Nick Jonas is slated to take over the vacant spot that Iggy Azalea has left after cancelling a performance at a Pittsburg Pride event.
In addition to the almost unprecedented backlash that Iggy Azalea is facing at the moment, she has had to pull out of a performance in Pittsburg due to the re-emergence of a number of allegedly homophobic tweets from several years ago.
Her bad luck appears to have made for Nick Jonas' good fortune as he apparently contacted the organisers of Pittsburg Pride himself to snatch up Azalea's now vacant spot. According to Billboard:
A statement from the Delta Foundation of Pittsburgh says Jonas contacted event organizers himself after hearing of Azalea’s cancellation. "Nick had heard about Pittsburgh Pride in the media and called us on Tuesday and said he would like to come and perform," said Gary Van Horn, president of Delta Foundation. "He has been a supporter of the LGBT community, and he wanted to make sure that the community and Pittsburgh had a Pride event that they could be proud of."
It's an interesting turn of events. On one hand, it's fantastic to see a straight male artist who is so passionately engaged with the gay community and so willing and able to show his support for his gay fans at any possible opportunity. On the other, it feels a little like pandering. There's no doubt that Jonas' image and record sales have benefited from his new gay fanbase and many would label his efforts to engage 'the gays' a little transparent.
It's no secret that gay men make loyal and dedicated fans - just ask Madonna or Britney Spears - but there's something inherently uncomfortable about artists who attempt to get any minority on side in an inorganic fashion. Between stripping off for gay magazines and now volunteering for Pride events, the cynics amongst us undoubtedly wonder what exactly Nick's motives are.
Because when you really think about it, what's worse - a straight person making poorly worded jokes at the expense of an underrepresented community (Iggy Azalea) or a straight person attempting to profit from the dedication of the very same group of people (Nick Jonas)? Neither are ideal, and if we're so vehemently opposed to one, why do we let the other slide?