hyped-up-to-the-max appearance of a a woman. Think Tammy Faye and Dolly Parton. Billie Holiday? Not so much.
Doesn't the fact that all of these so-called icons are women clue you in to the flaw in the theory? Could the author (or anyone else) really think that "gays" would only make "icons" out of women who have struggled and persevered, and not also men??