A gay music video porno - what more could you want?

A couple of weeks ago, artist Brendan MacLean made a fun, explicit music video about gay semiotics called 'House of Air'. It’s strangely poppy and upbeat all the while unrelentingly visually representing various kinks.

No question, it’s pornographic in nature. Though in a weirdly non-sexual way. The depiction of urophilia – that’s being peed on if you’re not up on the lingo – is done in such a matter of fact way I felt like I was in a sex education class. Well, if I’d ever had any meaningful lessons on sex education, anyway.  

MacLean has written an excellent article for the Guardian, which I heartily recommend. His link to the youtube video is now null and void as Youtube have removed the video this past week. I don’t think this is much of a surprise, it cites its rules on pornographic and sexual scenes and in all fairness, you don’t get more sexual than someone being shat on. (Apparently though, the poo wasn’t real)

What I don’t really get is the outrage. He's received multiple death threats over this. I honestly can't think of a bigger over reaction since Taylor Swift and Tom Hiddleston broke up. It was uploaded with the age explicit tag and no one has ever argued that it is inappropriate for children. It isn’t aimed at them. So the whole 'what about the children' argument doesn't really ring true. The video is a tongue in cheek look at an important issue – gay semiotics.

Especially back when the original essay - 'Gay Semiotics' - that the video is based on was produced, the need for a secret code for gay men was high. A way for communicating desires outside the mainstream and behind the back of an ignorant and regressive system of laws. It’s the same reason that the language polari was used as late as the sixities by British gay men to discuss their sexual urges.

Hal Fischer released the essay in 1977 with labelled pictures so that no one was confused. It is very breezy and to the point in its nature but incredibly important in documenting an integral part of the gay identity. The video by MacLean does a service to the community by ensuring that we do not forget the history of our community and the coping mechanism that were devised to survive in a less forgiving time.

Then again, the deep seated hatred that MacLean has been subjected to since releasing the video suggests that we’re not as forward thinking and open as we’d like to believe. I’ve already referenced the upbeat, friendly vibe of the music video and I imagine that this is the key reason that so many were up in arms. It is crystal clear that zero shame is present in the video, it is a celebration of semiotics and sex.

Regardless of the backlash that he’s received, he and his team should be proud of themselves – and I think they are. They’ve created a video which is fun and empowering. I’m under no illusion that I’m lucky to be alive and living in a city that is open and tolerant of my sexuality. However a pervasive heteronormativity often filters through and it’s wonderful to have videos like this that challenge that. A reminder that we do have our own culture and one that we should be proud of!

The video is here and I cannot recommend giving it a watch more. Probably wait until you’re home though if you’re at work, with kids or on public transport.  

Prejudice through ignorance is no excuse

We often see the level of prejudice and kindness of a person as interconnected. The received wisdom being that as the former increases, the later will decrease. We like to believe that we are friends with people that are free from bigoted views such as homophobia, sexism and racism. And ourselves, well we’re definitely beyond such low mindedness.

But are we? It’s a fact that stereotypes abound and that we’ve probably used at least one. The difference between calling the French moody and all immigrants workshy might seem stark but really they’re only different ends of the same spectrum. One that places generic feelings above all else. An angry man on Question Time, a couple of weeks ago, who seemed angry enough to storm the gates of the Bastille himself raged against facts because of the experiences he had seen and heard himself. I got uppity as I watched him, rolled my eyes in disbelief and tweeted my outrage at him. The irony that I was using him to reinforce my beliefs about angry old white men went right over my head for quite a while.

More than ever, people are dissenting from the voices of experts and looking for people that will speak their mind and be the voice of them – the people. Who doesn’t want to think that they’re part of the majority? And we all have public figures that we think take our views and distill them in a beautifully conveyed message that would be the envy of even Moses and his commandments.

Katie Hopkins is one of those people. And she expertly exemplifies that whole spectrum thing. Hopkins is a bit of a regular on This Morning, she’ll come on for a segment which is somehow hotly controversial but also pretty pointless and seem to divide the nation. Sometimes she does things akin to a stereotype about the French, probably tongue in cheek and harmless. Like that time when she got on the TV and was making ridiculous claims about not letting her children play with kids with certain names.

Now, most people watching that knew she was talking utter garbage. Children don’t choose their own names so how can it be an indication of their behaviour. And yet she was also theatrical and a little bit funny. It was such a low stakes debate that it didn’t really matter that she was being completely out of order. Plus, whilst she was pushing it to the absolute limits, the whole judgement on a name is not a new phenomenon. I’d definitely heard more than one snide, offhand comment from a teacher along the lines of ‘of course they’re called that’.

The problem is that when Hopkins has the legitimacy to go on and spout rubbish about names then she also has the legitimacy to talk about things far more dangerous than names. Like in December when she had a go at the NHS funding drugs that would prevent HIV. She acted innocent, asking for someone to explain why they were funding it when surely this was just an expensive way to increase other STI. It didn’t matter that none of that makes sense, that it’s documented that more routes for protection do not increase other infections. In black and white, it seemed to add to five so why on earth would it actually be equal to four?

Prejudice is being beaten down in our society in many different regards but it still seeps through in a few ways. Hopkins is an example of that, the frankness that she expounds allows her to bulldoze the rules against prejudice that generations before us have carefully created. This frankness is second only to one other emotion that trumps the normal protocol that protects against bigotry.

Fear and uncomfortableness is the one that reigns supreme in allowing people to indulge in deep rooted prejudices that sit in the back of our heads. It’s most clear in the horrible discrimination faced by Muslims who only want to live their lives but are targeted by people who have turned to hate through fear. These feelings of fear and uncomfortableness are often the catalyst for discrimination against people that are HIV positive.

Like I said in the beginning, people don’t fit into neat categories. Especially in regards to dealing with illnesses. It’s totally natural to be afraid of illness. Often in fear, we say and do things that we will later regret. No one thinks that they’re fighting for the cause that will be remembered as narrow minded and backward. Fear corrupts in a way even stronger than power because it doesn’t bend to anything remotely sensible. It relies on misinformation and darkness because in the shadows, insecurities can transform into massive monsters. Only too often fear of the illness will bleed over to people will the illness.

Compassion is always important. By understanding that most people are prejudiced through ignorance and fear, it’s easier to reach out and change opinions. It needs to be a two way street though. Ignorance makes people more comfortable in voicing opinions which don’t stand up to reason. I’ve heard people say without batting an eyelid that ‘they’re not prejudiced, they’re just uncomfortable’ being in the same gym as someone that was positive. This isn’t okay. It puts an irrational insecurity above the very real emotions of another person. We should be allowed to use the same gyms as you without feeling apologetic all the time. We have nothing to be ashamed about. The prejudice that exists in the air is impossible to absorb though so you spend a good amount of time questioning absolutes that you know to be true.

I remember drinking with a guy and explaining undetectable means untrasmittable. After I’d set out in detail that you could never get HIV from a person with an undetectable viral load he told me that whilst he knew that now, he suffered from hypochondriac so couldn’t possibly sleep with a positive individual. It was as if this somehow insulated him from his bigoted standpoint.

Holding views like this don’t make you a bad person but they are wrong. We need to challenge ourselves before we start preaching to others and the best way to do this is to confront our own prejudices and bigotry. By doing this we can break down stigma and get to a place where we can confront people’s prejudices without any blame being thrown about and reach a society where people are judged on their actions, not how they look or their disabilities. Once we’ve done that, we also must be ready to call out people for being prejudiced when they are. Even if they insist that they’re not really or that they have their own reasons. Bigotry is bigotry and whatever the reason its wrong. When we are able to admit that, we can save ourselves from the shackles of self hate it inevitably creates.