lack of gay representation in US television?

[Jerry_111]

After watching a few British television shows, I've come to notice a difference betweeen British and US media -- that is, there aren't really any portrayals of gays -- no, will and grace doesn't count -- in U.S. television. On a Brit show I saw two gay men kissing, and the scene wasn't stereotypical nor played for laughs -- it was as serious a scene as one that shows a romantic kiss between a man and a woman. In other words, their sexual orientation didn't define their character; it was just another aspect of their character.

Why the difference?

 

[Qonfused]

Because the general US populace is retarded when it comes to gay relations.

 

[Raziaar]

Not too many people are keen on seeing two gentlemen sucking on each others tongues as we see men and women do in your normal TV shows. Even some of those people supportive of gay rights, don't particularily like to see that. <shrugs>

My favorite gay portrayal in television has been Carter Haywood from Spin City. heh.

 

[Dalamari]

Queer Eye
Will and Grace
That makeover show on Bravo, hell, the whole network is gay programming
LOGO network

 

[smwScott]

Pretty much the only shows I watch are on HBO, with a few exceptions like Arrested Development or The Office. There seems to be a lot of gay representation ... maybe even disproportionately so. In Six Feet Under one of the main characters is gay and it makes up one of the series' story arcs. Sopranos had a gay mobster, but he got whacked. There's tons of homosexual overtones in Rome. There's a gay dude in the Office.

I mean, what exactly is the correct amount of gayness that TV should have? It seems to me there are a lot more gay people on television than I encounter in everyday life.

 

[brink's]

Just watch HBO

Six Feet Under-David Fisher/Keith
The Wire-lesbian black cop( so many characters i can't remember all their names)
Sopranoes-Vito Spatafore

 

[Mechagodzilla]

We ain't talking about the specialty grownup cable channels that you don't order unless you're already pretty gay.

Far more mainstream stuff like ABC, NBC and etc. is the issue.
When shows actually do have a gay character, it's either the entire focus of the show and/or (more likely) played for laughs.

i.e.
"Lol, the hoe-moe don't talk like people talk."
or, (perhaps more officiously),
"Lol, that guy seemed to act normal, but he's secretly gay! That's the punchline! Oh god my funnybone!!"

I don't think there's a single network TV show that presents an uncommented-upon gay character, let alone in a prominent role.

 

[Jerry_111]

Pretty much the only shows I watch are on HBO, with a few exceptions like Arrested Development or The Office. There seems to be a lot of gay representation ... maybe even disproportionately so. In Six Feet Under one of the main characters is gay and it makes up one of the series' story arcs. Sopranos had a gay mobster, but he got whacked. There's tons of homosexual overtones in Rome. There's a gay dude in the Office.

I mean, what exactly is the correct amount of gayness that TV should have? It seems to me there are a lot more gay people on television than I encounter in everyday life.

I meant on network primetime television.

 

[DeusExMachina]

There's an entire channel dedicated to gay programming. And Will and Grace and Queer Eye have lasted for a long time. We freakin' had Brokeback Mountain.

 

[63]

The L Word.

Best. Show. Ever.

 

[Jerry_111]

There's an entire channel dedicated to gay programming. And Will and Grace and Queer Eye have lasted for a long time. We freakin' had Brokeback Mountain.

1) i was talking about regular, network television programming such as NBC. Heck, on Doctor Who in the UK -- predominately a children's show -- there was a bisexual man who kissed another man!

2) I was talking about serious, honest portrayals of gays where their sexual orientation isn't the focus or definition of their characters.

3) true, but the characters' sexual orientations and relationship are again a big part of the focus.

Did you know the main character in the Transporter movies was actually gay?

 

[CptStern]

there are no postive gay role models on tv because the networks are far too afraid of portraying anything but a stereotype .. homer simpson best explains it when he said "I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my homosexuals flaming" ..anything else is a threat to conservative middle america ..so the networks are a little paranoid ...but can you blame them?

 

[mortiz]

I know British T.V. is inundated with raging homosexuals. I think seeing them is turning me a bit queer. I regularly admire men’s asses now. The Conservatives were right, you can catch gayness!

 

[brink's]

We ain't talking about the specialty grownup cable channels that you don't order unless you're already pretty gay.

So...watching HBO....makes you gay?

I don't think there's a single network TV show that presents an uncommented-upon gay character, let alone in a prominent role.

Why would they? The majority of Americans arn't big on homosexuality, so the networks target audience would only be a few million viewers( way to small for a major network).

 

[CptStern]

so there's no shows targeted to blacks? (12.1% of population = minority)

 

[mortiz]

so there's no shows targeted to blacks? (12.1% of population = minority)

Watching shows about Black people turns you Black apparantly.

 

[Jerry_111]

so there's no shows targeted to blacks? (12.1% of population = minority)

Anyone remember UPN?

 

[CptStern]

Watching shows about Black people turns you Black apparantly.

shiiiiit, now you goes and does tells me, I axed the cable peeple and they said fo sure you'll be blacker than black watching black teevee but I didnt believes dem

now I'm going to watch tele-latino! ...holmes


god does that mean that if I watch one of those perdominatly white shows like Little house of the Prairie or 7th Heaven I'll turn out like her? <shudder>

 

[brink's]

so there's no shows targeted to blacks? (12.1% of population = minority)

I don't watch much TV, but i can't think of any shows on network tv right now that target blacks specifically. Past shows, like Family Matters and the Cosby show i think targeted a family audience.

And remember, the majority of Americans don't have a problem with race, i don't think you could say the same about homosexuality.

 

[CptStern]

well not so sure about that ..David Duke sure as hell had a lot of support

 

[DeusExMachina]

1) i was talking about regular, network television programming such as NBC. Heck, on Doctor Who in the UK -- predominately a children's show -- there was a bisexual man who kissed another man!

2) I was talking about serious, honest portrayals of gays where their sexual orientation isn't the focus or definition of their characters.

3) true, but the characters' sexual orientations and relationship are again a big part of the focus.

Did you know the main character in the Transporter movies was actually gay?

Brokeback Mountain didn't focus on their orientations and the relationship focus was mostly on their wives. The main characters don't even come off as gay. Trust me, I own the film

And how is the main character in the Transporter gay? ...And why is this even relevant?

If you're looking for positive, non-stereotypical homosexuals, you look toward film. There's hundreds of films dealing with them.

 

[Raziaar]

there are no postive gay role models on tv because the networks are far too afraid of portraying anything but a stereotype .. homer simpson best explains it when he said "I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my homosexuals flaming" ..anything else is a threat to conservative middle america ..so the networks are a little paranoid ...but can you blame them?

The character Carter Haywood(played by Michael Boatman) in spin city is a positive rolemodel. And he doesn't follow any homosexual stereotypes... in fact he's always having to counter them from the bigoted Stuwart Bondeck(sp?).

I love SPin City... heh. Those two are my favorite characters.

 

[Gunner]

After seeing a guy get ass creamed in Sleeper Cell's 2nd season, I don't really want to see any more "gay representation".

 

[CptStern]

The character Carter Haywood(played by Michael Boatman) in spin city is a positive rolemodel. And he doesn't follow any homosexual stereotypes... in fact he's always having to counter them from the bigoted Stuwart Bondeck(sp?).

I love SPin City... heh. Those two are my favorite characters.

never been fan of spin city but they still made a point of his homosexuality ..whether stereotypical or not his character's main defining characteristic is his homosexuality ..again not a fan so I could be wrong

 

[Absinthe]

It was at times. But for the most part, his character stood on its own.

 

[el Chi]

It's rather unusual to have serious gay characters (as opposed to Will & Grace's obnoxious Jack), but it's even more unusual to have bisexual characters. People aren't so good with the whole "No seriously, I'm just attracted to both" thing.
Recently Torchwood, a spin-off series of Dr. Who, had a lead character whose sexuality was ambiguous, but as the program went on it became clear that he was bisexual, moreover it was interesting that this didn't come out in a "By the way everybody - I'm bi. Just so's you know" type scene. It was gossip and speculation between the other characters and became more evident as the character developed. It was oddly refreshing to see a character's alternative sexuality (I'd say bisexuality is even more misunderstood than homosexuality) developed rather than bluntly stated.

Even some of those people supportive of gay rights, don't particularily like to see that. <shrugs>

So hypocrits you mean?

After seeing a guy get ass creamed in Sleeper Cell's 2nd season, I don't really want to see any more "gay representation".

I've got some lovely sand for yuou to bury your head in, if you'd like?

The Conservatives were right, you can catch gayness!

Not to mention, "gayness" rhymes with "anus". Nearly.
Coincidence, or cause-and-effect, nearly?

 

[highlander]

we all know everyone on TV is gay :O

 

[smwScott]

So hypocrits you mean?

I've got some lovely sand for yuou to bury your head in, if you'd like?

Aren't you higher than thou. I am all for equal rights for everyone but that doesn't mean I enjoy seeing two guys **** ... I find it uncomfortable and even a bit repulsive. That doesn't mean I'm going to not watch a good film or show because it contains that, because I really don't care that much. Nor is it saying they shouldn't be able to do it.

You should at least acknowledge that some people have a natural aversion to seeing gay sex, as they might even have towards certain heterosexual fetishes.

People who go on about how everyone else should accept them and then attack somebody else for feeling a certain way are the true hypocrites.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

And remember, the majority of Americans don't have a problem with race, i don't think you could say the same about homosexuality.

Chicken and egg.

I think it's far more likely that positive (AKA neutral) portrayals in the media were what led to greater tolerance in the public sphere, instead of the other way around.

How, exactly, are you going to get people to stop fearing gays irrationally when they have experience with them in public (it's not visible like race; there's no such thing as a gaydar) and they aren't represented in any positive way except through specialty channels that specifically target the liberal-minded folks who are already least fearful?

Really, the cable/network dichotomy has created some weird kind of TV segregation. "Family-friendly" means, basically, gay-free whether it's intended that way or not.

In 1968, casting a black man as the lead in Night of the Living Dead was considered vastly unusual, especially in a film that is not overtly about race.

Here in 2007, people are probably still making Brokeback Mountain jokes, and that movie was specifically about homosexuality.
I can't think of a mainstream movie that features an openly gay hero in a plot that isn't specifically about homosexuality.

It's like if black people were only ever cast in movies about slavery, and there's something wrong with that.

People who go on about how everyone else should accept them and then attack somebody else for feeling a certain way are the true hypocrites.

I'm not sure I follow your logic.
We're against homophobia, while you're pro-disgust.

They call it homophobia for a reason, because it's an irrational fear, like spiders and heights.
I get the chills if I see a spider, even though I know spiders are harmless. That's something wrong with me.
You've also got an irrational reaction.
The difference is that fear of spiders doesn't retard the development of society.

That, and I'm not afraid of bugs on film (although I used to be as a kid).
How did I get over that fear?
By viewing movies, shows and books about spiders. Simple as that.
Familiarity kills fear, and familiarity is something that the public is not getting.

 

[15357]

So what. We have 0 representation of gays and nobody's complaining.

 

[CptStern]

So what. We have 0 representation of gays and nobody's complaining.

jeez I wonder why?

The Government of South Korea practices censorship of gay-content websites through its Information and Communications Ethics Committee, an official organ of the Ministry of Information and Communication. Homosexual and gay-related websites have been frequent and easy censorship targets, being blocked, filtered, or even outright banned by the Government. [5] Most recently the Ethics Committee included several prominent gay websites and servers on its banned list, declaring them "Harmful Media to Adolescents"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_in_South_Korea#Censorship_issues

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Hahaha, nobody's complaining because Numbers is cracking down on the ability to complain.

HAIL SOUTH KOREA, BASTION OF FREEDOM

And that's different from North Korea's evil censorious propaganda machine... how?

 

[15357]

#1. NK doesn't have Internet.

#2. NK is evil, while we are not.

#3. In the puppet state of NK, it is illegal to be gay. (Yeah, there is a law regarding that), while in the great Republic of Korea, it isn't.

#4. We aren't cracking down on the ability to complain, we are cracking down on harmful websites.

 

[CptStern]

And that's different from North Korea's evil censorious propaganda machine... how?

less guys on shiney white horses?

 

[Raziaar]

never been fan of spin city but they still made a point of his homosexuality ..whether stereotypical or not his character's main defining characteristic is his homosexuality ..again not a fan so I could be wrong

No... his main defining characteristic was that he was a unique individual, who stood up for what he believed in and fought for the rights of everybody equally.

Besides... what's wrong with making a case of his homosexuality? It's not like they were saying it was a bad thing. We're talking here about lack of gay representation in US television... so why is the fact that they bring it out and have it regularly brought up in the series, such a big problem? Should they of kept him in the closet? heh.

Besides... it's a show about political humor. What's not to like?

 

[15357]

less guys on shiney white horses?

That too.



Oh god... the translation is a bit off but... HUGE STORMS ALWAYS HAPPEN!

 

[Raziaar]

Oh, forgot this...

So hypocrits you mean?

Not necessarily hypocrits. You don't have to enjoy the sight of two guys making out, tongue lashing each other to be supportive of gay rights.

 

[CptStern]

No... his main defining characteristic was that he was a unique individual, who stood up for what he believed in and fought for the rights of everybody equally.

Besides... what's wrong with making a case of his homosexuality? It's not like they were saying it was a bad thing. We're talking here about lack of gay representation in US television... so why is the fact that they bring it out and have it regularly brought up in the series, such a big problem? Should they of kept him in the closet? heh.

on the flipside the fact that a character is heterosexual is never an issue ..unless he's a deviant ...........................

 

[Mechagodzilla]

#1. NK doesn't have Internet.

Oh, so you're actually well ahead of North Korea in terms of pointless evil government censorship.

#2. NK is evil, while we are not.

As stated above, pointless government censorship is evil.

#3. In the puppet state of NK, it is illegal to be gay. (Yeah, there is a law regarding that), while in the great Republic of Korea, it isn't.

Good for them, but that's a red herring when we're talking about freedom of speech laws. Focus plz.

#4. We aren't cracking down on the ability to complain, we are cracking down on harmful websites.

Hahaha, harmful how? Get you get GAY CANCER from one?
You suck at freedoms.
But at least you're good at evil, right?
Just like the North Koreans.


By the way, I heard that one of the koreas has pointless laws against gay people.
Tell me which one I'm talking about, plz.

We're talking here about lack of gay representation in US television... so why is the fact that they bring it out and have it regularly brought up in the series, such a big problem? Should they of kept him in the closet? heh.

That on its own is not a bad thing, but gays effecively don't exist in any other context. Either they're being persecuted or they're the "gay best friend."

Check, instead, the example at the start of the thread about an average guy who just kisses his husband and then goes off and does his job.
That simply doesn't happen on TV or on film.

 

[Raziaar]

on the flipside the fact that a character is heterosexual is never an issue ..unless he's a deviant ...........................

Isn't it homosexuals that are trying to get their sexuality out there... making it obvious for the world? A show like Spin City, which has a prominent, respected homosexual figure, in the world of politics no less... supports that goal for gay rights. What's the issue?