This morning, KERA ran an NPR story on the impending gay and lesbian genocide. Before the story they ran the warning that the following story had adult content.
Adult content?
There was no adult content in the story other than the mention of gay and lesbian. Did they run that disclaimer when they did stories on the Rwandan genocide? Do they run that warning in the Darfur genocide?
No. Absolutely not?
Why not?
Because NPR does not see gay and lesbian Ugandans as the victims of bigotry, hatred, ignorance. By warning us before the story, they are implying sexual orientation is a choice.
17 Comments
I heard this story as well, and I think it was because at one point someone referred to “anal sex” I believe that if that was not mentioned, perhaps the disclaimer would not have been used….
As a Ugandan, I know people in the West are quick to berate and undermine anything African…as barbaric or primitive. The West presents its culture as universal–using terms as human rights, universal freedom, global war on terror etc….The assumption is that other societies can only become civilized if they abandon their cultures and embrace the Western ethos. Behind this agenda there is race, racism and racialism….this is intended to subjugate non Western peoples.
On surface, it appears to be just homosexuality but there is a deeper meaning…a cultural and racial war. That’s why the more gay activists (most of them are Westerners) make noise, the more agitated we Africans will become. And this will lead to the total annihilation of gays in Africa ( you can also add Middle East and Asia).
Have you ever heard Europeans or Americans condemn Saudi Arabia or Asian countries for their laws against homosexuality? ( they are even more harsh). Why do Western countries specifically point out African countries? Why is the West so obsessed with homosexuality in Africa yet we have more pressing problems like lack of education, clean water, poor health, poverty etc… This is pure RACISM with a colonial mentality. Why care about homosexuality so much but ignore the welfare of the people?
Kelly I think you’re right. You can’t talk the legislation without mentioning that a large portion of the discussion is about “anal sex.” Disclaimer needed.
I would imagine that NPR is just protecting themselves. I don’t think mentioning anal sex is overly explicit. i mean sex is sex. Ultimately, I think we have bigger fish to fry then to be arguing with NPR. Though, you never know sometimes the little things stir up trouble.
I must have been already furiously typing when that reference was used. That reference was totally gratuitous, however.
By using it, NPR was consciously bringing the discussion around to sex rather than genocide. And this law applies to lesbians as well. What does anal sex have to do with lesbians? And why bring the discussion around to sex?
Because that makes stupid, bigoted or unaware people think, “Oh, yeah, maybe we should get rid of them. Maybe this law isn’t so bad.”
This is a law, promoted by evangelical crap like Rick Warren. After promoting the bill, promoting its author, he then backs away from the murder part of the law. Too little. Too late. If the tactic was to make us so relieved that mass murder of the LGBT community would be commuted to life prison sentences, I hope that backfires on this bigoted piece of scum. If one single gay or lesbian person is attacked, Rick Warren should be arrested and tried as an accessory to the crime.
By separating this genocide from other genocides, by warning people about listening to this story, NPR did what Germany did after World War 2. Other groups were set free from the concentration camps, but gay men were re-arrested to serve out their prison terms.
This law is an international human rights atrocity. The author of it should be arrested and tried in the Hague. NPR should not be warning people about anything other than the violence and they don’t warn people when they’re reporting on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and those stories also involve violence. They were warning people about those icky gays.
The reason I bring up coverage on NPR is because if NPR is not on our side, imagine the coverage on Fox. Right now, all we have is Rachel Maddow, The Daily Show and the gay press.
It IS important how NPR covers the story if we want to influence the Obama administration to step in and stop this.
Are you kidding me? Your headline is misleading, to say the least, and damaging to a news organization that is generally an ally of the gay community. NPR makes a minor “adult content” warning before a story that mentions anal sex, and from that you draw the conclusion they are complicit in Ugandan homosexual genocide? Shame on you. Did you even listen to the story first? Or did you run to write this blog the minute you heard th adult content warning? Because DallasVoice via Twitter had your sensational headline posted almost at the same time NPR finished the story. You certainly got attention, if that’s what you’re after, but it was attention for a lie, in terms of your headline.
NPR did in-depth coverage of this horrific story with reporters in the field interviewing some of the Ugandan people fighting it. It was more and better information than any other news outlet has provided. “The Family,” a fundamental Christian organization that is heavily involved in our government (among other things, they run the annual National Prayer Breakfast that every sitting president has attended since its inception), is allegedly supporting this and there are many elected officials and former-elected officials in our government who support The Family. In other words, our country has elected people who may be materially supporting this. Yet of everything covered in the NPR news piece, you choose to nitpick about an adult content warning? And post a headline defaming people who are on our side. Have you ever heard the phrase “can’t see the forest for the trees?”
David, go listen to the story for crying out loud. NPR did not toss in “anal sex” gratuitously. It came up in the course of an interview with one of the Ugandan people they were interviewing. How can you say it isn’t about sex? Fear and loathing of homosexual acts is a large part of the basis for the proposed legislation. You are reaching here and posting libelous content without being properly informed. I’m sorry, but I don’t think many of us see it the way you do. It never occurred to me to become incensed over an adult content warning. Really. The story itself was very well-done, informative, and brought home the horror of the situation.
I was listening to the last part of this story (missed the disclaimer at the beginning) with my toddler in the car and thinking about what she was going to hear and repeat, and whether I should change the station. (I decided not to.) Right at the end, the reporter asked the guy, “You’ll talk to me about anal sex, but not your budget??” And the reporter and the guy kind of laughed, while I kind of cringed. When I get a note from the school this afternoon about how my kid was saying “anal sex” on the playground, we’ll know the disclaimer was appropriate.
Anal sex aside, graphic stories about the war in Iraq or genocides or other violent acts ARE “adult content” as far as many parents are concerned. And I am 90% sure that I’ve heard NPR give disclaimers on other stories that referenced other heinously violent issues or were about straight sex. However, I’ve NEVER heard a disclaimer on an NPR story that involved GLBT issues without any reference to graphic violence or sex. If you can find one, let me know. And I’ll probably stop listening to NPR altogether.
We have good reason to be angry after hearing the story on NPR, but let’s direct it at the people committing or encouraging the atrocities, not the reporters who are raising awareness of the atrocities. That’s a good thing. We want to promote discussion, not scare people away from talking about LGBT issues because they’re afraid they might use the wrong words.
Fave, I completely agree. That part of the story doesn’t belong there. The story is about a legislative attempt to begin a genocide. The sexual reference detracted from the story, was gratuitous and inappropriate. We’re talking about murder. So if you tuned in late, the disclaimer was useless and the line offensive and story of the impending genocide got lost.
The comments by Olal, Ugandan, are quite disturbing. Not b/c he accuses “us westerners” of disparaging African culture, but b/c he has apparently not read much of the fine literature that came out of Africa during the 1960s-1970s struggles for liberation.
He should go back, for example, to the works of Chinua Achebe, an activist whose wonderful novels show the men as totally dominant, the women and children as totally subservient.
Maybe he thinks that is a good model, but I think it is cruel — and absurd.
Note to Olal:
One African country has a more enlightened policy on LGBT rights that the US and that is South Africa. They legalized same-sex marriage in 2006.
Countries outside Africa that continue down the road to barbarism include Iran who has 10 men awaiting execution for being gay. The point is that the pending bill in Uganda marks a step backwards from the tide of history. More to the point, the law seems designed to justify a potential bloodbath.
Once again, really? The entire message of this well-told news story was lost because of an adult content disclaimer at the beginning and a reference to anal sex near the end? Even though the reporter mentioned discussion of anal sex with the person she was interviewing in order to drive home a point regarding the level of fear among Ugandans trying to fight this?
But you’ve already admitted you were busily typing your blog the minute the adult content warning was made and that you missed the reference to anal sex as a result. Then, even though you didn’t hear it, much less hear it in context, you state it was gratuitous immediately thereafter:
“I must have been already furiously typing when that reference was used. That reference was totally gratuitous, however. ”
So your subject line, your entire blog, and your opinion it was gratuitous is based on a story you admit you didn’t even listen to.
This type of grabbing at straws is one of the reasons we don’t have more support. We are so quick to not only take offense, but to hunt for reasons that don’t exist. As Fave pointed out, NPR is trying to raise awareness of the situation, and they do make such disclaimers at the beginning of other similar stories.
I know blogs are supposed to be opinions, but I at least expect an opinion to be based on something the blogger actually experienced. The only opinion I’m reading here is that you are so offended by an adult content warning in relation to a gay news story that you can’t even listen to the story first before you blog about it.
Texbard: I can say it isn’t about sex just the way the Holocaust was not about religion. It’s about hatred and bigotry of anyone who is different than you are. Religion, sexual orientation. Those are excuses. It’s about hatred. And stupidity. And cruelty. And blaming another group for your country’s problems.
This law is about genocide and murder and human rights. It’s about scum like Rick Warren supporting this legislation. It’s about the Obama administration not speaking out until just this week against this legislation. I did listen to the piece. Several times. I’m sure it was an editing decision to leave in the line about sex. I think it was a poor decision that distracts and gives those who hate us ammunition. And for the record, most people here in the Dallas Voice office agree with you.
I’m with David Taffet. It is about the hatred and bigotry of and on the other, on him, on you. As someone who has worked at KERA Radio in Dallas, the station that carries NPR News programming, I would have edited out anything that distracted from the sober and consequential importance of this brewing crime against Humanity. David is also correct in shaming most of the corporate media. Rachel and a few others, including my radio show, and NPR News most of the time, are doing what we can to focus the proper attention on this brewing crime but where is Chris Matthews, Kieth, Ed, NBC News, ABC……?. Body parts and sex acts are not relevant in covering the planing of state genocide. Genocide is a crime against Humanity and should be covered by all news media.
Stay in there David, I’m with you on this one.
This is a response to Olal, Uganda.
Of course there is a racial perspective. There is also a geographical one and a cultural one. I am motivated to comment by guilt. Personal guilt and guilt by association. I have not done enough to combat cruelty, to protest against unnecessary harm done as a result of deliberate institutional and personal prejudice.
I did not protest sufficiently against apartheid. I did put enough effort into fighting against the racism in the country of my birth. People like me stood by as people have been arrested and imprisoned without due process.
People as a result of prejudice, as a result of fear, as a result of greed, harm others and as the suffering they cause is not justified they are undeniably cruel. Such cruelty will be judged as bad, as evil, by most people who are genuinely moved by Christian, Islamic, human ideals.
Human rights were invented as a means of protecting the individual against the power of the mob, whether the mob acts legitimately, within the legal framework of a country or illegally.
Ugandans enacting this bill will be enshrining cruelty, murder, blackmail and corruption and will be making them goals to be pursued. All right thinking people, all of us who have common ancestory, all of us who if we go back far enough are African, all of us should protest.
This was written in 1945 after the events in Nazi Germany:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out–
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out–
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out–
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out–
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me–
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
.
Dave, thank you for your response. I’m an admitted NPR-phile and believe they are our best hope for positive and accurate national news outlet coverage of LGBT issues. My reaction came from a place of not wanting to attack one of the few allies we have, especially one that I’m pretty sure had no intent in defaming the LGBT community in its coverage of the story.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this. I understand and agree it’s about hate, but religion and/or a societal taboo label placed on sex/homosexual sex or those different in general is the basis for the hatred, so I think they go hand-in-hand. And I think to understand the hatred and be able to fight it, you have to understand what causes it. In that way I don’t think the reference was inappropriate.
I do think you have started an interesting discussion of the story itself, one that needs much broader exposure. Unfortunately most of the news outlets would rather feature Tiger Woods or the Kardashians as lead stories. As one of my friends put it, news to day is not news, it’s infotainment.