Thursday, December 3, 2009

people's rights ignored

I have being silent about my views of the Adam Lambert's performance at the American Music Awards which occurred over a week ago. To be honest in regards to his public show of affection, I think a lot of it was unnecessary and coming from a gay man, quite cringe-worthy!

However putting a poor performance aside, the way the media have handled this is beyond upsetting. CBS blurring out the kiss between the two men but leave the Britney and Madonna in full view to the watching public. Then to have some of his appearances to be cancelled, with Chris Brown taking over his spot. Like I just don't understand how such big channels can get away with such obvious homophobia, sexism and double standards.


I can understand that the gay oral sex may have offended some, but to blur out a gay kiss between to men, have we really become so low that we can't try to break down the barriers that so many gay people are trying to fight in our society. Like will they blur out two gay men holding hands next, just because it may offend the few that don't agree with the gay community's essence.

If this was a case on race or discriminating the poor or elderly, there would be uproar. ABC and CBS would be forced to apologise. Can't people see what they have done is so unethical and are teaching the youth, the next generation, the wrong message. Like throw on a women beater on telly but avoid the controversial homosexual. These channels would have never stopped such controversial artist like Madonna and Lady Gaga, they would probably encourage it.

All this proves to me that when discriminating against acts of homosexuality, people can get away with it. People who illistrate our society to the developing world are getting away with it. How can the fight for equal rights narrow if such sanctions are allowed to be demonstrated? I can understand that some of the performance was inappropriate but how the event is been published from the media to the public is just not right. It makes me question people's understanding of a blatant civil right, the "Protection of discrimination", based on race, gender, religion and not forgetting sexual orientation.

Am I going a bit overboard or do you agree?

1 comment:

Ryan O said...

I agree with pretty much everything you said. I do think the whole charade was a poor and uncomfortable to watch move on Lamberts part, but the reaction of the networks has been shocking, and more chocking than their actions, was the fact that their actions are being seen as acceptible. Like you said, if it was a race issue, then there would be uproar. I think they should be made to apologise for their homophobic standards.