GLAAD responds to Ron Howard's gay joke defense

If you've been reading this blog in recent weeks, you know that there's been a lot of heated debate over whether it is perfectly appropriate or patently offensive for Vince Vaughn, the star of Ron Howard's upcoming fim "The Dilemma," to joke that an electric car is "gay." Universal Pictures, who bankrolled the picture, pulled the joke from its trailer after getting criticized in many quarters, starting with CNN's Anderson Cooper. But Howard made news again a week ago by writing to me to say that the joke will stay in the film.

Howard defended the joke, reminding people that just because a character in a film says or does something inappropriate doesn't necessarily mean that the filmmaker agrees with it. I've been in Howard's corner on this issue, believing that if we start making value judgments approving one joke over another, we're on a slippery slope to the arid wasteland of political correctness, especially since there have been gay jokes in "The Office" that didn't arouse any of the indignation directed at "The Dilemma."

But there's another side to the story. I've been speaking to the people at GLAAD, which works to prevent defamation of gays and lesbians in the media. GLAAD has been outspoken in its opposition to the joke, believing that it plays on exactly the kind of stereotyping that gives license to bullies. GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios took me up on an invitation to make his case for why the joke should be removed from the film, along with why some gay jokes, like the ones in "The Office," should be viewed through a different lens than the humor in "The Dilemma."

I think Barrios has a compelling point of view that is worth hearing. Here's what he has to say: 

 

When is a word more than just a word?  I’m sure it seemed innocuous enough to the writers of "The Dilemma" when they had the film’s main protagonist (played by Vince Vaughn) say “electric cars are gay” then qualify that he doesn’t mean “homosexual, gay, but, you know, my parents are chaperoning the dance, gay.” To people who don’t hear their identity used as a synonym for “undesirable” or “worthy of ridicule” on a daily basis, I’m sure it seems as though groups like GLAAD, concerned moviegoers, and public figures like Anderson Cooper are making a mountain out of a molehill. It’s just a joke, right? And Vaughn’s character even said he didn’t mean US.

But he did. After all, why has the word “gay” come to mean “something to be made fun of”? It’s because people who are gay or are perceived to be gay … have been historically ridiculed. Sure, it may seem like just a word, and for most people, that’s what it is. But for people who have spent their entire lives hearing their identities used as an insult, it takes on an entirely different meaning.

GLAAD is not a censor.  We’re here to educate.  It’s not “censorship” when someone tells you that your behavior is causing harm and you decide to stop doing it. From grade school straight through to the workplace, gay people are constantly bombarded with this kind of speech.  These words are usually not meant to hurt, but they establish a climate in which we are seen as inferior.  Is it an accident that gay people experience lower self-esteem, higher levels of depression and a lamentably large number of us make the sad choice never to come out of the closet and live their lives openly?

So when is a gay-related joke OK? Ron Howard claimed in his statement last week that “our film is taking additional heat as an emblem for many movies and TV shows that preceded it that have even more provocative characterizations and language.” In this very column last month, "The Dilemma" was compared to some gay-related humor on NBC’s "The Office." Here’s the difference.

"The Office" used a gay context to find humor in the ignorance of what was being said, rather than making a joke at the expense of all gay people.  In the episode,  boss Michael Scott and underling Dwight are interrogating openly gay coworker Oscar while trying to track down the source of Michael’s cold sore, which he briefly (and obviously incorrectly) thinks he may have gotten from Oscar.  Dwight begins by saying “I’m going to need a list of every man you’ve ever had sex with; I’m talking train stations, men’s rooms...” Michael continues the list, saying “Flower shops, fireworks celebrations...” and so on.

Anyone who has seen this show would understand that the joke is on Michael and Dwight, particularly as their list of locations grows more preposterous.  The humor comes from the fact that Michael and Dwight’s notions about gay people quickly reveal their own ignorance, bizarre imaginations and distinct social awkwardness.  In no way is the audience meant to identify with Michael and Dwight. The audience is meant to find their behavior absurd. Viewers identify and sympathize with Oscar in this scene, as he finds himself on the receiving end of Dwight and Michael’s idiocy, as he and every other employee in this fictional setting do on a weekly basis.

Ignorance should be a punch line. Identity should not. Humor can be a tricky thing to analyze and can be easily (and lazily) defended against criticism by saying “it’s just a joke.” Vaughn himself, when defending this line in his film, said “Comedy and joking about our differences breaks tension and brings us together.” And while Vaughn is wrong about the joke in his movie accomplishing this end, "The Office" is a perfect example of humor getting it right.

"The Dilemma" is hardly the first movie to use the word “gay” in this way, but it has come along at a watershed moment in our culture.  Hearing one’s very identity regularly used as a synonym for “inadequate” or “undesirable” on a daily basis does more than just hurt feelings.  Recent events have made it abundantly and tragically clear the effect that anti-gay language and attitudes can have on young people who are gay or are perceived to be gay  AND on the bullies who target them.

Would it change hearts and minds if Howard had made the decision to pull this line from the film? Would bullies suddenly realize the harm their behavior was causing and stop tormenting their victims? Would spontaneous hugging break out in the hallways of America’s schools? Of course not. But it would create a tiny space in our culture -– a window in which people could draw their own conclusions about what it means to be gay, without being told it’s something negative.

Both Goldstein and Howard asked if “comedy will be neutered” if Vince Vaughn’s character didn’t use the word “gay” to mean something to be made fun of. The answer is no. Acceptance of ridiculing gay people under the guise of “humor” would be neutered.  And honestly, comedy might be better off if writers found more creative ways to make us laugh. Maybe a pie in the face?

Photo: Vince Vaughn at a Chicago Bears game at Soldier Field in Chicago. 

Credit: Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images

Comments

[Sean]

I have to say, as someone who considers himself to be a liberal I categorically disagree with GLAAD on this issue. First and foremost, there is a substantial section of the popualtion that is considered different, for a variety of reasons. and those minoroties-from African-Americans to overweight people-have all had there particular group made fun of in film. Example: the movie "Blazing Saddles" does a bang-up job of making the white people look oike absolute idiots. Does that change the fact that the "n" word is used more times than one can count? Did Mel Brooks' intent, to point out the absurdity of racism, make a difference to the people that chose to be offended byt the use of that word? I doubt it VERY much.

The point is, if a person looks hard enough they can find something to be offended by, regardless of race, sexual orientation, religious preference etc. It sounds like it was a slow week for GLAAD-this is what happens when Eminem chooses to direct his energy elsewhere apparently.

[Joe]

To people who don’t hear their identity used as a synonym for “undesirable” or “worthy of ridicule” on a daily basis, I’m sure it seems as though groups like GLAAD, concerned moviegoers, and public figures like Anderson Cooper are making a mountain out of a molehill.

If you hear your lifestyle being used as a synonym for undesirable maybe you should rethink your lifestyle.

[anon]

" The humor comes from the fact that Michael and Dwight’s notions about gay people quickly reveal their own ignorance, bizarre imaginations and distinct social awkwardness. In no way is the audience meant to identify with Michael and Dwight. "

The *exact* same logic can be applied to vince vaughn's character. Give it a rest

[Silverlake Guy]

This gay man says: Eloquent explanation from GLAAD made all the more compelling by comparison with the Office joke.

[mark]

This article is gay. Who gave GLAAD the right to use the word "gay" and preclude the rest of the world from using a word that at one time meant "happy" or "joyful". Is GLAAD going to sue the UK because they still use the work "fag" to describe a cigarette?

While I support the freedom of choice for the individual in choosing who they want to be and what they want to do and who they want to love,etc., I cannot support a group who believes they have a power to censor others. I understand outrage at a (untrue) statement specifically intended to devalue or defame "gay" or homosexual people, but to express outrage because of a simple joke in a movie is overstepping a boundry.

This seems like more of a ploy for attention than a legitimate call to arms over something outrageous.

I'd like to see GLAAD go after every single comedian that makes a "gay" joke or every hilbilly that thinks homosexuality is a disease before they start taking on Ron Howard and Vice Vaughn.

If it's so outrageous then just refrain from watching the movie! It's what the Jews did when that ridiculous "Passion of the Christ" movie was made. That movie was a true outrage in that it rewrote facts of events to portray Jews is a negative light by casting soem blame on them for the death of Jesus. In the end it cam down to this: Don't like it? Don't see it.

[SDCyclist]

Barrios makes really excellent points. I agree completely. I couldn't have said it better myself. So, I won't try. I will just say that he speaks the truth because I'm in my 40's and STILL have to deal with idiots making inappropriate jokes that to them are "funny" but in reality are hurtful. It's just that my skin is so thick now that the only effect it has on me is maybe an eye-roll and a muttered "jack ass" under my breathe...

[PJANDROS]

You fear censorship could put us on the on a slippery slope to the arid wasteland of political correctness. Just where have you been, anyway. We arrived there a long time ago.

[Honestrob]

I COMPLETELY Disagree with GLAAD on this one.

I am very pro-homosexual, have grown up around homosexuals my entire life, but this is bogus. Much like the uproar over "Modern Family" last week.

This is bordering on a pile on of misguided "Politically Correctness" and I think it's time to back off. Where does it stop?

Should the NAACP protest if a white character calls someone a ni**er?
Should Feminists groups protest if a woman's character is called a b*tch? Or if someone asks if she's on the rag? What if a black man's character calls a Caucasian a honkey? Or Whitey? or White Devil? Or if a hispanic is called a Sp*c in context of a film? Or if a Jew is called Shylock?

It's called STORYTELLING.

Has anyone seen American History X?
This film would never get a release if we were to go by these rules and it's greater message would never have gotten out. Heck, we'd never see half of the Great films Spike Lee made with these arguments. Legendary films like The Godfather and Godfather 2 would be under attack as well.

And to say "the Dilemma" and "the Office" examples are apples and oranges is disingenuous. I and a few of my friends feel the Office OFTEN goes overboard, and not in a "laugh at us ignorant folks and how we stereotype people" way.

In fact, without seeing the film, how can GLAAD make the distinction that Vaughn's character doesn't have a similar reason for saying it as Michael on the Office?

This is posturing for the public effect and the fund raising GLAAD will inevitably do on the back of this uproar. It'll go out in appeal letters and mailings to remind everyone of of all the work that's left to do.

It's their M.O. - I know because I'm on their mailing list.
Why?
Because I donate to GLAAD every year.

Not this year.
This is a misguided and foolish issue to complain about and I won't support it.

[Katarina]

The Filmakers are right.. in that the car can be described as gay per the definition.... if others want to make more of it, well then go back to the original meaning, it only has had other meaning recently. So Ron is right, electric cars are usually painted very bright and showy...

gay   /geɪ/ Show Spelled
[gey] Show IPA
adjective, -er, -est, noun, adverb
–adjective
1. having or showing a merry, lively mood: gay spirits; gay music.
2. bright or showy: gay colors; gay ornaments.
3. given to or abounding in social or other pleasures: a gay social season.
4. licentious; dissipated; wanton: The baron is a gay old rogue with an eye for the ladies.

[Dee]

Regarding the sensitivity of people who choose the gay lifestyle...get over it or get out of it. Example...Halloween in West Hollywood. Gay people were acting "gay". That's what they do. Most people do not find this behavior appealing hence, the word "gay" comes to be used as a pejorative. It's neither good nor bad, just reality. Censoring it will not cause gays to be more accepted, only marginalized further for infringing on our rights to free expression...excuse me, isn't that what gay people wanted? They just don't want the rest of us to have the right to express our response to their expression, unless it's positive. Sounds like Communism to me.