Well, you’ll probably be hearing a lot about Dick Clark in the next little while. It is being reported by the National Enquirer that the late, great host of American Bandstand “conducted witch hunts against gays who appeared on his show – and banned homosexuals who’d been outed by his staff!” (The exclamation mark is the National Enquirer’s, not mine.) Says the report: “Handsome gay 14- to 17-year old males who helped popularize dance crazes like the Slop, the Continental, the Fly and the Hitchhike could stay on “Bandstand” as long as they looked straight. But any open hint of homosexuality got them kicked out the door – and the teens knew it in no uncertain terms.”
In other words, being gay was OK, but being open about it was not.
According to the report, many of the regular male dancers on the program were gay, and Mr. Clark was afraid that if it became public knowledge, an anti-gay backlash would lead to the show’s cancellation.
There’s a lot more in the article, which you can read by clicking on the above link, if interested.
My view: Considering the era — the show ended in 1989 after airing for 25 years — can you blame Mr. Clark for wanting to protect his show against certain cancellation, and protect the gay youth from discrimination who were on his show?
Evander Holyfield is under fire from many for what they deem as homophobic comments. Apparently, the boxer, who is participating in a U.K. reality-TV program called Celebrity Big Brother, voiced his opinion in the show’s Big House that homosexuality is a “choice,” and that it can be “fixed” by a doctor, and he compared it to a physical disability.
The hosts of the program have warned him about his outbursts, according to reports. He says he was merely stating his opinion, and he was only mentioning it to his partner on the show and had no plans to mention it to anyone else. I’m wondering if he forgot about the cameras.
Anyway, there are calls to have him booted out of the house, i.e. the show. But at least one writer, Brendan O’Neill in The Telegraph, wonders if the censuring of Holyfield isn’t going too far, saying: “There’s a further profound irony to the censuring of Evander Holyfield: it has been done in the name of tolerance yet it is actually a prime example of intolerance.”
That view is being expressed by others in similar cases these days, and I wonder if freedom of speech is being violated.
Writes Brendan: “Are (Holyfield’s) views outdated? Absolutely. Are they wrong? I believe so, and many others will, too. Are they offensive? To some I’m sure they were. But should Holyfield, and anyone else who is invited on to TV precisely to express him or herself and to be “real”, be allowed to give voice to such moral beliefs? I think they should; Channel 5 takes a very different view.”
There might be something to that.
— Jillian
We really shouldn’t judge with hind vision what happened one two or three generations ago. Mr Clark was born in 1929 and began his career in the 1950s. Times were different then. Homosexuality was not accepted in western society, the gay movement was just starting, we were not as enlightened then as we are now. If Mr. Clark let young gay men dance on his show then kudos to him. If he let them go then it’s a shame. He’s dead now. Let him be.
As for Mr. Holyfield, why are we surprised? He’s just a boxer that has had his head bashed in many times and is appearing in a low brow TV drama. Why in the world would his opinion bear any credence. What did you expect? Moral enlightenment. OK someone maybe should tell tell him he has a great gig and that he should Shut The F*ck Up.
We give these micro celebrities far too much ink.
LikeLike
Times change, fortunately, as with the case of the wonderful Alan Turing who was “fixed” for his then illegal homosexuality by the British legal system in the 1950s by what was then termed “chemical castration”, but who is now hailed as the genius that shortened the duration of WWII and saved “countless lives” and has just been granted a royal pardon for something that, today, is perfectly legal(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-25499447).
With regard to Evander Holyfield’s comments on a so-called “reality TV” programme: Hopefully we all are in a position to make our own choices with regards to our sexuality. I don’t think any of us would want to have our own particular choice regarded as a disease that the medical profession can fix. And why should we particularly take note of the opinion of a person who, by his own choice, made a career out of trying to inflict harm on his fellow man? Could the medical profession not also be called upon to cure him of his aberrant behaviour?
LikeLike
am disappointed to hear all this.. it makes me sad…
LikeLike
Hmmm – Interesting. You say you find it hard to blame Dick Clark for wanting to avoid the anti-gay backlash, considering the era. Is that significantly different, considering the current era, from Big Brother wanting to avoid the anti-anti-gay backlash? That’s about viewing figures, though.
I agree that those views are outdated, and wrong, but as to the right to freedom of speech, it’s not a blanket, anything goes right; it comes with responsibilities.
LikeLike