JOHN THE OBSCURE ™
By John Ruch
© 2006
Dr. No (Gays): Bond, James Bond vs. Phobia,
Homophobia
Daniel
Craig, the blond, rugged star of “
The site’s license to kill has been validated by major publicity in the likes of “Entertainment Weekly’s” fall movie preview issue and CNN.com. As those sources say, the site criticizes Craig’s looks and physique.
What they don’t say is that the site is also virulently homophobic, attacking Craig for “gaying it up” in another role, where his kissing scene with another man supposedly requires an “airsickness bag” to watch.
The entire CraigNotBond.com site went down for “major improvements” less than 18 hours after I asked spokesperson Deanna Brayton about its anti-gay content. After initially promising to answer all questions, Brayton declined to make any comment about the homophobic content, and didn’t reply when asked if it will return on the updated version of the site. More than 10 days later, the site is still “under construction.”
“Queer Guy for a Straight Spy?” was the headline on a July 13 post on the original version of the site. It included a video clip, apparently from Craig’s 2004 film “Enduring Love,” in which Craig is kissed by another man.
“After you’ve fully unfolded your airsickness bags, have a look at the new Bond gaying it up for the camera,” read the accompanying text.
After obsessively—and incorrectly—describing it as a “deep passionate kiss,” the text continued by bashing Craig supporters who have likened him to Sean Connery, the definitive Bond: “Since we have no such video on file of the Great Scot gaying it up for the camera, we can safely say these momma’s boys have been drinking from the curb again!”
Pro-Craig sites are out there. According to an Aug. 16 CraigNotBond.com post, they’re run by “schoolboys of questionable sexuality.”
CraigNotBond.com also posted two articles from other sources—including the gay blog Towleroad.com—in which Craig is quoted as saying, “I was out recently and all these gay guys were all over me like a rash, but they never ask about the Bond plot.” While the Craig quote is ambiguous—“rash” is hardly flattering—it appears from the site’s context and the use of headlines like, “Craig: ‘I’m a Gay Icon’” that they were posted as further homophobic critique, as if being around gay men was a kind of guilt by association.
As a bonus, the site included a link to “Littler Britain,” itself a tribute to the controversial British TV comedy “Little Britain,” which has a reputation for playing to both gays and gay-bashers for its “only gay in the village” character.
It’s not surprising that Bondamentalists would be homophobes—being reactionary on one topic usually means being reactionary on everything. (And Bond movies are hardly known for progressive sexuality in any case.)
What is surprising is that “Entertainment Weekly” and CNN would give credence to such a site without mentioning its homophobic content, which was prominently placed on its front page. Apparently, in 2006, it’s still valid to funnel readers to an anti-gay site, as long as you simply don’t mention that’s what it is.
The irony here is that CraigNotBond.com’s agenda is keeping Brosnan as Bond. That’s the Brosnan who bisexualed it up in his acclaimed movie “The Matador,” and who in 2002 told the London Daily Mail, “I thought I was gay” as a teenager and spent several years in confusion before deciding he’s straight.
Brayton wouldn’t comment about that, either.
Instead, she promised the revamped CraigNotBond.com “will be exceptional.” But will it still be homophobic? It remains to be seen whether being questioned about its Bondophobic anti-gay rants will leave the site shaken and stirred, or if it will keep giving gays the Goldfinger.1
1 It turns out the site has
already returned under the new URL of DanielCraigIsNotBond.com. (The
original site remains down.) It still has the headline links to the anti-gay
material, but those pages—and only those pages—are not available. I was
informed of the site’s return the day after this column’s publication by Brayton, who, rather remarkably, accused me of “slander”
for what she read as my taking credit for the disappearance of the original
site. Regarding the homophobia, she commented: “As far as the site being
homophobic…get over it boys! Not even close! Personally, I don’t feel being
homosexual is right. However, our site is about the truth…not about Gay
people.” [Original spelling and punctuation; it was also delivered in red
type.]
I responded by asking Brayton whether the missing anti-gay material will return.
She replied, verbatim (blue type this time): “I guess you’ll just have to wait
and see! Get over it Guy! We could care less about your homosexual innuendo’s.
It has NOTHING to do with our goal or our site. It’s called *FREE SPEECH* and
if you don’t like it…too bad.”
I responded by noting that it is her
site, not mine, that introduced homosexuality into the discussion; I also asked
her to clarify whether she meant that she is unsure whether the material will
return, or is just declining to tell me for personal reasons.
Brayton
did not reply. She couldn’t. After issuing her last tirade, she had blocked my
e-mail address.
Meanwhile, Craig has been implicated
in another kiss in another homophobic CNN.com/Associated Press report. On Sept.
1, under the patently homophobic headline, “New Bond actor has ‘Infamous’ kiss
with man,” CNN.com ran an AP story entirely about Craig being in a kissing
scene with another man in the forthcoming movie “Infamous.” The story, solely
about the kiss, predicted it will be widely talked about, without particularly
explaining why; homophobia is its own explanation.
Sept. 19: The “Infamous” reports
convinced DanielCraigIsNotBond.com to get back into the homophobia business.
The site seized on a similar report about the movie in a piece titled “More
Queer Eye for the Strait Spy?”, which indicates either severe spelling problems
or a mistaken impression that Craig has been caught in a lip-lock with Mark Knopfler. Confusingly, the piece is illustrated with the
kiss scene from “Enduring Love.” “Bond image shaken by Dan’s gay kiss,” the
site opines, with zero evidence except its own homophobic disgust. The site
also now includes a joke “diet” suggesting one will not want to eat after
viewing the “Casino Royale” trailers; it is
ambiguously titled “Think Pink!”
Nov. 15: Yesterday, on the verge of
the film’s release, CNN.com ran yet another AP report that gave credence to
DanielCraigIsNotBond.com and characterized opposition to Craig as based on his
looks and low profile. Not mentioned again: the homophobia. Ditto
for a Nov. 2 Guardian (
This column was originally written as a freelance news
article and shopped to various gay and progressive old-media publications.
After one nibble, much silence and an overall reminder of why newspapers are
dying deserved deaths, I’m submitting to the fate of all worthwhile writing of
the 21st century—eating my costs and giving it to you for free. Posted