It appears the television network MSNBC is presenting the LGBT community a double edged sword this evening. Rachel Maddow openly lesbian political commentator is getting a prime time slot to air her progressive ideological viewpoint. This is great not only as a way for members of our community to be in the public spotlight but also to take on the neo-cons ie: Pat Buchanan and the like who are anti-gay.
Here is the problem...
"MSNBC loves the chatter of liberal pundit Rachel Maddow, but not her look. Maddow, who's getting her own show, is being subjected to a network makeover. A source says an entire "glam squad" has been hired for the openly gay Maddow, and she has been asked not to wear her Drew Carey-esque glasses again. There's even talk of "putting her in a skirt." We're sure that'll do the trick. A rep for the channel didn't return e-mails."(NY Post)
There has been speculation all over the place. Some are suggesting this is an attempt by the NY Post (owned by Rupert Murdoch of Fox News) to damage MSNBC. Politely message MSNBC making sure Rachel Maddow can present as she likes and let them clarify what their position is.
viewerservices@msnbc.com
MSNBC TV
One MSNBC Plaza
Secaucus, N.J. 07094
Posts
12 comments:
On one hand, this is ridiculous. Maddow IS gay, and putting her in frills isn't going to make her 'less gay' to the viewers. I don't think, anyway. On the other hand, all female newscasters are probably subjected to the same thing if their style isn't 'glam' enough for primetime. So not a gay thing, necessarily, but a woman thing, definitely. It's bullshit, but it happens, and I'd rather have Maddow's mind on TV, even in a skirt, than have her not get the exposure. Hopefully eventually she'll be powerful enough that she can choose her own wardrobe, until then, I'm assuming she's choosing to play the game and climb the ladder. I wish her luck.
I agree with Screaming Lemur, it is bullshit but I'd rather her get the exposure even if it is "straightening" her up for the "mainstream audience". So I can't get...very upset at it although I kinda want to :/ I just hope they're not gonna try to throw a wig on her and 20 lbs of make up like "Seee? She's a girl!"
You know what, I have Women's Studies in...about an hour. I wonder if I can somehow weasel this subject in...
I think we should consider the source. Anyone who watches Olbermann regularly has heard him debunk all kinds of NY Post stories about him. They seem to be fascinated with Keith-bashing so by default, it's probably started with his MSNBC protege Maddow as well. Or it could be an exaggeration. I'm sure they don't want her to appear on-air as she is the rest of the day, but all of that was probably worked out before she signed on for the show. She seems like a strong woman who knows who she is. And they need her more than she needs them. If she pierces her ears and starts wearing pearls, that's when it's time to panic!
T.R it definitely seems appropriate this is definitely a topic for gender/sexuality studies.
Shaijinx - I guess time will tell, like in 5 hours, when her show is supposed to start. I am curious if she will be all glitz and glamour.
saber - i agree she personally wouldn't make a fuss because this is her big shot.
I know a lot of people in my class probably won't have much of a clue what I'm talking about, but I'll definitely try to pose the issue one way or another. I don't know what kind of responses I'll get though, if any *shrug*
Looking at Ms. Maddow's photo above, I can see MSNBC's point. She looks *very* "dyke-y," and that will turn off some viewers. Ms. Maddow will be much more effective in her new role if she softens her look a little. But, as Ellen DeGeneres has demonstrated, a woman doesn't have to wear a skirt or heels to be likeable. In Ms. Maddow's case, I think it's more a matter of changing the hairstyle and losing the plaid.
A SKIRT!!!! HELLS NO!! But, I do like her
look without the glasses. She's cute :)
HUGS!!!!!!!!!!!!
It would be tragic to ruin a cute butch like that. She's fine the way she is (though maybe she'd be better off leaving the glasses off.) We have too many "newsmodels". I look forward to seeing how she looks--and what she discusses--tonight.
Rachel was asked about the Page Six blurb and debunked it: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/09/rachel_maddow_its_hilarious_th.html
Sorry, the URL for that last post didn't make it through completely. Let's try this: http://tinyurl.com/64cgm5
Post a Comment