Suchergebnisse

For this article, I built on previous studies of representation by exploring the potential positive and negative impacts of descriptive representation in the policy process. Specifically, I examined the influence of openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) state legislators on the amount and types of LGBT‐related state legislation introduced from 1992 to 2002. My findings suggest that higher LGBT representation in state legislatures leads to greater substantive representation. The results also suggest, however, that descriptive representation is associated with the amount of anti‐LGBT legislation introduced. Additional analysis reveals that the net policy influence of increased LGBT representation is positive for the LGBT community.

Logo currently holds a self-described monopoly as the "Gay Channel for America." Logo stands alone as the single most concentrated national-level vehicle of LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered) visibility in the post millennial television era. The Logo Channel has reaped financial rewards from its strategy as a business entity, as LGBT American television viewers embraced its presence as a signifier to America that gays and lesbians have finally "made it". First, any claim to a monopoly deserves critical attention for its place in mainstream television, for its business practices, and for the power it holds in representing and targeting LGBT audiences. Second, Logo's construction of its audience is an extremely important window into current perceptions of LGBT identity, history, and progress. Third, Logo's ability to capitalize on gay and lesbian visibility in American culture and the rhetoric of "inclusiveness" are important historical and cultural moments to explore the political costs and benefits of these strategies—in business practices, programming content, and advertisements. In this study, I argue that Logo does not capitalize on its television presence to participate in LGBT political, economic, and social equality. Despite its significant visibility and messages of "inclusiveness" in American popular culture, Logo contributes to the perpetuation of negative and narrow stereotypes of consumerist gay culture, as it marginalizes ethnic minorities and women, through a variety of conformist, self-serving practices that undermine the libratory opportunity it holds for its LGBT viewers. Chapter Two "Another Lost Opportunity" examines a brief history of the cable television industry, the television business model and the representations of gays and lesbians on television to draw a parallel social history centered on visibility. Chapter Three "Like Taking Candy from a Baby" examines three reoccurring series on Logo: Noah's Arc, Can't Get a Date, and Round-Trip Ticket. Chapter Four "Easy as Shooting ...

This essay is a collection of statements, thoughts and opinions that exploded across the internet in response to a controversy that occurred during the 2007 LGBT film festival season. Catherine Crouch's short, The Gendercator, is the first film to be accepted and then removed from San Francisco's Frameline Film Festival, the longest running festival of its kind. The censorship of the film due to community pressure, and the transphobic storyline Crouch created raises central questions of community and identity/post identity politics – personal experience versus group representation, strategies for creating institutional spaces where queer identity formation can both develop and change, and problems that occur when grassroots organizations gain cultural cache that allows mobility for some but not for others.
I became involved when I was invited to sit on a panel with Crouch and others following the screening of The Gendercator at Outfest in Los Angeles. Rather than offer a personal account of the panel, a reading of the film, or analysis of the varying viewpoints and decisions made surrounding The Gendercator, I have relied on "blogosphere" and cyber world to tell this story. They rivaling voices from the LGBTQIA community beautifully convey all of the salient, ironic, painful, political and humorous positions as is. I have added my own positioning on key issues along the way. These are in the footnotes rather than the main text. This is not a strategy to perform the impossible act of journalistic "neutrality," but a conceptual move to contribute to the already loud and disharmonious cacophony surrounding The Gendercator. My contributions can be read as post blog postings, extending the web based conversation into another dimension, material based text.