Check the batteries on your fascism detector
After getting disinvited to an awards banquet, Bret Easton Ellis wrote a 3000+-word opinion piece for Out Magazine. In the essay, entitled “In the Reign of the Gay Magical Elves,” Ellis comments on his disinvitation and on the media coverage of the coming out of NBA benchwarmer Jason Collins.
Here’s the best part (and the reason we’re mentioning it on a website about standup comedy):
Because of these and similar comments, I’ve been accused by a few vocal sections of the gay community of being a “self-loathing” gay man. I might be a little self-loathing at times (I don’t think it’s an unattractive quality, BTW) but it’s not because I’m gay. I might come off that way because I think life is essentially hard and that scalding humor and rallying against its absurdities is the path on which to move through the world– and sometimes that means making fun of myself or lashing out at media targets in a way that might make it look to a dumbass that I Hate Bret. That a gay man can’t make a joke equating AIDS with Grindr (something my boyfriend and I had used a number of times) without getting punished and being called “self-loathing” is indicative of the new gay fascism. The real shame isn’t the jokey observation. The real shame is the PC gay reaction to the jokey observation. The real shame is that most gay men– who are every bit as hilariously filthy and raunchy and un-PC as their straight male counterparts– have to somehow tow the GLAAD party line in public or else be criticized. A lot of gay men probably feel they can’t be provocatively raunchy or politically incorrect in the mainstream media because it doesn’t represent The Cause. This is where we’re at now, I guess. Within the clenched world of the gay PC police there has been a tightening of the reigns. It’s as if in this historic moment for gay men we somehow still need to be babied and coddled and used as shining examples of humanity and objects of fascination—the gay baby panda—and this is a new kind of gay victimization. The fact that it is often being extolled by other gays in the Name of the Good Cause is doubly stifling.
We caution our readers to pay close attention to the words above that are in bold (we boldified them, not Ellis or Out.com) and ponder how they might relate to standup comedy in general and to recent standup comedy “controversies.” (Extra points to readers who can identify which controversies. Points will be taken off for readers who focus on gay issues instead of issues of free expression.)
Oh… and read the whole BEE essay– it’s fascinating and, let’s be honest, it doesn’t take all that long to read 3,000 words.
And if you don’t know who Bret Easton Ellis is, Wikipedia does.
6 Responses
Reply to: Check the batteries on your fascism detector
For FUCK”S sake….it’s ‘TOE the line’ and ‘tighten the REINS’…why kind of writer is this Ellis guy anyway??
Actually I know…kind of a fan, here. Ellis is right…political correctness is bad for _everybody’s ability…and RIGHT…to speak and think freely. Eventually PC turns around and bites its practitioners on the ass, and not in a fun way. Yeah sometimes it’s tough…are we not strong enough to deal with it?
“…are we not strong enough to deal with it?”
Not sure what “dealing with it” entails.
It is quite alarming, but we believe that many (too many) people find policing thought and expression to be appealing. When we started the magazine, we did battle mainly with the media and other institutions. It seems as though, these days, we’re witnessing more of these assaults on speech from fellow comics and alleged comedy “fans” more often than from the media.
It *is* hard to deal with the increasing pervasiveness of PC assumptions. Its proponents are religiously devoted to certain causes, which cannot be publicly questioned or mocked or even joked about, and must be fully supported at all times. All jokes are to be valued by the degree to which they Serve The Cause, and whether they offend the most easily offended (which these days includes “triggering” those most sensitive to their self-defined “triggers”).
Taken to its logical conclusion, it’s death to comedy, which must surprise, take non-standard views of taboos, speak the unspoken (and even the unspeakable), be mocking and cutting and aggressive (and “micro-aggressive”), and generally risk offense, if it is to be fresh and insightful and vital.
Unfortunately, to object to PC limits is to risk being called some combination of racist/sexist/homophobic, which we all must agree is the worst possible type of person to be. (If you don’t agree, you are of course by definition r/s/h. It’s really all very logical and self-contained, you see.) If you’re not accused of taking directs orders from The Enemies Of The Cause, you’ll be accused of “creating a climate” which incrementally aids Them. Your personal beliefs, intentions, friendships, and actions are no defense, as Mr. Ellis has learned. So, yes, “dealing with it” is problematic.
[Some improv group should call themselves the Trigger Warning Players.]
And many of the comments on BEE’s essay prove his point and demonstrate what PapaySF alludes to above. Read those comments only if you have a strong stomach.
I agree with what Ellis says here and he’s done some good stuff, but like David Anderson, it appalls me that a successful professional writer can actually type “tow the line”. I kinda hoped “tighten the reigns” was actually a joke playing on the power trip of GLAAD wanting to reign absolutely, but it’s unlikely. Props to Ellis’s editors over the years. He needs them.
Even the best writers need editors. And apparently, Out.com needs one or two. But that’s all beside the point.