Those who can, do. Those who can’t just whine (and whine, and whine)

Just amazing to me.  It never ceases to be disappointing and infuriating when I see something like this.

Ryan James Yezak put together a video project about the Gay Rights Movement, and in record breaking time, the self-appointed paragons of virtue and “citizen journalists” (gag me) have lined up to announce that it’s too white, not enough this, not enough that (fill in the blank).  Pam Spaulding’s backhanded compliment was so full of knuckles that it’s rendered completely moot and more of her attempting to be nice than actually giving a crap about being supportive.

Aside from clips of Ellen DeGeneres talking about the murder of Lawrence King (and a blink-of-an-eye clip of her coming out on her sitcom), you’d think lesbians are practically non-existent in the movement. And it’s definitely “gay rights” only – don’t expect anything related to trans folk here either. If gays and lesbians are second-class citizens, you have to wonder what society considers transgender citizens if we render them invisible from the movement (as bis already are).

And people of color? Well, aside from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (an opportunity to show gay activist and organizer of the March on Washington, from which the clip is taken, Bayard Rustin, was missed), one unmistakable landmark event in gay rights history is Lawrence v. Texas, which revolved around an interracial couple, John Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner. Not in the clips. Note: if Dan Choi hadn’t been in the DADT-related clips, then the vid would have been a complete whitewash. It’s kind of sad.

But my point is that editorial decision making is subjective in any film or documentary, and this particular slice of the cinematic pie probably represents the general audience’s perceptions of the movement and what it looks like as well. Will that ever organically evolve into broader vision of the movement? I hope so.

With that, I hope to see more from the talented Yezak.

Further fueling this lack of support is LGBT POV and Karen Ocamb (who’s never met a 5000 word article she couldn’t write) and she’s decided that Yezak’s documentary has stirred a “controversy” and cites Spaulding as an “important blogger” who’s got a quibble.  Well, which is it?  An utterly prefabricated controversy, or is it a quibble?

There does not appear to be the same concern over fundraising as Lucas expressed. Ironically, it is the lack of image of people of color and transgender people that is of concern to some – including important blogger Pam Spaulding. In her Pam’s House Blend post on Firedoglake, Pam first praises the “powerful compilation of historical events” as “well done, and emotional.” Her “quibble” is with how Yezak’s editorial selection of images represent “the status quo thinking about the movement – it’s largely about gay white men.”

And, last but not least is John Aravosis, who’s never one to back down from an attempt to bitch about something.  At all.  Ever.

There’s also the issue of the video including a lot of white guys and almost nobody black, Asian (one shot of Dan Choi), or female. I sometimes think the PC desire for inclusion can go too far, but in this case, there are women, for example, who have made a difference, who could have easily been included, such as Clinton HUD appointee Roberta Achtenberg, a number of the DADT women, or Elizabeth Birch during her time at HRC (I think there was even a quick shot of current HRC head Joe Solmonese, why not Birch too?). Or just some photos of lesbians getting married in California or elsewhere.

Here’s a question for these three film critics:  did any one of you think of calling Yezak up to talk to him about his film?  Or is your purpose as “citizen journalists” limited to sitting back and bitching about what’s not done rather than asking questions?  Hmmm…?

I’ll let Focus on the Rainbow close this post up for me.  I’m done with the bitch-and-moan crowd for today:

It never fails when someone tries to do something good there will always be someone to crawl out from under the dust ball infested carpet who will find fault and often from the LGBT Blogging World of The Elite.
Case in point the young and talented 23 year old filmmaker Ryan James Yezak who has put together a mini-documentary on YouTube using various clips from a multitude of sources showing some of the struggles of the LGBT community.
Before I get into the critic’s unhappiness let me first explain to the critic about selection of footage. In order to make a short documentary in which time is limited one must make an editorial decision as to what will go in and what will not in an effort of story telling. In order to make said documentary it is done to give a limited view of a given subject matter and not done to necessarily make the masses happy with inclusion or exclusion.

and (snipped)

Yes Pam it is kind of sad that even though you half-heartily give some praise to Yezak for his effort that is over shadowed by your discontent of what isn’t included in the documentary.
As I’ve written many times in the past in other editions of Focus On The Rainbow to critics of film makers, if you can do a better job then pony up and make your own. Until that time I say politely, STFU !

 

Related posts:

1. The whine heard around the world Ryan James Yezak made one (count 'em one) seven minute...
2. Comic Strip “Archie” Introduces It’s First Gay Character Archie, Betty, Veronica and Jughead have a new friend: Archie...
3. Zimbabwe Police Arrest Gay Rights Activists Two members of a Zimbabwean gay rights association are in...
4. You see a son getting berated for being gay in public by dad. Now what? I’m not an ABC fan by any stretch, but I...
5. Think being LGBT in the US is so bad? Move to Iran The IGLHRC’s full report on Iran is here. The next...