Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Wedding Guide for Young White Couples

Rebecca Sulock, the very capable and energetic features editor of Mountain Xpress, got fussed at the other day by readers for depicting only heterosexual white couples in her Valentine's Day piece on "creative couples."

She asked fussing readers to "watch for our wedding guide in next week's issue, which will highlight more varieties of love in our community."  But apart from a separate-but-equal section called "Love is Love," which pictures an unidentified male couple strolling hand-in-hand at the Biltmore Estate and quoting a female minister (who is apparently married to a female partner), there appears to be no "mainstreaming" of same-sex couples and still no non-white couples.

MountainX  recently ran a story asking its readers to sound-off about Mayor Bellamy's vote against city benefits for same-sex couples.  Maybe it will ask readers to sound-off about not relegating same-sex couples to their own corner.  And what about those non-white folks and those older folks who fall in love and pair up?

Was the print edition more rainbow hued?


  1. What about interracial couples?
    Or old/young relationships?
    Let us not forget tween couples.
    Also, there are democrat/republican relationships.
    Also international couples.
    And Interfaith couples.
    And Internet couples.

  2. Random, your use of "mainstreaming" makes me think you're a Gannettoid, and others in that company will know what I mean by that.

    Mountain Xpress is "white" in its coverage and that's no surprise. Do they even have any staff that's not white? A single staff writer who's not white?

    African Americans are featured if they're musicians or complaining about the police. Entertainers or victims. Not a good mix.

    The paper is liberal, but not as bloody liberal as they think they are.