 |
| David Jay and student Mary Kame Ginoza (S) |
Asexuality is edging into the media spotlight. More and more newspapers, magazines, and televised news programs are running stories about the elusive fourth orientation, and it’s all quite exciting to be recognised in media for once. The picture to the left, for example, comes from the British newspaper the Guardian's article on asexuality. Well, as they say, all good things must come to an end, and it seems to be so in this case as well.
As with many things in life, the more liberal media seem to take a less reactionary approach to anything outside the norm than the conservatives – it can be the difference between “it's estimated that 1% of the world's population is asexual, although research is limited”, and “a leading academic has suggested that the sexualisation of our culture has turned people off sexual feelings”. These two quotes from two of the biggest British newspapers – the first from the left-leaning Guardian, and the second from the staunchly-conservative Daily Mail – are an excellent example of how a few words can be used to change the entire meaning of a statement.
 |
| This is the photo from the Mail article. Interesting choice, isn't it? (S) |
It’s much the same across the pond in the United States, where asexuality has hit the headlines and talk shows hard, helped along with a lot of effort from “Granddaddy Ace” and poster boy of the asexual movement, David Jay. More than half of all interviews, talk shows, news articles, and documentaries involve Jay at some point or another, and unfortunately sometimes the shows he is on don’t want to take a balanced view of asexuality as an orientation.
In 2006, Jay appeared on The View, a US panel show, to explain to the American people that asexuality is legitimate. Unfortunately the panel was made up of comedians, and they were playing for laughs rather than sympathy. When Jay talked about how asexuals should group together and campaign for greater awareness, Joy Behar replied with, "What's the problem? Why do you need to organise?"
"If you're not having sex, what's there to talk about?" said her co-panellist Star Jones, and they proceeded to ridicule Jay: "Maybe it's repressed sexuality. Maybe you don't want to face what your sexuality means," said Behar. They then joked about making Jay "lie down". "To be analysed or for something else?"
Generally this is the exception to the rule, though. Most articles or shows that doubt asexuality is legitimate tend to just not invite asexuals to appear, whereas articles that are less biased against us generally interview aces. A good example of this in action is the Fox News show Red Eye’s recent failure to be inclusive (which can be watched here, if you're interested in watching it to laugh at all the ignorance).
Don’t worry though, guys, Fox hasn’t sent in five people that are completely ignorant on the subject. No, they know exactly what they’re talking about - and apparently asexuality is “called being a woman every three and a half weeks.” Despite the obvious confusion between asexuality and celibacy (and ignoring the exclusion of transwomen there), it gets even worse (or better, depending on how sarcastic you’re feeling today).
Dan Soder obviously had little idea of what asexuals are saying when we say we want visibility - “I don’t know, I think when they say they want to be represented - what do they want, just like the most boring beer commercials ever, just like a guy that’s like “beer”. That’s it. No chicks in bikinis.” Making fun of asexuals and objectifying women in one sentence, wow you sound like a really swell guy Dan!
The problem is when you get comedians to do a show on a sensitive topic – it’s very rare that they will be open and understanding about it. No, much like with David Jay and The View, a comedian’s job is to play for laughs, and on Fox it was much the same.
One of them came out with a hilarious quote which shows the general level of education in the room - “I think that the problem with this is that it’s one per cent. And can we just like, after a while stop recognizing things? Like if it’s that small a portion of the population, do I have to recognize you? Like, woo recognize me because I wear sock monkey hats! Ok, there’s a couple of people that wear sock monkey hats, I don’t need to recognize you. Yes, you exist. Move on.”
Something he needs to understand is that one per cent of the population is a fairly big number. If we were talking about the likelihood that Fox News would do a U-turn and become liberal or vaguely intelligent, then yes one per cent is pretty unlikely. But in a population of 311,591,917 (according to the US census Bureau in July 2011), we’re talking more than three million asexual people. Yes, in comparison it may not be so many, but if you put them all in a room together then you can bet that there would be a lot of cake consumed.
A good example of how much difference the people presenting and the guests on a show can make, in 2006 two members of AVEN appeared on Fox News Dayside, and the show is one of the most balanced and open minded of any that has featured asexuality, as you can see here:
So is all publicity good publicity? Obviously not, as lies and negative stereotypes of asexuals are much more damaging than invisibility. But generally the media reception has been unbiased and thorough, so hopefully the less ace-friendly articles won't sway the public.
If you're interested in signing a petition calling for Fox News to feature actual asexuals in their shows (rather than panel shows where they make fun of asexuals), there is one here.
Follow @FRW
