gay in hollywood
Sep. 27th, 2008 03:53 pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/fashion/28gay.html
Even when you're nobody (read: even when you're me), this is the sort of shit you have to think about all the time.
One thing it didn't cover, and I think is a common experience of gay women in entertainment, is that the beauty standard gets even higher. Androgyny that is sexy or provocative for a straight actress becomes an "ugly lesbian" concern. You have to be utterly, conventionally glamorous and completely non-threatening all the time. You don't get "quirky" wiggle room.
Even when you're nobody (read: even when you're me), this is the sort of shit you have to think about all the time.
One thing it didn't cover, and I think is a common experience of gay women in entertainment, is that the beauty standard gets even higher. Androgyny that is sexy or provocative for a straight actress becomes an "ugly lesbian" concern. You have to be utterly, conventionally glamorous and completely non-threatening all the time. You don't get "quirky" wiggle room.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-27 08:20 pm (UTC)Thanks for pointing us to this.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-28 06:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-28 01:39 am (UTC)Ugh, that's no good.
It just means you end up with a raft of some not-especially-memorable Pretty People.
May I friend you?
no subject
Date: 2008-09-28 02:05 pm (UTC)Er, rather. No, I odn't mind. Welcome.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-28 06:33 am (UTC)I'm just so happy that there are more GLBTQ roles today than there were 10 years ago. But, there's still a lot more ground to cover.