As a gay man, I'm not insulted by Y&R's move. While it would be nice for them to dive in and show the two men tongue tagging, I think Y&R is slowly easing viewers into it. As bad as it sounds, it's not everyone's cup of tea - so I think Y&R is playing it smart with this approach - with the intent (I hope) to finally show it on screen.
All My Children showed kissing and ATWT showed kissing. Y&R has no excuse. By not showing Rafe & Adam in a liplock, it just draws attention to the double-standard.
Originally posted by survivorkylie: As a gay man, I'm not insulted by Y&R's move. While it would be nice for them to dive in and show the two men tongue tagging, I think Y&R is slowly easing viewers into it. As bad as it sounds, it's not everyone's cup of tea - so I think Y&R is playing it smart with this approach - with the intent (I hope) to finally show it on screen.
Anyone who needs to be eased into watching two men kiss is not going to accept a storyline with gay characters. They would be outraged at the very idea of gay characters let alone a kiss. Would we accept african-americans only hugging or the show cutting away as not to show the kiss because it would offend certain white viewers??? Most thinking people would be outraged by that idea. Why is it acceptable for gay characters? Why would gay men condone such treatment? Aren't gay men worthy of better treatment than a stuffed cat???
The problem with soaps is that they are still writing as if it's the fifties. It's insulting to me that they need to cater to the ultraconservative crowd while thumbing their nose at everyone interested in seeing a kiss between men. If Rafe were Rafella, they would show the kiss, and they would not care if viewers wanted to see them as a couple or any of the various excuse provided the last two weeks. They want to lure new viewers in, but they don't want to offer them the same consideration. If this were GH, DOOL, ATWT, GL, or AMC, the reactions would be outrage, and the condemnation swift.
Okay, I'm not defending the decision to not show them kissing a second time. (I haven't seen the episode yet, so I'm not making any judgments, though the explanation I came up with last time, that the surprise factor trumped showing the kiss, obviously no longer applies.) But I do think there are plenty of viewers who wouldn't have any objections to gay characters or even storylines but would be jarred by seeing two men kiss. There's a big gray area of people out there who think, in theory, gays should be treated the same as everyone else, but have yet to really see or experience what that might mean. Again, I'm not defending whatever happened or didn't happen in today's episode. I just think survivorkylie makes a valid point.
Passions did do some great things in terms of showcasing (both racial and social) minorities stories and couples, but they also did some terrible things. The sex they showed between Chad and Vincent, let's not forget, wasn't just between two men but also between two brothers. And one of the characters later had sex with his own father. Sex between siblings and parents/children is another thing Passions did that, thankfully, isn't catching on in daytime. It's hard to talk about the show as a platform for social equality when they'd clearly do anything for shock factor, no matter how disgusting it might be.
Originally posted by EmmyLoser: But I do think there are plenty of viewers who wouldn't have any objections to gay characters or even storylines but would be jarred by seeing two men kiss. There's a big gray area of people out there who think, in theory, gays should be treated the same as everyone else, but have yet to really see or experience what that might mean. Again, I'm not defending whatever happened or didn't happen in today's episode. I just think survivorkylie makes a valid point.
If the characters were black or hispanic or Asian, no one would stand for a kissing ban. No one would say that viewers need to be eased into accepting a kiss. The same thing would go if Victoria and Neil were to rekindle their relationship. Can you imagine if an African-American member came on and wrote, "I understand why they are not showing the black characters kissing. White viewers need to be eased into seeing it."
I don't understand the thought process involved in catering to bigots or people who don't think they are bigots but are. Not only that, but when you don't show a kiss when it's clearly meant to be there, you call more attention to it than you would if you showed them kissing. You can have the viewers imagine them having sex, but not showing the simplest of pecks? What this does is privilege the bigots while kicking the other viewers in the teeth. Daytime is on life support. It's time to go for broke, and catering to the conservative crowd has not done the shows much good. If YR is going to worry more about the people outraged by a kiss, why should I and others worry or watch YR? You can't have it both ways. You can't seek out new viewers for your "gay" storyline, and then treat that gay storyline as if it's something that needs to be hidden or censored. It's offensive.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Crystal,
I'm with Crystal on this one. Watching two men kissing isn't everyone's cup of tea, but guess what -- the disgusting naked wrestling matches masquerading as sex scenes on other shows aren't my cup of tea, and I would hope not the preferred beverage of most viewers. But those characters are straight and the networks have no trouble showing them on daytime TV having sex that would make the programmers of Cinemax blush.
You know what else isn't my cup of tea? Incest. Rape. We get tons of those on soaps. The implication of not showing two men kissing is that just the prospect of two men kissing is somehow more objectionable than loveless sex battles, incest, and rape. That's deeply offensive. Because Y&R, for all its faults, is the best soap on TV right now and has frontburner gay storylines, we need to be vigilant and hold them to a high standard. Because this crap is unacceptable from the best soap on TV.
My fear is that Y&R deliberately wants to generate this outrage so they can generate excitement Luke/Noah-style for when they finally lift their ban, which is a cynical and disgusting way to do business and hopefully not what is actually happening. But it's true: if you show the kiss matter-of-factly, it's no big deal in 2009. But if you don't show it, suddenly everyone is talking about you. Let's hope it's not true that there's no such thing as bad publicity.
"A movie is not good because it arrives at conclusions you share, or bad because it does not. A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it: about the way it considers its subject matter, and about how its real subject may be quite different from the one it seems to provide." - Roger Ebert, from the introduction to "Awake in the Dark" (2006)
I just watched today's episode, and as a gay man and 25-year loyal viewer of Y&R, I can say I am insulted and offended. Maria Arena Bell and the rest of the brass at Y&R should be ashamed that they are portraying a kiss between two men as something so horrible that they can't air it on TV. What message does this send to the audience? I'll tell what kind of message it's sending. It's perpetuating homophobia and hateful, hurtful opinions that homosexuality is something to be ashamed of, something that has to be hidden.
You can't have it both ways, Y&R. You can't introduce gay characters and then impose a double standard when it comes to showing intimacy. Of course I realize that Adam isn't really gay, but in any other soap scenario the kiss would've been shown.
STOP PANDERING TO HOMOPHOBIC BIGOTS, Y&R!! If the show doesn't turn this situation around - and soon - I am done with Y&R. After sticking with the show for 25 years, it will be hard to give it up. But I have my integrity.
That is what I said. Maria you can't be given interviews saying that you are going to have gay characters up the wayzoo, and not feature them doing what straight characters do. I mean I am so so on the Adam situation, but if this was Amber sleeping w/Noah to keep a secret they would show it and that is all I am saying.
Posts: 5360 | Location: New York/California | Registered: September 30, 2006
Originally posted by Crystal: Anyone who needs to be eased into watching two men kiss is not going to accept a storyline with gay characters.
There's an ideal world and there's reality. And the sad reality is that, as you said, not everyone is ready for intimacy between same-sex individuals on air.
It's funny that you bring up African Americans, because it was this time just over 10 years ago that Bill Bell tried to pair up Neil and Victoria and the storyline got quickly aborted, because viewers were outraged by the mixed coupling. Fast forward 10 years later and Cane and Lily are the most popular couple on the show.
So as I said, we can harp all we want about what's ideal and just - but unfortunately, Y&R's producers have to look at the big picture and deal with the bigger reality of the fact that not everyone is ready to deal with it.
Things take time and as the wider mainstream world embraces same sex coupling/intimacy on Y&R, I give Y&R kudos for a) attempting to do this stoyrline and b) pulling it off in a practical way that is sound for the reality that they're faced with.
And guys, the story's only like 3 weeks old. Why don't we wait until it's played out before we judge.
Originally posted by survivorkylie: So as I said, we can harp all we want about what's ideal and just - but unfortunately, Y&R's producers have to look at the big picture and deal with the bigger reality of the fact that not everyone is ready to deal with it.
It comes down to this. They are either writing and producing for the bigots or they are writing for the people who want to see the stories portrayed honestly and fairly. You can't say to someone, "I want you to watch my show because you're part of a group that's not represented on television, but I'm going to half ass the story so I won't offend other viewers who don't want to see your group on television. Keep watching and accept the scraps I give you." I'm wrong. You can say it, but most people wouldn't put up with that attitude. This isn't 1982. 1992. 2002. This is 2009, and if YR can't tell a gay story honestly and fairly after making sure they got a lot of press for it, it's shameful and there are no excuses. As a woman, I'm tired of being screwed over by a genre which revels in the degradation of woman, and I'm sure as hell not going to put up with it when I see it happening to another group.
Originally posted by Crystal: It comes down to this. They are either writing and producing for the bigots or they are writing for the people who want to see the stories portrayed honestly and fairly.
Actually, what it comes down to is ratings - which is what Y&R producers have to take into account.
Yes, it's 2009. But if America - by that, I mean the wider mainstream America - is ready for gay/lesbian intimacy on daytime, our screens would been flooding with it. But sadly, they're not. And Y&R has to consider that - and it's easy for us viewers to moan and b*tch about it, because we're not accountable for that.
In order for Y&R to be able to tell the story they want to tell, they have to do so slowly. Sadly, yes, it's all about ratings - so they have to be strategic about it. Is it sad that they have to do it this way? Yes. Strategically smart? I'd argue yes.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: survivorkylie,
Especially with Y&R's audience. No offense (and I'm just making an unfounded hypothesis), but I think a lot of Y&R viewers may be prejudice to certain story telling.
I get why there is criticism of ATWT. There was the 211 day kiss ban. Apparently that is back since Luke and Noah aren't kissing anymore. They apparently also aren't allowed to be shown living together. From what I understand they moved in together in an off screen apartment. Horror! We might see them eating toast together! HORROR! I don't buy it's a set issue. They showed another character apartment the other day.
I just don't understand why some people seem to be ok with hiding Rafe/Adam kissing.
Originally posted by survivorkylie: In order for Y&R to be able to tell the story they want to tell, they have to do so slowly. Sadly, yes, it's all about ratings - so they have to be strategic about it. Is it sad that they have to do it this way? Yes. Strategically smart? I'd argue yes.
Most if not all the people who object to this kind of storyline will not care whether the story is slow or fast. They don't want a gay storyline period. Whether they kiss or not is not going to matter. They're going to hate anything gay. That's assuming those kinds of viewers are still watching after all the (gasp!) gay content. I would also say it's a strategic mistake to go out and court gay viewers (and others who are interested in those stories), and then alienate them by telling a story where gay characters are treated as so awful that affection must happen offscreen. Not only are they alienating the viewers who don't want a gay storyline, but they are ****ing off those viewers who do. Middle of the road storytelling never works no matter what the subject or plot. ATWT tried to appease both groups, and they ended up making a royal muck up of everything. Every other aspect of YR is designed to alienate older and Afro-American viewers and attract younger white viewers, so why is this the ONLY storyline that must be played slow to appease older and Afro-American viewers? It's a double standard, and it's appalling.
"Brothers and Sisters" featured a marriage between two gay men, who have healthy sexual lives that are shown just as the straight relationships are; it's a Nielsens hit. "Will & Grace" showed gay affection for eight seasons. One of the biggest stars in daytime television is Ellen DeGeneres, an out-and-proud lesbian. Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal won Best Kiss at the MTV Movie Awards for "Brokeback Mountain" -- a silly award, but a significant one, because it is voted for by the same youth demographic most networks would cream their shorts for. I recently heard that 75 percent of Americans support the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Gay marriage is legal in Iowa for crying out loud! When you talk about catering to an audience that isn't ready to see gay men kissing on television, who are we even talking about anymore? How many of them are there? Does Y&R think it will please them with its current storylines? The fact that gay men are on their television sets at all would turn them off no matter what they're doing or who with. And by withholding legitimate affection from their relationships, they risk driving the rest of us away. It's a lose-lose.
Let's get real. It's 2009. The world is different. Daytime doesn't reflect that. The powers that be talk a good game about attracting younger viewers and staying current. Well put your money where your mouth is! Take a chance by doing something no other soap is doing. Chances are, you'll lose a few closed-minded, small-town, flyover state potato farmers, but guess what -- your reward will be major attention from the mainstream press; ebullient excitement from an under-served demographic that will come in droves and recommend your show to others; and younger, more sophisticated, higher-income viewers who are likelier to buy the products being sold between lip-locks. This is obvious to anyone who has observed the Kyle/Fish phenomenon on OLTL. The show only had to announce that the two characters would become a romantic item, and they instantly became more popular than most of the couples who have been on the canvas for years. The only couples anyone cares about on GL and ATWT are Olivia/Natalia and Luke/Noah, and many of us are willing to put up with the unwatchable crap the writers come up with just to see something new and exciting in daytime, something that reflects the lives of a lot of loyal viewers who don't get to see themselves on TV often enough.
You want to talk about how best to serve the bottom line for your sponsors? Just talk to the folks at Covergirl and their spokesperson, Ellen DeGeneres.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: 742,
"A movie is not good because it arrives at conclusions you share, or bad because it does not. A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it: about the way it considers its subject matter, and about how its real subject may be quite different from the one it seems to provide." - Roger Ebert, from the introduction to "Awake in the Dark" (2006)
Y&R is sponsored by Glaxo-Smith/Kline, Baxter, etc, so unless they can start pushing a spray or vaccine to 'cure' gays with, I'm not going to hold my breathe.
Posts: 13935 | Location: canada | Registered: December 22, 2005
As a gay man, i have to say that i am not offended or put off about how Y&R is handling the Adam/Rafe pairing. This is not a budding romance, it's being written as a means to and end for Adam. I actually liked today's closing scene as the two were embracing as Nikki walked in on them. Great camera shot.
Look, it took Y&R 35+ years for them to introduce their first gay male characters to it's canvas, so let's give Maria and Hogan a chance to lay the groundwork before we judge them on how their doing a disservice to the gay community.
Rafe came out a few months ago, Phillip came out yesterday. Adam is seducing Rafe. THIS is all progress people.
For those of you who are complaining that Y&R should be asamed of themselves for not showing Adam and Rafe kissing or in bed....i say rent some porn and relieve yourselves.
You guys would be totally justified if this were Phillip and Rafe and the show actually had them date and fall in love, then YES..i would be ****ed too. But Adam is using Rafe and this story is twisted, so i'm not bothered by them not showing them swapping tongues.
Michael Muhney is impressing the hell out of me, i have to say. He's won me over already!
If you guys really want to bitch, bitch at the writers for what they're doing to the character of Sharon, how they can't write a decent story for Daniel, Amber, Kevin and Jana...and how they just dropped Colleen off the canvas as well as Raul.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: MARKPGH,
MARKPGH, I have no problem with bitching, and I've bitched about all the problems you've mentioned. This is another one.
This isn't about sexual gratification. It's about equality in storytelling. No, Adam and Rafe are not a budding romance. Adam is using Rafe. But Adam is using Heather too, and they kiss frequently; in fact, they kissed right after the scene where Adam and Rafe kissed and had sex for the first time, off-screen.
OLTL's Stacy is manipulating Rex. That's not a budding romance either. But their sexual gymnastics were graphic. Same with GH's Rebecca, who is seducing Nikolas to get Emily's birthright, or something like that. Sonny and Claudia don't even like each other, but they're tearing each other's clothes off nonetheless. Show me one instance of heterosexual sex that appeared off-screen because it wasn't a love story.
When Luke and Noah started on ATWT, we gave them a long leash, because it was new and we wanted to give them a chance to play it out. They used that leeway to institute a months-long kissing ban. I don't want to wait months before we hold Y&R accountable. If this changes tomorrow and we see some real homosexual affection, I'll be the first to applaud and give them due credit. But until they start treating their homosexual characters equally, I feel it's my duty as a viewer to hold their feet to the fire and express my dissatisfaction. Because with daytime in the state that it is, I am the most important demographic they need to worry about: people who still give a crap.
"A movie is not good because it arrives at conclusions you share, or bad because it does not. A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it: about the way it considers its subject matter, and about how its real subject may be quite different from the one it seems to provide." - Roger Ebert, from the introduction to "Awake in the Dark" (2006)
