"Dude, remember when Michael Scott kissed Oscar on that one episode of The Office? I was thinking, does that mean that Michael's gay? I mean, he kissed him and he didn't throw up!"
This is not an excerpt from a real conversation. Thank God it isn't, because it would have ended abruptly at the sound of my loud oh-my-gosh-are you-serious sigh.
As discussed as that episode of The Office was, I don't think anyone really thought for even a second that the character of Michael Scott (or even the actor Steve Carrell) was gay. Not for a flippin' second. It's Carrell's job to do whatever Michael wants to do, which is basically anything under the sun. The actor was just gay for pay (G4P) for a moment in time. Give it a rest.
Being G4P is a concept that was recently put into the language by comments from the cast of Modern Family. It describes a person who doesn't personally identify as homosexual acting as if they were homosexual in order to earn money. It's a term usually associated with pornography, but it can also mean flirting with the gay patrons at a restaurant you wait tables at. Or kissing an actor of the same gender on the sitcom you act on. But no matter how it breaks down, the idea of being G4P has garnered attention lately. But why?
A lot of heteros say that acting gay as part of a job automatically means that you identify as gay. But what they fail to realize is that people have been G4P than most people think, and in different ways. Remember the Village People? They weren't all gay, but they used what was trendy in gay culture at the time to gather a bigger audience. They saw that there was a new potential audience for their music, and they appealed to them. It's similar to how Cher tweaked her image over time to appeal to LGBTers, even going so far as to play a lesbian in Silkwood. She became a kind of Aunty Ally, even though she identified as straight. Sure, it's different to be a gal having sex with gals so you can pay the rent as opposed to just flirting with gals so you can pay rent. But the end reason is the same: No disrespect to people who DO identify as LGBT, but everyone's gotta pay rent. Or mortgage.
This sounds like a harsh opinion, but I have to disclose something here: I did something that may have maybe possibly classified me as G4P. I once had a gig as a fetish model, and I did some poses with a woman once. She was straight too, and we just made some art together. I was paid $90 for my time posing for pictures as a lesbian dominatrix. It was fun, and it helped me pay rent.
Because here's the truth about being G4P: It's about the money. People aren't trying to just mess with LGBTers by doing what they do. Ultimate fighter Dakota Cochrane came out as having been in many pornographic films in his younger days. Why? He was hard up for cash at the time, and there was supposedly a lot of money to be made by being in gay porn. Personally, I don't blame him for hustling as a young lad (I almost wrote "strapping young lad," but then realized it would be highly inappropriate). Everyone's values can be challenged when times are hard economically. Isn't that why some people enter cubicle jobs though they really want to be a painter?
At this point, I don't think the straight people acting as if they were gay are the ones we need to worry about. I'm more worried about the lesbians going to a gay bar for the first time, getting a thrill from the bartender flirting with them, and then finding out from an on-the-street interaction that she's actually straight. I'm worried about the young gay boys watching porn geared toward them for the first time, searching for a name he sees in the credits, and comes up with an image of him passionately embracing his wife. It can cause confusion, and even feelings of betrayal. My heart goes out to these LGBTers, and I truly hope that as few hearts are broken over orientation confusion as possible.
 |
| And I'm here via e-mail or Twitter if you ever need support. Just so ya know. |
Maybe I'm biased as a heterosexual, but I don't think there should be a rule prohibiting non-homosexual-identified people as acting as if they were something else as part of their job. People need money to live, not everyone is constricted from homophobia regarding themselves, and perhaps most important of all, the fact that this phenomenon is even happening means that LGBTers are starting to be taken seriously by businesses. They're being marketed to. People are manipulating their attitudes toward work because they can tell that this particular demographic has money they can invest. That's a miracle! And we all know that money speaks volume in terms of respect and autonomy. Harvey Milk gained regard in his community by supporting economic boycott organized by Teamsters, for Pete's sake.
While all LGBTers should tread carefully when consuming media specifically geared to them, I personally don't see the concept of G4P as a bad thing. Maybe serving the LGBT community has led to more people becoming allies than if they hadn't done otherwise. The second we start complaining about having more allies is when we know there's a problem in Not-Strictly-Hetero-Land.
And for the record: Steve Carrell also voiced half of The Ambiguously Gay Duo. Which makes him not only takes him to the next level of G4P, but just makes him all the more awesome.
What is your opinion of people that are 'gay for pay'? Does it change your mind about today's mainstream entertainment or pornography business? Are you a fan of 'The Ambiguously Gay Duo'? Your thoughts, please!
Follow @FRW
