On Monday, singer Ricky Martin announced to the world that he is gay, or in his words, “a fortunate homosexual man.” This wasn’t huge news, since many people had suspected it for years. He also hasn’t had a hit or been in the spotlight for quite some time. And there are far more high profile gays and lesbians (in show business and other fields) than in 1999 when Martin became known to mainstream American audiences. So, put those three together and his announcement wasn’t huge news.
On his website, Martin addressed why he didn’t come out sooner:
Many people told me: “Ricky it’s not important”, “it’s not worth it”, “all the years you’ve worked and everything you’ve built will collapse”, “many people in the world are not ready to accept your truth, your reality, your nature”. Because all this advice came from people who I love dearly, I decided to move on with my life not sharing with the world my entire truth. Allowing myself to be seduced by fear and insecurity became a self-fulfilling prophecy of sabotage.
Back in the late ’90s, it actually was big news that Ellen DeGeneres was saying “Yep, I’m Gay,” both in real life and as the character on her show. Singer George Michael revealed he’s gay after getting arrested for a “lewd act” in a Beverly Hills bathroom, and Matthew Shepard was brutally murdered for being gay. So, it’s understandable that Martin and the people around him were reluctant to be open about his sexuality. And whatever the context of those times, Martin had to come out on his own clock, whenever he felt the time was right.
Were you offended at the word “vagina?” It’s not a dirty word. So, there shouldn’t be a problem with saying it on television, right? That’s what I thought, until I read this.
Kotex is coming out with a new tampon line called U by Kotex. The original ad for the campaign used the word “vagina.” It turns out, using the proper word for female genitalia in a commercial was too much for three broadcast networks. So, they rejected it. Kotex came up with another version of the ad that replaced the v-word with “down there.” That was still over the line for two of those networks because they rejected the revised spot, too. (The networks involved weren’t disclosed.)
It’s bad enough that these corporations rejected the vagina version. It’s not like it’s inappropriate. The ad is for a tampon! But “down there” didn’t make it either? It’s vague, playful without being dirty, and relevant when talking about stuff that happens Down There. (Maybe they should’ve used vajayjay.)
So, after two strikes, here’s the sanitized version Kotex came up with:
My wife, Holly, and I have only been married for 6 1/2 months. In that short time, people have been asking me a question that catches me off guard. It literally started the day after the wedding. It’s not a huge question, but I’ve always paused when trying to answer it.
The question is, “How’s married life?”
It’s not an unanswerable question. I usually respond with a variation of, “Good. The same as before we were married.” Which is the truth. The question was hard for me to answer the first couple of times. It’s not because there was something wrong with Holly and me. I just don’t think of life in terms of before and after getting married. It seems I don’t understand the concept of “Married Life.”
Did you see the controversial Dodge commercial during the Super Bowl? Many people thought it was sexist. I thought it was whiny. Check it out.
The life of these guys are so miserable because they have to spend time with their mothers-in-law and take their wives’ calls? What assholes. These guys are whining about how whipped they feel because they have to watch “vampire shows?” Having to do those things doesn’t break down the American man. Feeling that those things do break it down is being whiny. It’s the opposite of the manly-man they’re trying to be.
I never understood the whole “life is over because I’m married” line of thinking. First, the reasons “life is so bad” always seemed lame, like in this commercial. And second, no one forced these guys to get married in the first place. So, conclusion: Stupid commercial.
A few weeks later, I noticed an ad for Dockers khakis that said “Wear the Pants.” I saw it and others for the same campaign in a few places in Midtown, but didn’t initially pay too much attention to them. Then I thought about “Wearing the pants” in light of the Dodge ad. It turns out the Dockers campaign is telling men to “wear the pants” to bring back manhood. Wearing khakis is going to bring macho back?
Before I wrote this post about more wives earning more money than their husbands, I sent an email to several male friends about the trend. Why just guys? Because I first read about “The Rise of Wives” in this New York Times article. The piece only quoted women who said who said they had difficulty finding and staying with male companions. They claimed the men they dated were insecure about being out-earned. I found a few articles on the increase in stay-at-home dads, but nothing from men on this study. It was like half the story was missing.
So, I emailed some of my guy friends. Here are responses from two of them.
Feliciano wrote:
I don’t mind when I find out the woman I’m dating makes more than me. The real challenge is deciding when or if to reveal how much I make. It’s something that should come out naturally. I’m always wary of women who want/need to know how much I make right away. It’s funny, I wonder if more guys are figuring out clever ways to find out how much the woman they’re dating earns…sort of a new twist on gold-digging.
The resurrection of the Tiger Woods Brand began Friday with his televised apology. Woods seemed sincere, but the mea culpa to his fans, sponsors and the general public is secondary to something else.
He must win at golf.
The most important part of Tiger’s brand is being a golfer who wins. Yes, his image as wholesome family man helped him be a pitchman, inspiration to kids and known as an all-around good guy. All of that, though, was based on him being a golf champion.
His apology was a good first step to bring reality in sync with what his image was before seemingly countless women came forward to say they slept with Tiger. The biggest step, though, will be when Tiger competes. If he can dominate on the golf course, then he will be “back.” If he can’t, The Tiger Woods Brand will be a contrite face on the memory of a once-great golfing career.
Sarah Palin’s and Barack Obama’s very different styles and appeal illustrate the contradiction Americans have about our leaders. Some people like Joe the Plumbers. Others like elites. Others like the two wrapped up into one.
Palin, who has said she’s thinking about running for president in 2012, blew away the Tea Party Convention crowd in Nashville for a price of $100,000. What unique brand of folksy does the Tea Party get for 100-grand? She delivers lines like, “How’s that hope-y, change-y stuff working out for ya?” and writes on her hand. (You’d think with all that money, she could just remember the four concepts she scribbled on her palm.)
On the other hand (pun intended), Obama’s State of the Union speech last month was just the opposite of Palin’s folksy speech. There were the customary two introductions of the president and 91 ovations, including 58 that brought Congress – at least some of them – to their feet. Kings, queens and dictators get that type of adulation.
Most football fans are thinking about the match-up between the Saints and the Colts later today. I, not being a huge fan of the game, am thinking more about the Super Bowl commercial controversy. Don’t think that I dislike football. I enjoy a good competitive game as much as anyone, and I’ll probably watch tomorrow.
The controversy over what ads CBS has decided to show and what they rejected is important, though. Those decisions over what an expected 90 million people will see says a lot about CBS’s and the NFL’s points of view. It also says a lot about what they think the 90 million viewers want to see.
The network rejected ads from ManCrunch, a gay dating website, and the web domain and hosting firm GoDaddy, whose ads have been rejected from previous Super Bowl broadcasts. CBS has agreed, though, to air a pro-life ad from conservative group Focus on the Family featuring Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow. There have been sexy ads that have aired during previous Super Bowls, including some from GoDaddy, and there will surely be some this year. There’s very little flesh in either the ManCrunch or GoDaddy ads, though. This seems to be more about sexuality than straight-up sex.
In the ManCrunch ad, two guy’s guys are on a couch watching a football game. Their hands touch over a bowl of potato chips, they share a glance and then they start making out. It’s nothing racier than something you might see on a late night sketch comedy (and apparently it’s already been done there). Here’s the ad:
In the GoDaddy ad, you have a gruff looking footballer who retires, comes out of the closet after leaving football, is flamboyantly gay, and starts a lingerie line using GoDaddy’s services:
Let’s say you’ve gone a few dates with someone. The person you’re getting to know is hot, funny, uses the right fork, has nice teeth and is everything you think your looking for in a mate.
Then, after hearing about their job, their last vacation and their spotless apartment, you’re pretty sure they earn more money than you. They may not have a trust fund, but you’re pretty sure they’re worrying about money a less than you are.
Now, if you’re a guy, is this a problem? Did her level of hotness just take a nosedive after finding out she out-earns you? Is she now undateable? If you’re a woman and realize your salary is bigger than your date’s, did this romance just end? Did you lose interest?
Or does it matter anymore that a man doesn’t make as much as the woman he’s dating?
Harry Reid’s “Negro” comment turned into a political crisis for the Senate Majority Leader. Before coverage of the earthquake in Haiti pushed the controversy from the news media’s attention, Republicans were calling for his resignation. They said it’s the same as when Trent Lott was forced to resign as Senate Majority Leader after speaking at a birthday celebration for then-Sen. Strom Thurmond. Lott said, “We wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years” if Thurmond – who ran on a segregationist ticket – was elected president in 1948. Sorry GOP. It’s not the same.
Besides the political pressure on Reid to resign, his remarks also prompted talk about a national conversation on race. Professor Michael Eric Dyson said Reid’s remarks were a “teachable moment” for Barack Obama and the president needs to deal with the issue of race. Dyson added that Obama “runs from race like a black man runs from a cop.” That’s not an accurate analogy, nor is it particularly helpful when talking about race, but Obama would be an ideal choice begin a national conversation on race. Dr. Boyce Watkins, though, has a few reasons why Obama shouldn’t begin the conversation. One of which, alienating some white voters, Obama himself probably realizes.
It’s fitting that the issue of race comes up around the time we celebrate the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday while at the same time looking back at Obama’s (historic, though disappointing to some) first year in office. While his ascendancy to the Oval Office is proof that America has come a long way regarding race, the national hissy-fit we just had over Harry Reid ungracefully speaking the truth is proof we have a long way to go. Former Al Gore Campaign Manager Donna Brazile said this about the Reid gaffe: “We don’t have a common language to discuss issues – especially issues like racism and the sensitivity around discussing race. And because of that, people often trip over themselves.”
Finding that common language would help start a national conversation on race. But what exactly is a “national conversation?” If the United States is going to make an effort to talk about race on both national and local levels, how would that actually happen? Logistically speaking, how would a conversation on a national scale work?
Comments (1) 
Themocracy