First Thing, Daily Maverick's flagship newsletter

Join the 230 000 South Africans who read First Thing newsletter.

We'd like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick

More specifically, we'd like those who can afford to pay to start paying. What it comes down to is whether or not you value Daily Maverick. Think of us in terms of your daily cappuccino from your favourite coffee shop. It costs around R35. That’s R1,050 per month on frothy milk. Don’t get us wrong, we’re almost exclusively fuelled by coffee. BUT maybe R200 of that R1,050 could go to the journalism that’s fighting for the country?

We don’t dictate how much we’d like our readers to contribute. After all, how much you value our work is subjective (and frankly, every amount helps). At R200, you get it back in Uber Eats and ride vouchers every month, but that’s just a suggestion. A little less than a week’s worth of cappuccinos.

We can't survive on hope and our own determination. Our country is going to be considerably worse off if we don’t have a strong, sustainable news media. If you’re rejigging your budgets, and it comes to choosing between frothy milk and Daily Maverick, we hope you might reconsider that cappuccino.

We need your help. And we’re not ashamed to ask for it.

Our mission is to Defend Truth. Join Maverick Insider.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options

I want to see all that fun, messy queer chaos on my tel...

Defend Truth

Opinionista

Move over heteros — I want to see fun, messy queer ‘reality’ chaos on my television too!

mm

Giuseppe Rajkumar Guerandi is a class of 2021 Journalism Honours graduate at Stellenbosch University, with an undergraduate degree in International Studies. They pride themselves in being a half-Indian, half-Italian, non-binary South African, with hopes of expanding the platform for marginalised stories and furthering South Africa’s stake in broader international relations. An intern at Daily Maverick, they is now a regular freelancer and have been accepted into the Masters programme in Journalism at Columbia University.

Let’s be honest, reality television is hardly profound and tends to stick to anachronistic, heteronormative depictions of society.

One does not approach reality shows with the same intentions that one might approach a Charlie Kaufman film when a hankering for existential dread strikes, and one does not dissect every word from a reality star’s mouth in search of something prophetically meaningful in the same way one might agonise over Homer’s Odyssey.

What’s more, reality TV geared around dating is hardly Shakespearean in its exploration of romance or as sexy as The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

If what you’ve read thus far comes across as annoyingly pretentious, that’s not by chance. Most baseline critiques of reality shows as a concept reek of being out of touch or feel like an ill-informed excuse to meanderingly complain. The utility of this type of viewing is often to serve as the antithesis to the extreme heights of overwrought classics, not the comparative to them.   

In a world marred by oppression, pandemics and wars, reality TV has its place as much-needed escapism. It can be a wonderland of frivolous, mind-numbing fun that only becomes more delightful when romance, sex and booze-filled partying are thrown into the mix.

Emotions are a lot. Deep, nuanced, gut-wrenching emotion can be a bit much. Reality TV is at its best when it provides emotional reprieve. But one critique of these shows, particularly the dating variety, sticks for me: they are not nearly queer enough!

If I wanted to be bombarded with the questionable discourse of cisgendered straight guys in vests and flip-flops talking about how hot girls are and how untameable their carnal desires are, I’d go back to living in a university residence. Granted, it can also be fun to watch said straight guys act the fool and remind us that straight people are, in fact, the problem.

Shows like “Love Island” and “Too Hot to Handle” are almost entirely structured around heterosexual romance and sexuality, and focus on the messy escapades of drunken straights. If these show-runners knew anything about the queer community, they’d know we could provide excessive partying, convoluted romance, sensual sexuality and meme-able chaos like no other — I’m gay; I’m allowed to promulgate broad-stroke stereotypes about queer people.

The ethics of gamifying love aside, queer reality shows have generally been experiencing a renaissance with the success of “RuPaul’s Drag Race” across demographics and the all-queer eighth season of the wildly popular dating show “Are You the One?”.

The latter flipped the show’s typically heteronormative match-making format on its head insofar as the contestants were all queer, encompassing just about every gender and sexuality the spectrum has to offer, while maintaining the show’s general premise.

This genre-defying season of television not only evidenced the fact that queers have more fun, but also upped the romantic and sexual stakes while striking a brilliant balance of queer education and touching moments, such as when two contestants bonded over the transmasculine half’s ritual gender-affirming shot of testosterone.

In the vein of a heavyweight gay icon, cishet people for reality shows are hardly ground-breaking. Reality is far gayer than these shows suggest, and what’s worse, they deprive audiences of the blend of fun, chaos, insightfulness and sentimentality that only queers can offer.

Even the most heterosexual and cisgendered among you have to admit that there’s only so many times a person can watch straight people talk about sports or attempt to twerk while getting caught up in predictably bland love triangles. Imagine how much more delicious those love triangles would be if every party was a different gender and/or sexuality.

It goes without saying that representation matters, and queer people deserve love as much as anyone else. The only thing “logistically difficult” about integrating our community into reality dating shows is keeping up with the exciting storylines and endless entertainment value.

I know I give straight people a lot of flack, and while you’re not all bad I think we’ve earned the right to bully your kind. I think it’s high time that they step aside and make some room for queer people to make reality TV more real and to access the escapism for which cishet people have a bottomless menu of options.  

In the prolific words of one of our greatest minds, the drag queen Trixie Mattel: “I’m so sick of the straight people.” DM168

This story first appeared in our weekly Daily Maverick 168 newspaper which is available for R25 at Pick n Pay, Exclusive Books and airport bookstores. For your nearest stockist, please click here.

Gallery

Comments - share your knowledge and experience

Please note you must be a Maverick Insider to comment. Sign up here or sign in if you are already an Insider.

Everybody has an opinion but not everyone has the knowledge and the experience to contribute meaningfully to a discussion. That’s what we want from our members. Help us learn with your expertise and insights on articles that we publish. We encourage different, respectful viewpoints to further our understanding of the world. View our comments policy here.

All Comments 2

  • This is spot on. I am straight (with a gay son, and a number of very gay friends) and I can tell you that (and I am going to be generalising and stereotyping so suck it up..) there is nothing quite as funny, and hysterically so, than a high-camp, Afrikaans (preferably but not essential) gay guy having either a tantrum, a rant, or delivering gushy praise.
    And actually, in most scenarios, they make better entertainment than straights…,so yes, I would watch.

  • what is good for the goose and also for the gander, is not necessarily so for the goslings. How do we control what is on the media which is not always monitored

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted