The ‘openly gay’ thing
June 24, 2008 at 12:49 pm by Wayne GarciaLately I am vexed by the use of openly gay as an adjective needed to describe any gay person running for public office who is willing to discuss their sexual orientation. Like this Herald account, about a Fort Lauderdale city council member running for the mayor’s office being vacated by the openly intolerant Jim Naugle:
Dean Trantalis officially filed Monday to run for mayor in Fort Lauderdale in 2009.
He formally kicked off his campaign at ArtServe Monday evening. Trantalis, the city’s first openly gay city commissioner, served one term between 2003 and 2006. He decided not to run for a second term.
In a speech Monday, Trantalis talked about his desire to lower property taxes, fight crime and overdevelopment while embracing the city’s diversity. He offered no specifics regarding how he will lower taxes other than forming a task force to attract new industries.
I was made very aware of the phrase a few weeks back when a campaign manager for a local candidate called me to complain that every time his candidate was introduced in a news story, the words “openly gay” preceded the candidate’s name. Did I plan on referring to the candidate’s opponent as the “openly obnoxious” incumbent?
Then there is this exchange from CL’s upcoming Q&A interview with “openly gay” county commission candidates Darden Rice and Kevin Beckner, to be published Wednesday in print and online:
Beckner: A lot of times, the way the media treats it – and this also has to do with the individual – it seems to be a front-page story, it seems to be headline news when somebody is gay or somebody is lesbian. Making that a headline story, I don’t know is necessarily right. I still struggle to understand why it’s a breaking story when you talk about somebody being gay or being lesbian. As Darden mentioned, this isn’t a lifestyle. This isn’t something we have chosen to be, it’s who we are. And to make it a headliner, I never understood that. That’s part of the reason why we put it on the table. There was a little buzz floating at first and now, like I mentioned … but we haven’t talked about this issue in public and it’s never been brought up probably since last September. It’s been a long time since I’ve talked when I’ve been out walking the streets or at different events that’s anybody has even brought that up, because people have come to know me. They know what we’re focused on. They’ve come to know me as an individual, so I think it’s not so much of an issue anymore once people understand where that other individual is coming from.
I think a lot of times when people think of ‘oh the first openly gay candidate’ they don’t realize that Hillsborough County and counties across the state have been electing officials for years that have been gay, but have not chosen to talk about their personal life. I think that’s their own prerogative not to. I respect that they didn’t. I chose to because, for myself, I want to be open and honest about who I am. I want to put it all on the table.
So, how do we refer to candidates who are open about being gay? Or should we even note it at all?
Send to a friend:
June 24th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
I think it depends on the context. For instance, the “first openly gay” could mean there were others who weren’t so open about it. But in general, I don’t think there’s need for the modifier, IMHO.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Incumbant? Retired? Gay? Indicted? Handicapped? It’s part of each candidate’s story.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
If a gay candidate chooses to categorize themself as such - then yes, it is fair game to use the label.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
First anything is especially worth mentioning. And a candidate / official may not be the first gay, but being the first to acknowledge it makes reporters use the “openly” qualifier.
I agree with Jim above - accurately describing candidates is necessary.
But it’s not news by itself, nor is any one trait the only thing notable about anyone.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
I think that by aknowledging their sexuality openly, the candidates are pandering to a certain political base. There are alot of gay/lesbian people in the Tampa Bay area who would probably vote for someone simply because they knew they were gay. It’s probably the reason you will see Kevin Beckner on a float in St. Pete’s pride parade this weekend. It’s all politics, the one with the most votes wins. But, i guess on the same token, there are alot of other people in Tampa Bay that would NOT vote for someone simply because that person is gay. I think it’s great that Kevin Beckner is “openly gay”. Especially in light of the fact that his opponent, Brian Blair is such an “openly homophobic” person.
As far as the media constantly referring to the candidate as “openly gay”, it seems a bit sensational and somewhat offensive. It’s not like they would ever utter the phrases “openly jewish” candidate or “white protestant” candidate. But, with homosexuality such a hot button issues in politics these days, i can see why some choose to print it.