When JL King sat on Oprah’s couch and pretended as if he was doing all of us women a favor by ‘exposing’ the undercover world of men lusting and loving other men, he started a dialogue that could possibly be considered positive or self-serving. For starters, the phenomenon of men having sex with other men on the so-called ‘down low’ is nothing new. Those of you who are scratching your heads at the term ‘down low,’ the new meaning of ‘down low,’ and not the true heterosexual definition that R. Kelly made famous with Ronald Isley in song; is simply homosexual or bisexual men sleeping with the same sex but doing so ‘in the closest.’ Some of these men would have you believe that they are not gay/homo/bi/ sexual. They just like to get down with men on occasion. Then go back home to girlfriends, wives, significant others and the such. These men believe that just because they love to indulge in jump offs with men, that that does not mean they are gay.
It is not my opinion to tell other folks how to live their lives. However, this so-called ‘down low’ ridiculousness has got to be retired. It is so deceitful and manipulative. And add to that destructive and dangerous.
Hence, the true problem and solution to the question of why men loving men like to live under the cloak of secrecy is only magnified when the arena playing field is as wide and lucrative as the entertainment business. In his not quite tell-all, author Terrance Dean takes us into his world…the world of what you see is more than likely what you’d never expect. “Hiding In Hip Hop” is a truthful window into what it is like to be gay and in ‘deep cover’ within Hollywood and the music industry. I personally found Terrance’s own journey to become confident and secure in his sexuality a universal theme that runs throughout the book. What I would have really appreciated was more of the self-discovery process that Terrance subscribed to instead of trying to decipher if “Bruce” is Bill Cosby or not. Which I doubt.
Which brings me to another important issue that I feel compelled to address. “Hiding In Hip Hop”was marketed as a name dropping tell-all, who’s who of the entertainment industry’s closeted or denial driven gay community. This is not the case. You will find names. But the names are fictitious. The characters behind the names are not. Terrance goes to great lengths to give us bus loads of clues as to who is ‘suspect.’ But eventually, the fictitious names and the puzzle pieces that fit but don’t fit begins to wear thin. There comes a point when it becomes boring. Now I don’t believe in ‘outing’ nor do I approve of others who do so. I am not implying either that it would have been okay for Terrance Dean to ‘out’ his friends, business associates and paramours. But in this era where the media is constantly begging to be fed, to have a titillating book on shelves, claiming that there is meat where there truly isn’t, is to compromise an author’s integrity. Unless the primary goal is to sell, sell, sell. I mean, let’s face it. Karrine Stephens set a whole new bar.
I want to get into more about this so-called ‘down low’ cultural. I will do so in an upcoming commentary. But, you want to know if “Hiding In Hip Hop” is any good, right? I’ll give you this: If you can keep yourself from falling in the trap of trying to figure out every famously in the closet gay man that you come across in your reading, then I have to give Terrance Dean’s book a B+.
If you are looking for the dirt and dirty low down, and you love to sit for hours working on The New York Times crossword puzzles, I’ll give “Hiding In Hip Hop” an A+.
On the heels of Senator Hillary Clinton’s primary win in Kentucky late Tuesday, analysts and critics alike are suggesting that the win was a racist one.
In an independent exit poll taken yesterday, nearly half of all Kentucky voters polled admitted that they voted for Clinton solely on the basis that she is White. The same can be positively said for West Virginia voters as well. In 2008, racial progress and forward, progressive thinking has moved at a snail’s pace in the South.
But many political analysts believe that Clinton should reject these votes based on her own moral platform that repudiates discrimination of any kind. But at this stage in the political game, is this idea plausible? Being behind Barack Obama in desired delegate votes, is it reasonable to assume that consideration of such a matter makes sense?
The answer has to be no. The mere fact that Kentucky and West Virginia are primarily predominately white states, is no definitive reason for rejecting the votes of American citizens. It is the right of every American to exercise their voting privilege. Racist or otherwise. In fact, it has been said that the only reason African American voters are voting for Obama is because he is an African American. If African Americans are in fact voting for Obama based on the color of his skin, this would indeed be classified as a sad, sad moment in our collective history.
The same can be said for White Americans who are voting for Hillary simply because she is White. The focus of this campaign should be on the issues of health care, poverty, crime, education, employment, housing, GAS and the ‘so-called’ War on Terror. If voters aren’t focused on what is truly important, then what America will get is another four years of mediocre, lack luster leadership in the White House.
Who wants that?
Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama won the state of Oregon but lost Kentucky to Democratic rival Senator Hillary Clinton. To date, Barack Obama has accumulated 1,962 delegate votes to Clinton’s 1,777. In order to secure the Democratic nomination, both candidates will need to win 2,026 votes.
Political analysts conclude that even though Obama is in the lead and the apparent front runner, it is more than likely that he will not make the total numbers allotted. Therefore, the final decision on who will be the Democratic nominee for President will be decided in August.
But this has not slowed down Senator Hillary Clinton. Despite trailing Obama in delegate votes, Senator Clinton has made no indication that she will end her campaign. With the latest win of Kentucky under her belt, Clinton vows to continue to “fight” in her quest to become the first woman President of The United States.
Last week, there was a huge media blitz over legendary broadcast journalist and media mogul Barbara Walters’ memoir, “AUDITION.” A moving autobiography of a life fraught with emotional and career highs and lows, Barbara Walters candidly exposed details her private and public persona.
In “AUDITION,” Barbara Walters also exposed the truth about Star Jones. Barbara Walters wrote:
“Star, whose weight was becoming more and more of an issue, decided to take drastic measures. After consulting her doctors she decided to have gastric bypass surgery that would shrink her stomach and make overeating uncomfortable if not dangerous. We expected her, when she felt well, to talk about her procedure on the air…Star had even told me that she would discuss the whole operation and its aftermath with me on 20/20.”
But America remembers something totally opposite. Star never spoke about her drastic weight loss and her frightening shrinking appearance. And when she did, if you faithful “View” watchers recall, Star attributed her amazing weight loss to exercise and diet. Not to gastric bypass surgery. However, the public was not as stupid as Star would liked to have believed. Having watched the fab transformation of Al Roker and “American Idol” Randy Jackson from gastric bypass, the public knew the truth. Star Jones hadn’t miraculously lost weight by traditional Richard Simmons methods. Star had the surgery.
Did America care that Star had gastric bypass surgery? No. What infuriated the American public was the way Star Jones openly denied and lied about how her weight loss occurred. Later, she even wrote a book entitled “SHINE” where Star attributed positive thinking and affirmation to her weight loss success. We, the public knew otherwise.
Yet, “The View” co-hosts and Barbara Walters knew the truth. Even when Star reneged on her promise to discuss her weight loss on 20/20, Barbara Walters and the other co-hosts honored Star’s request, reluctantly so, not to discuss the surgery.
“Star said she didn’t want to become what she called ‘a poster child’ for the procedure and have to answer a lot of questions. I understood that, but it put us all in a terrible position. It meant we virtually had to lie for Star, especially when she said again and again on the air that her weight loss was due primarilyto portion control and pilates.”
In an un-necessary response to Barbara Walters’ recollection in her memoir, Star Jones released a statement to the press:
“It is a sad day when an icon like Barbara Walters, in the sunset of her life, is reduced to publicly branding herself as an adulterer…and speaking negatively against me for the sake of selling a book.”
Nowhere in this ridiculous press release did Star Jones refute the validity of Barbara Walters’ memory. Or claim. And guess what? She won’t. Star Jones made an ill-advised move when she decided to make a counter statement regarding Barbara Walters’ book. Being the “icon” that Star readily admits she is, Barbara Walters is more than able to make sure that Star never works in television again. How about that? Besides, there was no need addressing the public over a matter that everyone already viewed as fact. No one needed Barbara Walters to verify what we already knew: Star Jones felt insecure about her decision to have bariatric surgery. She worried that her decision would make her look like a failure.
This is the bulk of the situation right there.
So, instead of Star Jones taking pot shots at a woman that gave her career a major boost, what she needs to do is figure out how to regain the public’s trust and confidence. That is why her talk show didn’t succeed. No one was watching. No one cared.