Snicker-gate

This has been a remarkably tough week to be gay, hasn't it?

First of all, Isaiah Washington was released from gayhab and went back to work, then Paris Hilton, former grand marshall of the Los Angeles Gay Pride Parade was caught on video tape using the f-word, and now, apocalyptically, Snickers airs a Superbowl commercial showing two men eating a chocolate bar, accidentally kissing, and then ripping out their chest hair.

Obviously this calls for a press release.

The Human Rights campaign, America's largest LGBT organization, issued a statement on Monday asking all of the important questions:

"Is Snickers suggesting that people who eat their candy bars are cavemen? It's an odd market to court, particularly after the Isaiah Washington flap a couple of weeks ago, which clearly showed that there's a strong distate out there for people who portray themselves as anti-gay or holding on to old prejudices and stereotypes."

Weird. When I first saw the ad I thought, holy shit, here's two men kissing during the Superbowl. When did that start happening?

Advertisers have used the same tactic for decades: straight men do something that could be misperceived as gay or threatening to their masculinity, realize their mistake, and react with disgust and horror. But in the past, when a straight man in a commercial did something "gay," it was as mild as accidental gay footsie under the kitchen table or putting on pantyhose. But this was a kiss! On the Superbowl! And the men's hystrionic reaction ends up lampooning their masculinity, rather than reinforcing it.

If the comment board at Adrant is any indication, a lot of conservatives seem to have interpreted the ad in the same way. One person even calls it the work of "activist gays."

I understand that representational politics have their value, and that homophobia shouldn't be used to sell candy bars, but I also think that when it comes to campy commercials that are purposely over-the-top, and only arguably offensive, they're not worth getting worked up about.