How The Times Undid Years Of Fighting Homophobia With One Single Article

[tweetmeme]

Last week the UK broadsheet  newpaper, The Times, featured an article called “The Day I Decided To Stop Being Gay“. Written by Patrick Muirhead the article saw Muirhead explain how 20 years after coming out he had discovered, after a trip to the barbers where he saw the immense love between a young boy and his dad, that he now wants to settle down with a woman and have a child.

Beginning by writing in what appears to be a light hearted manner Patrick explains that whilst he has been out for 20 years he was never truly convinced of his sexuality:

“never liked football or fighting and I do make a beautifully light Victoria sponge when the need arises. But I shamble like a bloke, I burp and fart without shame and I’ve never really got Barbra Streisand. “

Whilst likely to raise a smile with some,  the writing of Muirhead quickly appears to show glimpses of whay many of the commentors to the article see as internalised homophobia as he talks about the way gay partners see each other

“I wince when gays describe boyfriends as “husbands”, subverting a solemn institution created to provide stability for child-rearing”

and how he feels he has got little from relationships as a gay man saying:

“But two decades of cavorting with my own sex has delivered little that is memorable,”

Going on to say how two summers ago he met a stunning Ukrainian woman called Olga, Muirhead writes that nothing ended up happening in that particular relationship, but what did was an interest in attracting the opposite sex after years of wanting nothing but the attention of the same sex.

Using the rest of the article sees Muirhead questions what kind of husband he would make, as well it appears to justify to himself as much as the readers of the article that what he is feeling is acceptable, using the example of jazz singer and art critic George Melly, and how he at 30 suddenly stopped looking at the boys and started looking at the girls instead.

In terms of writing,  it’s not a badly written piece. In terms of content I personally find it very uncomfortable to read, and am hugely disappointed in The Times for firstly publishing it, and secondly for giving it such a sensationalist title.

And the reason why is down to the reputation The Times has in British society. Seen as a newspaper that is committed to well researched, well constructed articles, The Times has gained itself a position of trust in society. It is something that people will read and feel comfortable to quote from knowing, that unlike a more tabloid style paper such as the Daily Mail or The Sun, the content has been well thought out and not just another piece of sensationalistic reporting.

This article represents none of these elements. The title would be more at home in a tabloid. By giving it the title “The Day I Decided To Stop Being Gay”, The Times are effectively constructing homosexuality as a choice. And this is dangerous because it’s not just words.  The Times have acted to create themselves a powerful discourse that says people choose to be gay or straight. Now if this was a discourse constructed by a publication like the Daily Mail the impact would be less. People would read it and know it couldn’t trusted because this is from a paper that made up this or that rumour. Reading in The Times, a paper with a strong reputation, leads it to be immediately more acceptable. Something repeated and acceptable

And what makes it worse is there is no element to the article that acts to deny or challenge this discourse. Effectively this is an article about a man wanting to become a father more than a husband, yet the article is more constructed around the issue that gay people can go straight, and there is only one reason for that – an article saying homosexuality is a choice is going to spark much more debate than one which simply talks about a man wanting to become a dad.

The Times could have done so much to make this a stronger article. For example at no point in the article is the actual word bisexuality mentioned – a weak example using George Melly does not cut the mustard in my book – so on top of constructing homosexuality as a choice, the paper has also acted to construct bisexuality as not even being something that exists. In fact it has acted to construct bisexuals as people who can’t make up their mind, not as a sexual orientation in its own right.

Thank you The Times for making it that little bit harder for every gay, lesbian and bisexual person to be understood, and for doing your it for reinforcing all the false beliefs we’ve been fighting to reverse. I won’t be buying your newspaper again any time soon.