TV show with a gay couple?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JennyAnne
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BlueEyedLady said:
I think you might be surprised to find out that more people in your life are gay than you realize.

You really have no gay friends or relatives? No one in your spouse’s family? Neighbors? Your doctor/lawyer/dentist/mailman? I have 2 lesbians in my family, one in my immediate family and the other is my niece. My husband has two gay relatives, only one of them is out to the family. I have several gay friends, my husband’s boss is gay, and of course I have many gay classmates-but that’s just due to the fact that it’s a large program. While gay people may be overrepresented in my life, I also believe they’re underrepresented in yours. Everyone I know IRL has at least one gay person in their life, and even on these boards posters frequently share stories of the many gay people in their lives. (I’m not talking about the threads started about gays, I’m talking about the many posters who respond to those threads with “My ________ is gay”. Or “I have a gay ______”. Just the fact that over three percent of the population is gay means that most people will have a gay person in their closest circles (work/family/social/school).
Click to expand...
  • My family: one niece – haven’t seen her in 10 years (not because she’s a lesbian, just hasn’t worked out that way.
  • My wife’s family: one niece – she and my wife had a falling out and we haven’t seen her for probably 5-6 years (she’s actually bisexual, not lesbian)
  • Doctor: her husband and kids would be shocked and surprised to find that out
  • Dentist: fellow K of C member and father of 3
  • Dental Hygienist (or her daughter who is also a hygienist in the same practice): nope.
  • Mail woman: married/kids
  • Investment manager: yes. I talk to him on the phone every couple of months and may see him once a year.
  • Neighbors: one couple has a lesbian daughter, but she moved in with her girlfriend shortly after graduating from high school and we literally never see her; we may see her car parked outside her folks’ house every few weeks
  • Previous job: there may have been one LGBT person there (pretty much everybody was married…or had a serious boyfriend/girlfriend of the opposite sex)
  • Job before that: can’t think of anybody who even may have been
  • Air Force time: I may have met 10 of them in my 21 year career – and that’s out of several hundred friends I made over that career and literally thousands that I knew over that time (of course, when I was in was “pre-DADT” and “DADT” time, so the only time one would find out is with close friends)
I will fully admit that in my previous job that I had to do a lot of lobbying (not a high enough percentage where I would have to be a registered lobbyist, but enough where I would have to record my hours doing it). And there were a dramatically higher percentage of gay people I ran into on Capitol Hill and at Executive Branch offices than in my day-to-day life.

Having said that, and to your point, I also fully acknowledge that some of the people with whom I casually associated may have been “LGBT” and the subject didn’t come up as a result of professional discussions or meetings. Nor should it. One should not expect a homosexual to answer the phone “Human Resources, this is Lance and I’m gay. How can I help you?” any more than one should expect, “Human Resources, this is Caleb and I’m a Baptist, can I help you?”

On the other hand, to my point, if it would be unnatural and inappropriate for a “LGBT” person to announce their sexuality in a professional meeting, casual setting, sales situation, or other business case, then why would it pertinent for a character in a bit role on a program to do so?
 
markomalley said:
  • My family: one niece – haven’t seen her in 10 years (not because she’s a lesbian, just hasn’t worked out that way.
  • My wife’s family: one niece – she and my wife had a falling out and we haven’t seen her for probably 5-6 years (she’s actually bisexual, not lesbian)
  • Doctor: her husband and kids would be shocked and surprised to find that out
  • Dentist: fellow K of C member and father of 3
  • Dental Hygienist (or her daughter who is also a hygienist in the same practice): nope.
  • Mail woman: married/kids
  • Investment manager: yes. I talk to him on the phone every couple of months and may see him once a year.
  • Neighbors: one couple has a lesbian daughter, but she moved in with her girlfriend shortly after graduating from high school and we literally never see her; we may see her car parked outside her folks’ house every few weeks
  • Previous job: there may have been one LGBT person there (pretty much everybody was married…or had a serious boyfriend/girlfriend of the opposite sex)
  • Job before that: can’t think of anybody who even may have been
  • Air Force time: I may have met 10 of them in my 21 year career – and that’s out of several hundred friends I made over that career and literally thousands that I knew over that time (of course, when I was in was “pre-DADT” and “DADT” time, so the only time one would find out is with close friends)
I will fully admit that in my previous job that I had to do a lot of lobbying (not a high enough percentage where I would have to be a registered lobbyist, but enough where I would have to record my hours doing it). And there were a dramatically higher percentage of gay people I ran into on Capitol Hill and at Executive Branch offices than in my day-to-day life.

Having said that, and to your point, I also fully acknowledge that some of the people with whom I casually associated may have been “LGBT” and the subject didn’t come up as a result of professional discussions or meetings. Nor should it. One should not expect a homosexual to answer the phone “Human Resources, this is Lance and I’m gay. How can I help you?” any more than one should expect, “Human Resources, this is Caleb and I’m a Baptist, can I help you?”

On the other hand, to my point, if it would be unnatural and inappropriate for a “LGBT” person to announce their sexuality in a professional meeting, casual setting, sales situation, or other business case, then why would it pertinent for a character in a bit role on a program to do so?
Click to expand...
I was thinking about this in terms of Star Trek, because I think of everything in terms of Star Trek right now. Pretty much all of the characters in pretty much every incarnation of Star Trek exhibit OSA, whether it’s through a relationship, a few comments, a scene where they’re clearly attracted to someone, or whatever. Nobody ever comes out as says “I’m straight”, but it’s obvious from their behavior that even the possibly-not-sentient holographic doctor from Voyager is interested in women. I would expect that SSA, particularly if the person sees nothing wrong with same-sex relationships, would make itself known in the same manner.

Like, I know I for one always think of this as something that shouldn’t have a huge effect on day-to-day interaction, but then I would expect there to be lots of characters where we just don’t know if they experience OSA or SSA. There aren’t- in any given show with a regular cast, most of the characters are going to exhibit OSA at some point.
 
Kamaduck said:
I was thinking about this in terms of Star Trek, because I think of everything in terms of Star Trek right now. Pretty much all of the characters in pretty much every incarnation of Star Trek exhibit OSA, whether it’s through a relationship, a few comments, a scene where they’re clearly attracted to someone, or whatever. Nobody ever comes out as says “I’m straight”, but it’s obvious from their behavior that even the possibly-not-sentient holographic doctor from Voyager is interested in women. I would expect that SSA, particularly if the person sees nothing wrong with same-sex relationships, would make itself known in the same manner.

Like, I know I for one always think of this as something that shouldn’t have a huge effect on day-to-day interaction, but then I would expect there to be lots of characters where we just don’t know if they experience OSA or SSA. There aren’t- in any given show with a regular cast, most of the characters are going to exhibit OSA at some point.
Click to expand...
Since you are talking Star Trek, the whole character of Dax could be a study.
 
on_the_hill said:
And he also used nude models. Which gives me two reasons. Thank you.

I’m kidding. I wouldn’t avoid Tschaikowsky because of his rumored homosexuality. I was just curious about what others thought.
Click to expand...
You crafty rascal:p I’m glad I am working on discernment and didn’t let you have it with both barrels.🙂
 
My concern would be if many of our so called “reality” shows are shown overseas…people would get the image that we really are a nation on the road to hell.
 
Origen52 said:
You crafty rascal:p I’m glad I am working on discernment and didn’t let you have it with both barrels.🙂
Click to expand...
But there is a point at which I will tune out. As in the case, as someone else mentioned, if there’s a gay couple holding hands on a TV show, (or someone like Maher). I don’t relate, I don’t care to relate, and would rather not waste my energy pretending that I do.

I like home improvements, decorating, gardening, but stopped reading Better Homes & Gardens because it was like every house was done by a gay couple. Double income, no kids, gay, nothng but time and money. I want to see a house by a working couple with three kids.
 
I find it sad that some people are so affected by the increasing appearance of gay individuals in the media and in the world. As a catholic, I should also avoid programs and events which depict adulterers, fornicators and sodomites (one need not be a homosexual to engage in the act, think about it :eek:). If I began to count how many of the above are in my life, the list would be pretty long.

Pope Francis is often quoted in this context, but I’d like to quote my favourite theologian, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. Benedict has spoken clearly on the church’s objection to SSM and on the sinfulness of the sexual act between same sex individuals. But, he also always strongly stated that Catholics are not thereby allowed to demean, discriminate or show lack of charity to any one.
*
It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the church’s pastors wherever it occurs… The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in work, in action and in law.*

These are words by which I can live.
 
About 3% of men abuse children sexually. They are in our lives. How many appearances do they make. How about overweight or ugly people? Religious people? My point is that if people think something is bad or don’t want to see something, it won’t make an appearance.
 
Kamaduck said:
I was thinking about this in terms of Star Trek, because I think of everything in terms of Star Trek right now. Pretty much all of the characters in pretty much every incarnation of Star Trek exhibit OSA, whether it’s through a relationship, a few comments, a scene where they’re clearly attracted to someone, or whatever. Nobody ever comes out as says “I’m straight”, but it’s obvious from their behavior that even the possibly-not-sentient holographic doctor from Voyager is interested in women. I would expect that SSA, particularly if the person sees nothing wrong with same-sex relationships, would make itself known in the same manner.

Like, I know I for one always think of this as something that shouldn’t have a huge effect on day-to-day interaction, but then I would expect there to be lots of characters where we just don’t know if they experience OSA or SSA. There aren’t- in any given show with a regular cast, most of the characters are going to exhibit OSA at some point.
Click to expand...
OSA?

Why the need for such acronym?
 
Origen52 said:
I find it sad that some people are so affected by the increasing appearance of gay individuals in the media and in the world. As a catholic, I should also avoid programs and events which depict adulterers, fornicators and sodomites (one need not be a homosexual to engage in the act, think about it :eek:). If I began to count how many of the above are in my life, the list would be pretty long.
Click to expand...
I find sad that some Catholics are not affected by the increasing promotion of lgbt topics in the media.
 
kozlosap said:
Are you building a bunker in your house where you can sit and not have yourself or your “faith” confronted by actions and art that upset you? Its a darn good thing that our Lord didn’t have your mindset. The Church has never indicated that being a gay human being offends her, its the sin of adultery both gay and STRAIGHT that she preaches against. I find wackos walking around carrying guns in schools, churches and movie theaters much more offensive and dangerous. :cool:
Click to expand...
Your first sentence speaks volumes…👍
 
kozlosap said:
Are you building a bunker in your house where you can sit and not have yourself or your “faith” confronted by actions and art that upset you? Its a darn good thing that our Lord didn’t have your mindset. The Church has never indicated that being a gay human being offends her, its the sin of adultery both gay and STRAIGHT that she preaches against. I find wackos walking around carrying guns in schools, churches and movie theaters much more offensive and dangerous. :cool:
Click to expand...
Your first sentence speaks volumes…👍
 
CesarAugustus said:
I find sad that some Catholics are not affected by the increasing promotion of lgbt topics in the media.
Click to expand...
Heterosexual sinners don’t need a lobby anymore, their lifestyles are totally accepted.

You may not be old enough, but I remember when divorce was portrayed in a very negative light. When it was said that a divorced man would never be elected president. When being a “kept woman” was so shameful it would exclude you from polite society. I’m not saying it was right, or wrong it was just the way heterosexual deviant lifestyles were viewed. None of that occurs anymore, so heterosexual sinners must also have had a strong lobby.
 
Origen52 said:
Heterosexual sinners don’t need a lobby anymore, their lifestyles are totally accepted.

You may not be old enough, but I remember when divorce was portrayed in a very negative light. When it was said that a divorced man would never be elected president. When being a “kept woman” was so shameful it would exclude you from polite society. I’m not saying it was right, or wrong it was just the way heterosexual deviant lifestyles were viewed. None of that occurs anymore, so heterosexual sinners must also have had a strong lobby.
Click to expand...
What you described is part of the gradual process of normalization. Divorce, fornication, inmmodesty in dress. I have seen it work in my country (I have been studying these types of process in the media for a long time). A Bishop warned about that (he had a reputation of being polemic), but it seems that people didn’t paid much attention to him. Now they are pushing lgbt themes. Who knows what is going to be the trend in some years.

Because they have succeeded with the normalization of a group of sins, it doesn’t mean we shoulnd’t be concerned with the new group they are pushing for.
 
markomalley said:
So if 3.5% of the population have this condition, then why in the world would it be appropriate for 42% of primetime programming (Fox) or 50% of primetime programming (ABC Family) need to have homosexual characters?
Click to expand...
Should I be that disgusted by the existence of The Fosters, an ABC Family series which does feature a homosexual couple?
 
Maxirad said:
Should I be that disgusted by the existence of The Fosters, an ABC Family series which does feature a homosexual couple?
Click to expand...
I have no idea as I’ve never even heard of the series until now, much less have seen it.

Is it disgusting?
 
markomalley said:
You didn’t read that correctly. The quote said: 42 percent of primetime programming hours

In other words, for every 100 hours of primetime television broadcast on Fox, 42 of those hours would have included one or more homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual characters onscreen.
Click to expand...
Whether this does or doesn’t reflect an individual’s reality, I wonder how much of that time is spent focused on a gay relationship. It seems like there’s a difference between a scene that involves a character who happens to be gay - a fact that doesn’t impact the scene or episode or what have you - and a scene that’s directly affected by their sexuality.

I don’t see how a lgbt character in a show is constantly being an offensive thing, even if you’re opposed to lgbt relationships, any more than it’d be offensive to interact with a lgbt person in real life. It just seems like the majority of the time will be spent on things where it’s not relevant. 🤷

Not all the time of course, I’m sure their relationships and crushes will come up periodically, as they do for straight characters, but it seems like they’d have to be a pretty minor/flat character if their sole impact on the show was the fact that they’re gay.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top