Although I’m not sure whether adding oxygen to the controversy surrounding Bruno is actually going to help their cause, the Gay And Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) – America’s leading advocacy group for better depictions of gay people in the media – has come out against Bruno.
In an op-ed in the LA Times, Rashad Robinson, senior director of programs at GLAAD, argues that, “Even when filmmakers have the best of intentions, there can be a disconnect between the concept and the execution. In Bruno, the satire often loses sight of the way gay people are treated in real life.”
The organisation’s basic argument is that whatever the filmmaker’s intention, “The issue with Bruno is that the majority of its (mostly straight) audience will have to “deal with it” for only 90 minutes or so. But it’s gay people – day in and day out – who will be stuck dealing with the fallout from a film that ultimately affirms some of the attitudes it believes it is trying to demolish. It could come up in the form of jokes about gay parents at the office. Or gay teens taunted with the name “Bruno” in school hallways. Or in fanning the flames of anti-gay campaigns and laws, like California’s Proposition 8, pushed by those who exploit discomfort, and the “ewwww” factor, for political ends.”
The makers of Bruno had actually shown a rough cut of the film to GLAAD to get their response, however GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios told The Hollywood Reporter that the organisation had “shared a number of concerns, and unfortunately, the scenes that we had the biggest concerns about remained in the film” (such as the suggestion of Bruno having sex in front of his young son). Barrios added that ultimately, “the movie doesn’t decrease homophobia, but decreases the public’s comfort with gay people.”
In the UK, Stonewall, the British gay campaigning group, has said that it won’t be making a statement on Bruno. Whether GLAAD is right or not, Stonewall’s stance is probably more sensible than fanning the flames.