San Francisco Gay Men's Chorus' Newest Song

[TruthBTold]

From what I have read a song posted by the San Francisco Gay Men's Chorus on YouTube was very recently withdrawn by the organization because of death threats to members and participants and taken out of context when discussed on conservative media.  Purportedly it had been commissioned and performed by the Oakland Symphony and then picked up by and performed on a couple of prior occasions by the SFGMC without mishap.  The video was a split screen created of individual members during the pandemic.  No one expected the reaction that ensued and thus after much discussion it was taken down on most social media.  Allegedly it is a satirical song that is meant to further tolerance and fairness.  I was wondering if anyone has heard the song?  

P.S.  I was not sure exactly where to put this thread.  I checked and could not find prior posts about it. 

[cany10011]

For some additional context (the video in question can still be viewed).  Instead of building tolerance, i think that the lyrics triggered a backlash. Especially in the era of Jeffrey Epstein’s….I can see why it is so controversial. The refrain “converting children” was OK once or twice, but it is everywhere in the song and is a little cringeworthy. 

https://sfist.com/2021/07/08/extremely-funny-sf-gay-mens-chorus-video-unleashes-torrent-of-right-wing-threats-vitriol/

 

 

Edited July 9, 2021 by cany10011

[+ nycman]

I watched it.

Honestly, I felt the "joke" missed it’s mark.

And without the "joke", it’s creepy.

Yes, death threats are bad, but "we’re coming for your children…" isn’t exactly a great message either.

Edited July 9, 2021 by nycman

[mike carey]

It did come up earlier.

 

[TruthBTold]

I think it was funny if you took it for what it is meant to be and let it be satirical.  It isn't taking itself seriously but hopes that slowly but surely fairness and tolerance will win over those who have believed the propaganda that has been put out for years.  I mean, "[E]ven Grandma likes RuPaul." 

[bostonman]

I agree with the majority of the posters here - though the "joke" may be well-intended, it doesn't come off well at all. And the right-wingers have no sense of humor anyway, so they certainly wouldn't get it even if they wanted to. There may be something darkly satirical intended here, but it's really not funny. 

With the constant mention of children, I think it does wind up sounding incredibly creepy. It's too blatant for its own good. (Compare this to Rodgers and Hammerstein's classic "You've Got To Be Carefully Taught" which does have a lyric about "before you are 6 or 7 or 8" but since the song doesn't focus on age otherwise, and doesn't play on a terrible stereotype involving converting kids' sexuality, it lands differently.)

To be honest, had I been asked to sing this, I would have said no and possibly have even left the group. It's way tone deaf, no matter what the intention. Shame on the writers, and the SF Gay Men's Chorus. It might be the kind of song that would be funny sung (and heard) by drunk queens at a gay piano bar (let's talk about stereotypes, huh?), but they never should have released it publicly. 

Edited July 9, 2021 by bostonman

[+ tassojunior]

i don't get the offence at gay men using the word "children"

seems like that's a barrier we need to break not accept. gay does not mean pedophile.  

[bostonman]

Just now, tassojunior said:

gay does not mean pedophile.  

No, it doesn't. WE know that. But a lot of people don't, or won't get rid of their biases to accept that.

[TruthBTold]

20 hours ago, bostonman said:

No, it doesn't. WE know that. But a lot of people don't, or won't get rid of their biases to accept that.

True.  However the gay community does not have to play into their biases.  Individuals can find humor in things and others won't find humor in the same things.  It is the same thing as certain people watching a certain Netflix (or other network) comedy and finding it funny (such as finding Fran Lebowitz funny - or not).  On the other hand someone else might find the same show/comedian irritating and condescending.  Or in a different scenario, I might see a pic of a guy in the Gallery section here and find him really handsome while someone else might find him not someone they would date/sleep with.  But to each his own and that is the way it is supposed to be (I think).

[+ tassojunior]

22 hours ago, bostonman said:

No, it doesn't. WE know that. But a lot of people don't, or won't get rid of their biases to accept that.

But it is an unfounded prejudice that will never be gotten rid of by not confronting it. It's like a tacit acceptance that " yes, we gays do have a fondness for young boys" so we won't mention kids. But for politics it's better not to confront it. I know several gay men on long prison sentences in absurd cases because society and especially police, accept that prejudice as truth. 

[bostonman]

1 minute ago, tassojunior said:

But it is an unfounded prejudice that will never be gotten rid of by not confronting it. 

Yes. But is a song like this the way to do that??? 

Edited July 10, 2021 by bostonman

[+ tassojunior]

1 hour ago, bostonman said:

Yes. But is a song like this the way to do that??? 

If it's a way to start a conversation about whether gay men actually are more likely to be pedophile predators, yes. Otherwise the prejudice is swept under the rug and remains. I'm for anything that gets a discussion of the issue.

[jeezifonly]

It’s also a good idea to know your audience. In a live concert (or even on a CD for sale in the lobby they make great gifts get them now!) the audience has gone to some effort to participate, thereby expressing an understanding of the group and, likely, their overall intent of using music to elevate the community.

Gay men + sarcasm = comedy gold. Usually. W&G as proof.

But when you’re posting a selection on YouTube or other platform, a more critical eye ought to be used. -  Assumption must be made that some people will take literally what is ironic or otherwise reliant on a particular humor. Seems a lot of people who take things literally are also loud. and very post-y. “ !!! !! ! ! ! !, and further, !!!!!! !!!!!!!! “

And those same people are rarely valuable in any exchange intended to be “a conversation” about public perception vs nuanced reality.  Let’s each send our local, if not SFO, Gay Chorus a generous donation!

 

[bostonman]

46 minutes ago, jeezifonly said:

Gay men + sarcasm = comedy gold. Usually. W&G as proof.

But when you’re posting a selection on YouTube or other platform, a more critical eye ought to be used.

I also simply question if "converting children" is really right for this much comedy anyway. Had the song maybe used it once, perhaps. But as a recurring lyric all the way through, it just seems very distasteful. (Something about "converting straights" in general might have gone over a little better - but I'm not sure that targeting the kids - especially/even for a laugh - is really right.) I'm not usually against edgy humor in general, but...

Edited July 10, 2021 by bostonman

[jeezifonly]

3 hours ago, bostonman said:

I also simply question if "converting children" is really right for this much comedy anyway. Had the song maybe used it once, perhaps. But as a recurring lyric all the way through, it just seems very distasteful. (Something about "converting straights" in general might have gone over a little better - but I'm not sure that targeting the kids - especially/even for a laugh - is really right.) I'm not usually against edgy humor in general, but...

What makes dark humor work is that both performer and audience mutually and silently agree the act/behavior/thought at the center of the joke is heinous, so much so that we KNOW the laugh comes from the absurdity of talking about it in a banal or sarcastic tone.  

They took a gamble that part of the audience did not know about the agreement. And that they would equate “convert” with “rape”.

(I mean, really! One is Protestant and the other Catholic…)

[bostonman]

1 hour ago, jeezifonly said:

What makes dark humor work is that both performer and audience mutually and silently agree the act/behavior/thought at the center of the joke is heinous, so much so that we KNOW the laugh comes from the absurdity of talking about it in a banal or sarcastic tone.  

They took a gamble that part of the audience did not know about the agreement. And that they would equate “convert” with “rape”.

That explains it really well - thanks! it's like, say, going to see The Book Of Mormon or Avenue Q - you're assumedly in on the joke from the beginning, so you know the kind of comedy you're looking at - and also what the truth behind the comedy is. 

However, it's not necessarily equating convert with rape, though yes, that's possible too. Just the idea that a gay man could influence the sexuality of a child is a prevalent myth as it is. (The idea, of having an openly gay teacher is not maybe so much that he'd try to seduce anyone in the class, just that he would have the ability to turn them gay. Silly or not, I think there are people that still believe that.)

[marylander1940]

 

11 hours ago, tassojunior said:

But it is an unfounded prejudice that will never be gotten rid of by not confronting it. It's like a tacit acceptance that " yes, we gays do have a fondness for young boys" so we won't mention kids. But for politics it's better not to confront it. I know several gay men on long prison sentences in absurd cases because society and especially police, accept that prejudice as truth. 

Several? 

"We'll convert your children, we'll make them tolerant and fair".

9 hours ago, tassojunior said:

If it's a way to start a conversation about whether gay men actually are more likely to be pedophile predators, yes. Otherwise the prejudice is swept under the rug and remains. I'm for anything that gets a discussion of the issue.

It doesn't matter, they believe whatever is convenient.