The question of a question

As you know, I write a question-and-answer column about entertainment which runs in newspapers around the country. And some time back I received a letter asking this:

I know it is a delicate question to be asked these days, but one that I'd like to have answered. Is there are regulation out there that says gays must be represented on television shows? I quit watching three shows because they made me sick seeing gay men dating, kissing, etx.

At first I decided not to answer the question, either directly (as I sometimes do) or in my column. I did not want to give this person a voice. But, as time passed, it seemed more appropriate to answer it, especially considering the backlash against the children's show "Arthur" over its inclusion of a gay couple, and over Gillette having a young transgender man in an ad. I may also have gone back to it because of Pride Month. After all, in recent days there have been even more issues in that time: the White House banning Pride flags at embassies and "Straight Pride" parades and the Vatican's rejection of gender fluidity. So there has been ample reason to reply to the letter writer. Which I did this way:

Your question was appalling, though not surprising in light of the recent flaps of "Arthur" and a Gillette commercial. I do not know of a regulation calling for LGBTQ representation on TV. But we should welcome portrayals of all people, regardless of some folks' fears and prejudices, because they are in all parts of this country. I've lived in the South, the Northeast and the Midwest and have had LGBTQ friends, family, colleagues and students who deserve to be seen in mainstream entertainment as much as the people you prefer.

I had been even more steamed in an earlier draft, but that made my point. So I put it in my column, sent it on its way and anticipated some reaction.

Which did not come. And, when I checked a couple of places where the column ran, I noticed that this question and answer were not there.

I asked my editor about it and was told that the column been cut before it was sent to the newspapers, that "while we appreciated your answer, we don't want to give a platform to homophobia in any shape or form."

I get that. After all, I had held off answering the question for much the same reason. But at the same time, I wonder if we let ideas flourish in darkness when we do not address them in the light.