One of about a thousand gags that left me weak with laughter in “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” went a little something like this:
You know how I know that you’re gay?
How?
You like the movie “Maid in Manhattan.”
You know how I know you’re gay?
How?
I saw you make a spinach dip in a loaf of sourdough bread once.
If GLAAD gets its way, movies may not have those kind of quips much longer.
The trailer for the upcoming comedy “The Dilemma” features Vince Vaughn’s character saying the following:
“Electric cars … are gay. Well, not homosexual gay, but ‘my parents are chaperoning the dance’ gay.”
Or, should we say, “featured.”
Universal yanked the trailer once GLAAD and other folks, like CNN’s Anderson Cooper, spoke out about the sequence.
(Cooper, who said of the incident that words can be weapons, is the same news anchor who belittled the most organic political uprising in decades by calling its members “Tea baggers.”)
The cultural moment comes in the wake of several suicides of young gay males, making an already toxic situation a heartbreaking one.
Vaughn issued a carefully parsed statement regarding the controversy:
“Let me add my voice of support to the people outraged by the bullying and persecution of people for their differences, whatever those differences may be. Comedy and joking about our differences breaks tension and brings us together. Drawing dividing lines over what we can and cannot joke about does exactly that; it divides us. Most importantly, where does it stop?”
WWTW leans right on most issues, but has no beef with, to quote ex-Gov. James McGreevey, “Gay Americans.” The fact that some young, confused gay people consider suicide rather than face a world where they’ll be assaulted for their sexual desires is a stain on our culture, nothing less.
Yet it feels like this “Dilemma” not only provides no new answers but clamps down on creative expression.
We don’t know the context of Vaughn’s statement within the film. Maybe his character is a lout, or just someone who speaks first and thinks a half hour later. Or maybe he’s the guy who tells off-color jokes 24/7 but you’d trust him with your life in a heartbeat all the same because his heart is pure and good.
Does it really matter?
Howard Stern taunts gays and the gay lifestyle endlessly on his radio show, but regular listeners know he’s one of the most pro-gay voices in the media.
Our culture tends to use moments like this to curb speech, to set up new language restrictions and, ultimately, to start facile conversations about big issues without ever offering real solutions. What if a Muslim group demanded action for a joke involving a Islamic terrorist? Or a Christian group raised heck over a faith-based character played for cruel laughs (See “Easy A” for a real-life example of the latter)?
Yes, we’d only be losing a few jokes if “The Dilemma” example spreads. But it will set an uncomfortable precedent that won’t go unnoticed by those seeking to further clamp down on free expression.
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 27 comments… read them below or add one }
I am of the opinion that everything is fair game, a la South Park.
It is, Shane … but it’s also complicated. I wouldn’t want to see a movie hero slamming a minority group with a vicious slur without the kind of context that lets us know he’s in the wrong. I think public outrage and a common culture prevents that from happening. But the instance that started this all here hardly qualifies.
Looks like Vince Vaughn and Geert Wilders have something in common after all (although Vaughn certainly has it better, SO FAR).
Just throw in Adam Lambert as the common link, and it all becomes crystal clear.
I’m getting really sick and tired of all the lefty complaining about gays getting bullied in school. Like you, Christian, I have no problem with homosexuality, but kids get bullied for all kinds of reasons, and always have. I was an overweight kid, and I got bullied relentlessly.
Straight kids have been driven to suicide by bullying, too, because they were too short, too fat, wore glasses, whatever. (Where were Anderson Cooper and all the other “anti-bullying” media elites then, I wonder.)
And you’re right, if we start stifling free speech just because we’re afraid of offending someone, where does it stop?
I’m getting really sick and tired of all the lefty complaining about gays getting bullied in school.
It’s got nothing to do specifically with gays getting bullied. This is just political special interest tactic 2-a. Find a specific case where one of your victim class is victimized then use the power of the sympathetic leftist media to blow up a sand grain to make it look the size of Mount Whitney.
Of course, it only works if your victim class operates as a wing of the Democratic party. I guess you remember all the massive media attention in the instance three years ago of the white couple who were attacked, raped and tortured by a gang of black thugs? Yeah, me neither.
If the line read “electric cars are so ‘Negro’” or “electric cars are so ‘Jew’” — not Negro Negro as in a race but Negro as in being violent and lawless, or not Jew Jew as in a religion, but Jew as in cheap, would we even be discussing it here? “It’s so gay!” is a smirky term that has been in use for several years to smear gays without actually being anti-gay — a cowardly put down describing something lame. And that implies that gays must be lame as well. I saw the trailer in question. I was shocked that the phrase was being use in a preview as a way of attracking viewers — but then again I wasn’t shocked that it was being said by Vince Vaughn, a creepy, untalented actor who has made a career out of vulgar, tasteless humor. I was surprised it was used in a promo for a movie by Ron Howard, a liberal who I thought had better taste. But just because the source of the slur is from a supposely gay-friendly individual doesn’t make it less insulting.
To defend this hateful put down, to defend it as a priceless example of freedom of speech is insulting as well. “How dare those homosexuals deny us the right to slur them with their own words.” “It’s only a joke” is the lamest excuse possible for defending an insult.
One more question: If the line read “Electric cars are so ‘republican!” or “so ‘American!’” would we be speaking out in defense or ranting in anger?
Does anyone wonder why GLAAD and Anderson Cooper thought it necessary to denounce a movie trailer, that’s right a trailer, and not the Islamic nutjobs who threatened Adam Lambert?
As for this film, It can’t pay for this kind of press, which almost makes me wonder if it wasn’t all some kind of sick media scheme.
This is pure nonsense, but considering those involved, I can’t say I’m surprised. Fun fact for GLAAD, Cooper and any other liberal nitwits: freedom of speech exists in this country, which means someone can say something offensive and by-and-large we all have to tolerate it. Eesh, bullying is one thing, but a joke in a movie trailer? Aren’t there important matters to deal with instead? And if GLAAD and Cooper are so concerned about the gay community, why don’t they pressure Obama to accept gay marriage?
I also wanna take issue with the cited “gays being bullied and driven to suicide” line of thought. Look, my heart goes out to anyone that felt they had no option but suicide, but the gay kids that have done it are not the only ones. As others have noted, plenty of people of any distinction have felt so kicked around that they feel they have no other choice but to end it all. It’s so horrific to contemplate what drives someone to do that. “Bullying” seems like such a mere word when you really think about it. Still, why do people only talk about this stuff when the victim happens to be gay? Granted, GLAAD has made its mission statement clear, but what about media chumps like Cooper? Focusing on the victim’s sexual orientation denigrates everyone of any distinction – the straight by refusing to acknowledge the horrible problems *anyone* can go through, and the gays by focusing on one aspect of their life as if that was all there was to them. One of my best friends is gay, and she always likes to say, “I don’t believe in labels. I’m just me. Me liking girls is just one part of me.”
For over a decade the word “gay” in the pop/youth culture has meant “defective, no good, sh*tty’. A kid who uses the word “gay” to demean someone or something (like a car) today has no clue that it once meant homosexual.
The fact that some young, confused gay people consider suicide rather than face a world where they’ll be assaulted for their sexual desires is a stain on our culture, nothing less.
I agree, but I disagree with your insinuated connection to the social conservatives being the cause of this. Back when it wasn’t socially acceptable but legally prosecutable I would have agreed with you, but now there is a more christian approach to gays (phels is a freak) Many (most) people think it’s wrong in general, but in specific they really don’t care.
The pain, _I_ think is in that we have spent the last 60 or so years removing motivation for constance and life and meaning in the world. The philosophies of the world are so deconstructive, that a gay person might find more comfort in becoming a romeo or a juliet, after their “forbidden” love is discovered. Rather than actually trying to face their issues they run to the socially described action because the deconstructionalists have managed to convince them that they CAN’T talk to their parents, they CAN’T talk to their friends.
I’ve done a LOT of things that my family hasn’t approved of, in fact a GREAT DEAL of them but society never told me that I couldn’t talk to them about it once it was discovered. When I was young sometimes I cried, sometimes I was defiant, but I never thought that suicide was the answer. Maybe it’s me, but I think it is the social stygma placed on gays by “gay advocates,” who are enforcing a specific moral code upon gays requiring advocacy and “pride.”
Gay Advocates don’t say, “don’t worry, people love you.” they say “GET YOUR ASS ON OPRAH! YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY!”
Nothing says neglect like telling someone that everyone hates them, while at the same time telling them they need to go out and subject themselves to more hatred (at least as described by the “activists”) to get “closure.” I think the gay activist community, and the gay support community is more responsible for the “atmosphere” than anything I say, and I use a lot of slurs for a lot of things. It’s not conservative christians (phelps is a freak) it’s the victim mentality. These individuals think that they will always be victims, because that is what their activists tell them.
As for Vaughn, I don’t think I have ever seen or read an interview with him where he talked about anything other than the project he was working on or promoting, so to take crap out on Vaughn sounds like a very bad pitch call.
I know that the studio said that they would pull the trailer, but this weekend waiting for our movie, there was the trailer with the joke in it big as life. I was kind of surprised after all the hullabaloo, and don’t know if it was an error or what.
I can’t speak for Toto, but I don’t see any insinuation against social conservatives in what he wrote.
Lines like that are in movies and TV shows virtually every week, and get little more than resigned sighs from most conservatives.
Should Katy Perry’s song “You’re So Gay” also be censored from the airwaves? Hmmmmm…
This is hardly a new development. When I was in high school in the late ’80s, it was totally standard usage among kids my age to say, e.g., “It was totally gay of Mrs. Jenkins to give us a pop quiz the day after Thanksgiving Weekend.” And yet absolutely everyone was fully aware of the fact that it also signified “homosexual.”
Anyway, speaking as a homo who’s about to turn 39, I would observe that the use of “gay” as an informal yet polite term for homosexuals was truly cutting edge back in the early ’70s, when I was in diapers. And the very idea that homosexuals had a RIGHT (in their capacity as citizens, taxpayers, and consumers) to insist on elementary courtesy from politicians, police, and mass media was a shocking novelty to a lot of people. So, make no mistake — the adoption and promotion of the term “gay” was, in its time, a really significant improvement.
HOWEVER, that was four decades ago, and perhaps it’s time for homosexuals to consider that the word “gay” has exceeded its useful shelf life, and should be allowed to go gradually out of style, just as the once-polite terms “colored person” and “Oriental” did. As to what might replace it — well, I get the impression that a lot of college kids and 20-somethings now gravitate towards “queer,” although my personal preference is the bluntly un-euphemistic “homosexual,” or just “homo.”
It made a lasting impression on me as a closeted teenager watching Total Recall when the technician at the memory-implant service is walking Arnold Schwarzenegger through the registration form and asks “Is your romantic preference hetero or homo?” in the bland matter-of-fact tone with which one would pose the question “What is your blood type?” And Arnie responds “Hetero” in the same nonchalant way, without taking the slightest offense at the fact that the attractive female technician had presented “hetero” and “homo” as equally probable choices.
Of course, the other thing from Total Recall that left an indelible impression was the (uncredited) cameo by Eccentrica Gallumbits — and I don’t even like boobs in THAT way!
***For over a decade the word “gay” in the pop/youth culture has meant “defective, no good, sh*tty’. A kid who uses the word “gay” to demean someone or something (like a car) today has no clue that it once meant homosexual.***
And before “gay” meant homosexual, it meant happy. The fact that a group of people co-opted a word that in itself had been co-opted shouldn’t shock or upset anyone at this point.
I don’t seem to recall “Piss Christ” being censored. Hmmm. Double standards taste so much better when you’re applying them rather than having them applied to you.
–One more question: If the line read “Electric cars are so ‘republican!” or “so ‘American!’” would we be speaking out in defense or ranting in anger?–
Lines like that are in movies and TV shows virtually every week, and get little more than resigned sighs from most conservatives.
So, shouldn’t we sympathize and support another group who gets mad and fights back? Instead, what do we give them? “Who cares? We must defend our fundamental right to offensive language and gays should just suffer in silence so that bigots wouldn’t have to act politely?” That’s conservatism? Here is an example of liberals acting in a bigotted and hypocrital manner and we side with them.
Should Katy Perry’s song “You’re So Gay” also be censored from the airwaves? Hmmmmm…
Yes, but only because it’s an incredibly bad song.
Does this mean that Vince Vaughn might finally be understanding the conservative view that the need for liberty without interference or limits from the government and/or political correctness is good?
I hope the entertainers who aren’t to far gone recognize what is going on here. Their left leaning policies are coming back to bite them. We have become so politically correct we can’t with stand a joke. How will we ever with stand what the world throws at us.
Merwyn, do you truly believe that the line spoken by Vince Vaughn was meant to be malicious? Your comments use words like “hate”, “attack”, “smear”, and “bigot” – which seem somewhat over the top in the circumstances.
@verbatim
Perhaps Vaughan is seeing the conservative light, and he wouldn’t be the first. Despite their claims to the contrary, Modern liberals (a.k.a Progressives) demand that all people should blindly follow their agenda…or else.
Even Black liberals are not immune to this backlash. For example, the secular Black college Morehouse University began a new dress code requiring all male students to dress in business suits.
Almost instantly, the Homosexual mafia attacked Morehouse for being “homophobic” because the dress code eliminates crossdressing along with do rags and sagging pants. PC Black magazines like VIBE have leaped in the fray to prove their “pro-gay” and to heck with Black pride:
http://www.vibe.com/content/mean-girls-morehouse
The irony is that Black homosexuals like blogger Sandra Rose LOVE the dress code because they’re sick of Black men dressing like clowns:
http://sandrarose.com/2009/10/morehouse-under-fire-for-asking-black-men-to-be-men/
So, Toto is right that the Homosexual Mafia is more interested in stamping out the First Amendment than promoting real equality and freedom.
Everyone,
Here is a story that shows how standing your ground against homosexual activists and other liberals is worth it.
Just Cookies, a bakery in Indianapolis, was targeted by liberal college students for declining to support a pro-gay campus event. The bakery’s owners refused to cave causing more pro-gay protests.
Ironically, all this hubbub has caused Just Cookies to attract more customers and thus booming cookie sales.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1209930
So, Mr. Vaughan, keep standing your ground instead of letting the liberals try to force you to conform. Just Cookies is proof that standing for your principles attracts a lot of surprising support.
jic
– Merwyn, do you truly believe that the line spoken by Vince Vaughn was meant to be malicious? Your comments use words like “hate”, “attack”, “smear”, and “bigot” – which seem somewhat over the top in the circumstances. —
The phrase “That’s so gay” is meant to be demeaning. It takes a word meant to identify one group and places another meaning on it. Lame means gay, therefore gays are lame. I don’t think Vince Vaughn saw it as insulting because he is not meant to be a butt of the joke. Had the line read “Electric cars are so Vince Vaugh — not hilarious, successful movie star Vince Vaughn, but untalented, insensitive hack Vince Vaughn.” I doubt Vaughn would have found it amusing; most likely he would have demanded a rewrite or most likely stormed off the set. It’s amazing how quickly our defense of the constitutional right to be offensive disappears when we are the target. In the movie, calling electric cars “gay” just isn’t funny, unless you hate homosexuals. I am saddened to see so many using this as an issue to defend “freedom of speech;” what a cowardly way to hide one’s bigotry.
I don’t think this is a freedom of speech issue at the moment – as far as I know, nobody is talking about making this a legal issue. GLAAD is entitled to condemn anything they want, no matter how penny-ante it might seem to anyone else. I think what they have to consider is whether or not this is really the hill they want to die on. Once you convince people that you are humorless, petty and hypersensitive they just stop taking you seriously, and you lose any influence you may have.
Christian, I must commend you on writing on such a hot button subject! Bravo!
As a redhead I’m truly offended when people use the phrase “beat her like a redheaded stepchild.” Why does a redhead deserve to be beat? Or is it because she is a stepchild?
I’m kidding, of course. I think we all just need to chill and we should laugh at ourselves once in awhile – whether we are gay, straight, conservative, liberal, or redheaded.
It seems to me that our society is taking itself way to seriously these days and quite frankly I’d rather laugh than have to constantly be offended.