Members jfung79 Posted April 19, 2009 Members Share Posted April 19, 2009 I think Luke would do that to Damian in a heartbeat. Since the school election campaign where he cheated to win, Luke has been far from whitewashed. Damian made a lot of good points to Lily the other day that Luke has a lot of Damian/Grimaldi in him -- he'll see and want something, and do whatever it takes to get what he wants, no matter the legalities or the consequences to others. "The ends justify the means." Lily was desperately in denial and defending Luke, but Damian was not all that wrong. Also, Luke has always had his drinking problem. And even back in 2006, he pushed his mom and she fell down the stairs -- yes it was an accident, but there's still an angry side to him. Even before the election, he was not perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted April 19, 2009 Members Share Posted April 19, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Doyen Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 I don’t care for gay characters on soaps because it just becomes too convoluted, political, insincere, plastic and agenda-driven. Meanwhile TPTB tend to pussyfoot around the characters, not wanting to piss off either conservatives or GLAAD. You have some viewers who want a gay villain (or a villain who just *happens to be* gay.) Why? Basically to further ‘normalize’ homosexuals by showing them with a broad array of human personality types—good and bad. However, if a soap did that, there will undoubtedly be those viewers who will see it as a slant against, or conspiracy to vilify, gay people…even if the show doesn’t present their homosexuality as the root cause of their nefarious ways. Furthermore, on soaps, I notice that whenever a gay character is presented, there’s always such a black and white reaction to them. On one side, you have plot point snarls of “faggot” this and “faggot” that by the most cartoonish homophobes you could ever encounter. On the other side, you have equally overblown sermons and generic cliché declarations of forced acceptance from the usual ‘good folks.’ Then we get these polarizing “big moments” of bigots versus the enlightened. In real life there are many gay people who may have parents, siblings, friends who aren’t particularly thrilled that they are gay, but they still have an otherwise decent relationship…despite some bumpy patches. You never see that on TV though. It’s always all or nothing. Mom & Dad either totally accept their gay child…or they totally shun them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Excellent post and I agree with every part of it. There are just so many ways gay characters can be presented, but there are just as many unnecessary roadblocks. GLAAD does a lot of good, but sometimes I really think they need to sit down somewhere and be quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 I actually wish GLAAD were more involved in criticizing bad gay-related stories or atmospheres. They gave an award to a mediocre Grey's Anatomy episode at the height of the huge controversy with Isaiah Washington and TR Knight. They lauded the "Rianca" AMC wedding even though the story was riddled with negative lesbian stereotypes and they didn't even consummate their marriage. Any complex family relationships are hard to find on TV now. I think they did a good job of showing some of Erica's unease on AMC without making her evil. The other problem is there are still so few gay characters on TV. Until there are more, then I don't mind that most of their relationships with their families are presented in stark terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Adam Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Do not get me started on GLADD. They are more of a barrier, than a promoter of the community's best interest, ESPECIALLY when it comes to these daytime soaps trying to tell "groundbreaking" gay friendly storylines. They are part of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jfung79 Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Are you watching Guiding Light? Olivia has had bemused "uh, okay, Natalia huh, uh, okay, well that's uh, wow, okay, let's change the subject" type reactions from the straight men and women she's told who never speak to her about it again. Bill, Jeffrey, and Mel all basically responded to her like that. There's no statement of forced acceptance or outrage, more WTF? I think ATWT is getting to what you are talking about in the second paragraph with Damian, where he'll never completely get Luke being gay but they'll have a better relationship, if, as I believe, he is not behind these threats to Luke in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members leevo64 Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Afterelton.com is reporting that Rafe is the gay character on Y&R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChitHappens Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 ABSOLUTELY agree. I don't see gay characters on soaps - just a few walking PSAs! ANDREA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Primetime's Brothers and Sisters continues to push the envelope and define where we're headed. Yesterday, to show full gay male foreplay (sorry, Moila)--shirtless sweaty necking -- and talk at length about a three-way... well ... that's pretty boundary-pushing. While B&S has its problems, it is a continuing melodrama, a serial set around a family and their peripheral members. I really feel that B&S and its ilk are the inheritors of the soap mantle. Daytime may fade, but serials will live forever. And in that note, if daytime wants to extends its relevance even a little bit, they'll look closely at what B&S is doing, and absorb that fearlessness. By the way -- afraid of the advertisers? Last week Roger Newcomb reported that B&S was in the top 10 or top 15 of per-spot advertising rates on network TV. They may not be the biggest show, but that have a banging-great demographic. Daytime should try to lure THAT audience -- not huge but smart, progressive, affluent. Implication: I don't think you lure that audience with any of our current eight soaps. They are too associated with grandma and 40 years of history and selling shoe polish. You make a new show, and build -- from the beginning -- for a smaller niche audience that is profitable. For starters, you don't air during the daytime. Once we stop worrying about offending grandmothers in Peoria (who, in fact, probably wouldn't be offended -- but Madison Avenue is worried they will be), gay characters on soaps can flourish. So can the multi-cultural rainbow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 That's just it. I'd want the grandmothers in Peoria (or wherever) to be offended. Then, I'd want to hold up that mirror to them, and show them what the outside world sees in their own prejudices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members leevo64 Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 I think that's what makes TV so powerful. It has the potential to open peoples' eyes to things they never saw or understood before. Isn't that what Agnes Nixon worked so hard to do in all her shows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Exactly. She never outright condemned anyone for his/her/their beliefs, but her topically relevant storylines always implied a message of tolerance and listening to the "other side"'s p.o.v. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChitHappens Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Here's to hoping Soaps are not headed in B&S direction because I think last night showed one of the biggest stereotypes out there. A threesome? How many straight couples on television have engaged in this type of activity? I don't care one way or the other for gay storylines because I just want a story, but I would like to think that last night's eppy was offensive to some people. It was more about how can we increase our audience rather than, let's just tell the tale of 2 gay men. It was far from that. I didn't care for it at all. BTW, if Kevin must be gay, can we get someone else for him? This guy makes me want to hurl huge chunks! I need at least one masculine male to get any kind of enjoyment out of it. ANDREA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted April 20, 2009 Members Share Posted April 20, 2009 Well, there were those swingers on "All in the Family".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.fbb6aa067610794e36433d57928a2f42.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.