Originally posted by style88: Geez! It's no wonder it's so hard abolish gay stereotypes off the TV screen, when there are gay men who are quite willing to act like that.
If you think cottaging is a good thing, I feel desperately sorry for you. I guess the younger generation like me have things a bit better off and we don't have to resort to doing things like that to boost our 'gay credentials'.
I wouldn't have said it was stereotyping, it's more a case of showing that there are still plenty of men out there that still take part in this behaviour.
I think many people are sticking their heads in the sand if they honestly believe these things don't happen. Many of these people are gay men themselves, especially those that do not frequent the gay clubs for whatever reason.
As "The Art Teacher" mentions, isn't it a good thing that this programme has made people think about the issues involved and prompted discussion.
Wouldn't it be more constructive to think about why people do such activities, rather than getting all moralistic and preachy. Maybe then we can start to takle the issues responsibly.
Posted 23-07-07 17:49 Hide Post quote: So you're saying that you can't be gay AND have morals? Give me a break. The thought of having sex thorugh a glory hole in a public toilet disgusts me, whether it was gay sex or straight sex.
You say it disgusts you, but you have to wonder where that disgust comes from. Sex is sex and if it seems immoral/disgusting in certain contexts or between certain people then perhaps that's because we are taught to think that only certain 'moral' forms of sexual expression are legitimate. The really interesting question is why? What are the wider social functions of a culture limiting the way people think and express themselves sexually.
Wouldn't it be more constructive to think about why people do such activities, rather than getting all moralistic and preachy. Maybe then we can start to takle the issues responsibly.
Morals? Like beauty, morals only exist in the eys of the beholder! What you think is disgusting, other people just do not! I would like to refer to the person who said that "Don't assume that whatever is okay for you is okay with everyone else, or that peoplewould react in exactly the same way you would."
I never did. I do not expect people to be as unbothered as me. I was only telling them the way I saw it. I am not a egocentric person, I know people have different views, and I will respect their right to express them.
Just a tip theres a little reply with quote button on the right of your post press the quote button under the post you want to reply too then no one will get confused who your talking at. [/QUOTE]
I'm apparently old , so I know nothing ![/QUOTE] Well your not as old as me come on now.
"It Is Impossible To Defeat An Ignorant Man In Argument."
"Never Converse With An Idiot, For Someone May Walk By And Not Know Who The Idiot Is".!
Just a tip theres a little reply with quote button on the right of your post press the quote button under the post you want to reply too then no one will get confused who your talking at.
I'm apparently old , so I know nothing ![/QUOTE] Well your not as old as me come on now. [/QUOTE]
Just a tip theres a little reply with quote button on the right of your post press the quote button under the post you want to reply too then no one will get confused who your talking at.
quote:
I'm apparently old , so I know nothing ! Well your not as old as me come on now.
Your as old as the man you feel !
Your nearly there.
"It Is Impossible To Defeat An Ignorant Man In Argument."
"Never Converse With An Idiot, For Someone May Walk By And Not Know Who The Idiot Is".!
About to eat my dinner but I would like to steer this away from the moral debate that's been going on.
There's been alot of people that have been "Furious" as the topic title states. But why? I'd like to leave the idea that gay people are always portrayed in a negative light out of this. I don't think many people would argue otherwise, so lets not continue that rant.
One fact we can't deny is that cottaging happens. Focusing on this, why do you think people still go cottaging? What does this say about the current social climate towards homosexuality? How can we change this?
Like many others, I too was disappointed in the negativity of this program. It pains me that not one character experienced a happy ending (even the kids violin got smashed up), and it just seemed an unnecessary depiction of gay life. I dont see why the makers felt three gay bashing incidents were necessary and why the world was one of such darkness. It has left me with nothing other than a sense of loneliness, and a panic almost for what could happen, or what my future is going to be like. I dont think this programme will have an effect on society as such, other than making some gay people, including myself and family of gay people feel like crap, and feel quite concerned. My world is nothing like that one, not to dismiss events in the programme as being at all unrealistic, just all together they were unnecessary and too much for one programme. I thought we were celebrating something this week on channel 4.
Originally posted by jonjones: Like many others, I too was disappointed in the negativity of this program. It pains me that not one character experienced a happy ending (even the kids violin got smashed up), and it just seemed an unnecessary depiction of gay life. I dont see why the makers felt three gay bashing incidents were necessary and why the world was one of such darkness. It has left me with nothing other than a sense of loneliness, and a panic almost for what could happen, or what my future is going to be like. I dont think this programme will have an effect on society as such, other than making some gay people, including myself and family of gay people feel like crap, and feel quite concerned. My world is nothing like that one, not to dismiss events in the programme as being at all unrealistic, just all together they were unnecessary and too much for one programme. I thought we were celebrating something this week on channel 4.
Well dont worry you have already stated your world isn't like that mine isn't either or many others so it's unlikely to change any day soon because channel 4 commisioned a rather dark depressing film about homophobia and dwelt on the seedier sides of the characters without much balance. I suppose it depends on what life throws at you and how you respond to it if you have a good head on your shoulders you will overcome most problems make the right decisions, follow the right path, and live a fulfilling and productive life.
"It Is Impossible To Defeat An Ignorant Man In Argument."
"Never Converse With An Idiot, For Someone May Walk By And Not Know Who The Idiot Is".!
Originally posted by jonjones: Like many others, I too was disappointed in the negativity of this program. It pains me that not one character experienced a happy ending (even the kids violin got smashed up), and it just seemed an unnecessary depiction of gay life. I dont see why the makers felt three gay bashing incidents were necessary and why the world was one of such darkness. It has left me with nothing other than a sense of loneliness, and a panic almost for what could happen, or what my future is going to be like. I dont think this programme will have an effect on society as such, other than making some gay people, including myself and family of gay people feel like crap, and feel quite concerned. My world is nothing like that one, not to dismiss events in the programme as being at all unrealistic, just all together they were unnecessary and too much for one programme. I thought we were celebrating something this week on channel 4.
Indeed. God knows what teenagers just coming to terms with their sexuality must think when they watched this.
There's certainly been nothing celebratory about 'gay season' so far. It's been incredibly depressing.
It ends with Queer as old folk's lets hope thats not too depressing when they reflect about living in the 20s or 30s were gay people weren't tolerated or accepted.
"It Is Impossible To Defeat An Ignorant Man In Argument."
"Never Converse With An Idiot, For Someone May Walk By And Not Know Who The Idiot Is".!
I don't see anything to celebrate about the gay rights movement. It is inherently depressing since it's about trying to obtain the rights others enjoy, but we have been denied for centuries.
I thought the show was quite good in that it showed the lives of different gay people and tried to be honest etc...what I didn't like was how they were all portrayed and so sterotypically too. They still havn't got the idea of portraying gay people as normal people as they are...like they all go around doing that? But it was still good.
<Ginevra>
Posted
I would've liked to have seen more lesbian stories too...I don' knowwhy, but there seems to be hardly any footage on gay women! But anyway, I know that wasn't what this was about
It was quite depressing and i really wish that they hadn't made practically all the women complete, argh, bigots! lol! I still liked it in it's own way, but I don't know if it would create a positive or negative reaction
I was so angry after watching this I was seeing RED and Billy you couldn't have put it better. The really stories were the young boy with the violin, why was one guy beating up the other , was he gay? Why do men still feel the need to go to toilets, the question go on and on. no answers! Was this made for gay men or the straight world. Its fails on both counts. The first sign of a kiss and half the straight audience would have turned of and the sight of a 14 year old playing with himself out a window as he look at a older sweaty men in his grubby flat would have lost the other half. Looking at this show thur straight eyes all you would have seen is sex, toilets, sex, thugs ,sex ,perverts, sex, paedophiles. SO everyone learn something new then !!!!! There is a story to be told of gay men in 2007 but its not this one.
Originally posted by swin: I don't see anything to celebrate about the gay rights movement. It is inherently depressing since it's about trying to obtain the rights others enjoy, but we have been denied for centuries.
Or, to put it another way, the struggle for gay human rights is only slowly making headway, despite a sudden burst of equalising legislation over the past 10 years. It's still quite a challenge to be gay in the UK, although it's obviously far, far better than to be born gay in, say, Iran (where they don't have "gay seasons" on telly; they hang you).
We wouldn't have had this conversation about cottaging if Kevin Elyot had chosen to write a comedy-drama about a gay couple. In fact we wouldn't have had quite the same discussion if he'd written a dark drama set entirely in a public toilet. He could have aimed for something like a "Bent" for the noughties. But the fact is, he did neither of those things and instead wrote one of those "interweaving strands" dramas. His choice of this structure makes it very difficult not to conclude that in some way he was making a point (quite a depressing point) about many, not all gay lives in Britain today. It doesn't aim to be 100% representative, that's never the job of fiction or drama; but it does clearly strive for some general truth, for some "bigger picture" to emerge. Like all the best art.
I say it strives for these laudable artistic goals; sadly, it fails to achieve them. It was humourless, for a start. I did not find it gripping or involving at all. Just a poorly thrown together collage little better than the average episode of mid-period Brookside.
In the event
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mud sometimes gives the illusion of depth. – Marshall McLuhan
Posted 23-07-07 20:55 Hide Post I think its safe to say that the overwhelming concensus on last night programme is one of great dissapointment.
Personally I find it extremely hard to believe that channel 4 had the cheek to advertise this programme as a "celebration of 40 year of the decrimilisation of homosexuality" when it focused on every steriotype going.
Never before have I been so offended by a television programme that I have felt compelled to write in and complain. Needless to say my complaint has already been submitted.
Channel 4 as a telvision station and Liza as its commissioner, you should both be ashamed of yourselves.
Never before have I been so offended by a television programme that I have felt compelled to write in and complain. Needless to say my complaint has already been submitted.
Channel 4 as a telvision station and Liza as its commissioner, you should both be ashamed of yourselves.
I agree with that completely. It was shameful to tout this pap as part of a 'celebration'? This is what Liza Marshall had to say in Independent article:
"this film will not be fluffy like Queer as Folk because times appear to have changed and gay politics has moved on.
"This is Kevin's take on what it is like to be gay in London today, which is in many ways very disturbing. There has been a rise in gay bashing, but this is accompanied by civil partnerships and widespread public acceptance. We wanted to explore that conflict."
Hear that? 'This is Kevin's take on what it is like to be gay in London'. Next time Channel4 decide to commission a drama from someone they may want to look a little deeper into exactly what that person's idea of being gay in London is actually like.
Seems like a lot of people are worried that the representation of gay men in this drama will reflect negatively on them. The fact that they are so concerned about what mainstream middle England may or may not think of them shows they have a long way to go before they are truely libereted as gay people. Of course lots of gay people don't live the lives depicted in the drama, but lots do - fact! Using a set of moral norms for sexual conduct that evolved for heterosexual society, and trying to apply them to gay people's sex lives isn't necessarily gonna work too well. There are some fundamentally different dynamics at work between the way gays interact and the way straights do. If you need to feel validated by living your lives as closely to the straight 'ideal' as you can then that's your business. But try at least to take on board that a diversity of sexual expression (and a tolerance of that diversity) would be a hallmark of a truely liberal progressive society.
I say it strives for these laudable artistic goals; sadly, it fails to achieve them. It was humourless, for a start. I did not find it gripping or involving at all. Just a poorly thrown together collage little better than the average episode of mid-period Brookside.
In the event
He did write an episode of Grange Hill.
"It Is Impossible To Defeat An Ignorant Man In Argument."
"Never Converse With An Idiot, For Someone May Walk By And Not Know Who The Idiot Is".!
[/QUOTE]
