Levi Johnston is not a gay icon no matter what Joy Behar and Kathy Griffin say.
Why does this matter? It seems like a silly issue, but it is not. It is a very good example of how even our friends trivialize and diminish us in subtle but dangerous ways.
Here's a thought: if we can prove that a few black women want Levi to fuck their brains out, can we expect to see headlines calling Mr. Johnston an African American icon?
When Joy Behar interviewed Levi, she most certainly could have called him a running joke--but please, not a gay icon.
Freaks and freak shows are a grand old American tradition. From P.T. Barnum’s Side Show Freaks to Ripley’s Believe It Or Not, Freaks have played starring roles in American popular culture for as long as there has been a need for entertainment and newspaper promotion.
Following in the footsteps of Lobster Boy, General Tom Thumb and The Elephant Man, Levi Johnston has captured the popular imagination. But one of the tricks to preserving the fragile integrity of American culture is to recognize freaks as freaks and not catapult them to the status of icon.
So as the mainstream media circles the wagons around Levi as a gay icon, this gay icon must fight the inappropriate impulse to go postal.
I stupidly watched Joy Behar interview Levi Johnston.
Ms. Behar—who thinks of herself as a progressive and gay-friendly pushed Levi to discuss his feelings about having become a gay icon. Clearly, Ms. Behar, like most Americans is fast losing her command of the English language.
Let us start with the obvious: Judy Garland is a gay icon, Levi Johnston is not. Garland's suffering and struggles resonated and came to symbolize the suffering and struggles of every gay man in America. Even Madonna qualifies, having come to symbolize and celebrate sexual freedom and expression. Absolutely iconic.
Sure, Levi with his frat boy vibe is moderately sexy and when he sold his naked ass to Playgirl.com, he well knew that tens of gay men would be jerking off to his hockey beefy self once or even twice--but most would look, laugh at Sarah Palin and move on.
Of course, the best part of the Behar Johnston interview came when Johnston thought Behar was asking if he would do gay porn. Johnston admitted on national TV that he had been offered a role in gay porn, had seriously considered it but had finally declined in order to protect his long term image (which is why he wouldn’t show the Playgirl photographer his infamous Alaskan Salmon.
Image aside, Johnston was ready to go gay for pay. Good man. The ethics and morals of a true Christian.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Johnston is famous because he impregnated the unmarried teenage daughter of a fundamentalist Christian moron who could very well be the next President of the United States. That certainly qualifies Levi for mega-freak status: The hockey puck for a brain who fucked the President’s daughter.
But gay icon? Please stop calling him that. Save the dignity of gay icons from Garland to Dietrich to Streisand! Save the nearly shattered integrity of the English language!
In fact, let’s ask an English language icon to define icon.
According to Mr. Webster an icon can either be a representation or a concept of some sort (religion, philosophy, cultural phenomenon, tragic event, etc.), an object of uncritical devotion, an emblem or symbol.
In all fairness to he-who-hides-his-penis-and-won’t-let-another-man-suck-his-dick-on-video-because-he’s-protecting-his-credibility, Levi Johnston has achieved iconic status. He’s an icon representing the hypocrisy and the profound immorality of American Christianity. And while he may very well be an object of desire for some gay men who think a naked straight moron from Alaska is hot—and I do—he is no gay icon.
So one more time: Please stop calling Levi Johnston a gay icon. It demeans and trivializes gay iconography and queer culture. Adding Levi Johnston to a pantheon of gay icons that includes the Stonewall Inn, Oscar Wilde, Rock Hudson and Tina Turner is truly insulting and diminishes us all.
I agree, however I think he acquitted himself well in his answer to that question. It was neither pandering nor dismissive. When his 15 minutes are finally up I don't doubt that we'll get the full monty and the money shot.
Posted by: Alan down in Florida | Monday, 14 December 2009 at 11:47 AM