Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Who's onlineThere are currently 16 members and 889 guests online.
|
Why "As the World Turns" deserves the GLAAD award
However, not only did the kissing blackout end and Luke and Noah finally sleep together, but the show has also tackled a variety of gay-related issues including housing discrimination and homophobia. Pop star Cyndi Lauper appeared in an episode about tolerance that celebrated gay pride, a middle-aged gay man played Laurence Lau came out in another storyline, and just this month, the show added Zac, another teenage character who is either gay or bisexual. I can see why O’Neil and Branco are so upset ATWT won this year. Imagine if every show so blatantly discriminated against gay characters! The outrage! And who would the two men have the award go to? All My Children currently features a lesbian couple, but according to AfterEllen.com, their storyline has been handled less than favorably. As for gay male characters on other soaps, there are currently none. Zero. Zip. Branco argues that the award should’ve gone to General Hospital: Night Shift for not only featuring a five-episode arc involving a gay romance, but because one of the roles was played by out actor Chad Allen. Unfortunately, GH: NS aired during primetime and thus was submitted for that category where it did not receive a nomination.
Adam Grimes, Chad Allen on General Hospital: Night Shift
Branco argues GLAAD should have renamed the category “outstanding soap opera” thereby allowing GH: NS to “fairly compete.” That doesn’t sound like an outrageous suggestion and perhaps GLAAD will change their rules in the future. But that doesn’t change the fact that GLAAD was absolutely right to give ATWT the award this year and last year. Indeed, a case can be made that by giving the show the award a year ago, the organization actually helped encourage the P&G to not only keep the characters despite the criticism from all sides, but to allow them to start kissing again as well as finally consummating their relationship. In criticizing ATWT and GLAAD, both O’Neil and Branco behave, frankly, like small children who fail to understand (or choose not to) that the world isn’t a perfect place and that we can’t have everything all at once. In a perfect world, good gay characters would be commonplace on television. The world is far from perfect, however, and to throw words such as “homophobic” and “discriminates” at the one soap opera featuring gay male characters is ridiculous. O’Neil and Branco claim that by calling out ATWT and GLAAD, they are advancing gay visibility. I’d argue they are setting it back. By hurling such invective at those responsible for creating Luke and Noah, the two men send a message that those behind the show better get everything exactly right or they’ll be crucified. They also send a message to anyone else considering adding gay characters that they better think twice. After all, with ATWT being called homophobic while actually including gay characters, what TV producer wouldn’t think twice before risking the same fate by adding a gay character to their show? Does this mean ATWT can’t be criticized? Of course not. AfterElton.com has written extensively about these issues (here and here), but in doing so we always tried to acknowledge the reality of ATWT’s situation and gave them credit where credit is due. Hopefully, O’Neil and Branco will eventually learn to do the same. Submitted by on Tue, 2009-04-07 20:27. |
 Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|
Welcome to AfterElton.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media
a year ago, no award ... now, yes to the award!!!
ATWT has done an amazing job. Yes, the first year the gay storyline was not handled in the best way. Looking back, okay, the writers put on the baby gear for all of us. But now, there is no denying that there are gay characters who are an integral part of the show. And in the past six months we have seen more than two other gay characters, Zac and HOTGRANDPA make appearances and be part of the show.
ATWT deserved the award. Hands down, no questions asked.
He wasn't drunk, just angry, was all
Let's forget the fact that GLAAD presented AfterElton with an award that seemed to be taylor made to include them and the fact that AfterElton attends GLAAD award ceremonies (and I assume many of the staff are members of GLAAD?) and that AfterElton has been given unprecedented access to As The World Turns.
P&G showed blatant bigotry and they exploited gay people, gay fans and the gay community and for that they receive a GLAAD award and kudos from the editor and staff at AfterElton.
P&G did not come around to create an inclusive portrayal of the couple until after months and months of perhaps the most news worthy protest in the history of soaps. And even at that they exploited the situation and fed us lies while whipping up seriously demeaning cock-blockers like an illegal marriage to an immigrant. P&G did not alter the course of the couple until it was clear that the protest (there is no bad press) was no longer drawing viewers; they even felt they had to re-name their production company in order to distance the controversy from the parent company.
Pardon me for drawing a rather large analogy, but this is like giving the Board of Education of Topeka an NAACP award AFTER the Supreme Court forced them to integrate their schools. Does their Board of Education deserve an award today for recent progress? Perhaps, I wouldn't know, but I do know that they didn't deserve an award back in 1954. And ATWT doesn't deserve the awards GLAAD dished out for 2007 or 2008.
Yes, we should forgive P&G, and we should commend their current efforts but not forget their shabby treatment in the past. It turns my stomach to read on these pages that you would hold up your champagne flute to toast them for their blatant bigotry.
As I have written before, GLAAD is an awards show. We know that AfterElton loves Award shows. GLAAD puts on a show, and they want all the glamor and prestige that a bunch of guppies can muster. It is the Capote Syndrome. Some gay people still seem to believe that if they throw a lavish party and invite all the important straight people to come, then they will be accepted by society. (ala the Black and White Ball) but just as Tru found out, they come, drink your champagne and still dis you behind your back.
GLAAD's mission statement says that if no show merits an award, none is given. We know that doesn't matter, but if it did it would be a moot point, as Jensen asks who should they rather give it to? Well, let me answer that: I would give it to a show that was deserving, a show that had not discriminated during the year of application for the award! If GLAAD had waited, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
As for the usefulness of GLAAD? Occasionally they will issue a statement to someone, or get their name associated with an act of discrimination in the news. But their real achievement is hosting a Ball. That they honor and invite people who promote a negative stereotype of gay people is not their real concern, obviously, but it diminishes what could be an award of merit and creates a fluffy award that is meaningless and so a waste of the communities assets.
IMHO
First of all, let it be known that I am scared of you. Your main goal on the website seems to be to harshly disagree with anything and everything here. With that in mind, I give my opinion humbly, and I hope that you don't attack me, or get how you get...
Did NUKE deserve the award last year? Maybe not. Though ATWT was the only soap opera with a steady gay male couple, I agree that while the Parker couple was having sex, the fact that NUKE was not even kissing, was discriminatory. I would consider that crumbs, though i would also have to forget all the other story lines (Noah's dad, Luke's two dads, NUKE themselves, Maddie, etc.).
Did NUKE deserve the award this year? Yes. There was no constitutional law that forced ATWT to have, continue, and improve the visibility of gay men on their show. To even compare it to the Brown vs. Board of Education ruling makes me sick.
And on a side note, GLAAD has done way too many things for you to sit there and go and bash their awards show. They have done so much for the community over the past COUPLE OF DECADES, and you have done what, exactly? So for you to sit there and .... you know what you're just not worth it. Nukely, I'm never going to get through to you am I. B/c even as I say these things, I know what you're going to say, and nothing I say is right, I disgust you, blah, blah, blah.
Then fine. You know what, I'm too tired to care about what you think anymore. I refuse to let your negativity affect how I feel about my favorite fake gay couple (other than all the couple's in Noah's Arc and Jack/Enis).
Man what was my point again? Oh yeah, they deserved to win because NO ONE ELSE is doing what they are doing. They are encouraging other shows to include NORMAL (for a soap show) gay characters and do NORMAL things (FOR A SOAP). Nukely, it seems as if you never heard the phrase "one step at a time".
Now go on and say how I'm a "sheep", the entire world is blind and homophobic, etc.
Kitty
No so humble, really.
First of all Kitty, you rate my above comment a "zero", a bit of a stinky put down before you tell us you're scared of me? That's how you want to start this? but you don't want we get personal, right?
Kitty, You can't possibly have read my comments here enough to know what I am like or what I believe. But if you think I'm harsh, just say so and skip the false humility schtick.
Again the GLAAD award is suppose to reward inclusive gay characters. But it also seems that GLAAD simply creates various award titles and contenders so they have enough people to parade on stage so that the tuxedoed attendees have enough time to toss back two bottles of champagne.
We are talking about a specific award given for a performance in a specific time period. This years performance will be judged and awarded in 2010. Just like the Oscars, that's how it is suppose to work but really we know that how these shows perform has no effect on whether they get a GLAAD award or not.
I don't know what you think, really, or why. I would gather, that like me, you would enjoy the story we were promised at the beginning. The story that they seem to finally be willing to tell, the story they were too weak, too greedy or too selfish to tell until today. You are ready to applaud them for these efforts and new found kahonas. So, am I. But I don't want that to be confused to suggest that what they did before is worthy of our praise. That is what this whole discussion is about. I don't think you're a sheep but you do seem to react without thinking and may be in love with the idea of romance to the point where you're ignoring painful truths.
I agree that ATWT deserved
I agree
Ever since the double standard ended, I think Nuke have been well written. They may not have been given the best storylines, but I would say the same about most of the other characters too. Jade, Emily, Vienna, Parker and Katie have all had ridiculous moments lately, too. But, overall, they've created interesting, likeable, relatable characters with Luke and Noah, which is the most important thing in a soap.
I do think the overall writing in the soap has been getting better, recently. It feels like they're slowing down and letting us into the characters' minds, instead of going from one crazy dramatic thing to another. I hope this will be reflected in Luke and Noah's story too.
Thank you!
Great points, Michael, and thanks especially for not pulling any punches with Tom or Nelson.
It's just silly to even try to argue that the only daytime show in the US that continually shows a loving, committed young gay couple doesn't dserve an award that is specifically established to recognize positive media portrayals of the LGBT community.
Nelson and Tom continue to let their personal issues play out in their respective blogs for the sake of controversy. And they're just plain wrong.
BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Michael - I haven't always agreed with you about everything, but I can honestly say I agree with every single word you wrote. And I think it was vital that those things be said. I read the earlier article and some of the comments at work today, and was steaming ever since. I would have posted myself at the time, but I knew I'd express myself in a way I'd regret later. So I got on now to post a more level headed comment, and I'm happy to say that you said most everything I wanted to say.
I just want to add three things. A lot of gay people are endlessly upset about the concept of stereotyping. However, in my opinion, the obvious things like mincing, Judy Garland worship, etc. are basically cartoon caricatures, and don't really impact our community in a significant way. I don't mean to diminish that, but only the most hopeless straight people buy into that these days, or have their perceptions of gay people shaped by that. I know none of my straight friends are impacted by that. But the stereotype I DO see over and over again among straight people is the stereotype of the whiny, bitchy complainer. They tend to see gay people as never satisfied, way too quick to take offense, and constantly bitching about something. Unfortunately, that stereotype has some basis in reality, and the earlier article and your comments reflect that.
Second, I can't help but wonder if people who can't see the forest for the trees are reflecting a basic insecurity. Perhaps their bluster is their way of coping with and hiding the fact that they don't really feel very good about themselves. Anything but perfection in the media is a threat, any perceived shortcoming reminds them of their insecurity.
Lastly, some have called ATWT degrading, and further talk about what the kissing ban and the chasteness is telling young gays. Well, I'm confident that there aren't many 16 year old gays out there watching ATWT and saying to themselves, "darn, look at that; I sure am inadequate now and sex for me is something to be ashamed of". But I am sure that there are legions of young gays out there feeling validated and more fully a part of society because of the example set by Luke and Noah. A pair of well adjusted (for soap land!) gay kids totally accepted by their families, totally open, kissing all the time (now, anyway!), showing affection in public, fighting discrimination boldly, with full support from their friends and family. Degrading??? What dark and dingy hellhole of a world are these people living in anyway?
So I guess I did turn this into a bit of a rant after all! Oh well. But thanks again, Michael, for your well reasoned and well expressed comments.
"But the stereotype I DO
"But the stereotype I DO see over and over again among straight people is the stereotype of the whiny, bitchy complainer. They tend to see gay people as never satisfied, way too quick to take offense, and constantly bitching about something. Unfortunately, that stereotype has some basis in reality, and the earlier article and your comments reflect that."
Oh God, yes. While ATWT isn't without its flaws, sometimes I think some people wouldn't be happy with this show no matter what it did. (A lot of them also criticize it for reasons that indicate they're not familiar with the soap opera format.) I've seen everything from gay people complaining when Luke and Noah do something cute and light-hearted because "this show isn't serious enough about the realities gay teenagers face" to people complaining that too many bad things happen to them (hello, soap opera!) to people getting really, really picky about stupid crap ("that kiss wasn't LONG enough!").
It's not just a gay thing
Dennis Mpls - But the stereotype I DO see over and over again among straight people is the stereotype of the whiny, bitchy complainer. They tend to see gay people as never satisfied, way too quick to take offense, and constantly bitching about something. Unfortunately, that stereotype has some basis in reality, and the earlier article and your comments reflect that.
It's not just a gay thing. It's a minority thing. Speaking broadly here, straights see us as over-sensitive, never satisfied, too quick to see insult where, as far as they're concerned, none is being offered. They have trouble understanding why we're so pissed off. Whites felt/feel that way about blacks ever since they got uppity and started demanding justice. It's always easy to say minorities are nitpicking and way too angry when you pass through life with privelege. It's makes you blind to the shades and shadows of ingrained prejudice. In other words - you don't get it if it's not personally biting you in the ass.
As regards ATWT. Some things they do wrong. Somethings they do right. At least give them credit for not only trying but persisting against a lot of AFA crapola. ATWT is ham-fisted and clumsy - that straight blindness - but IMO, at least, they're on our side.
Cat - You make a valid
Cat - You make a valid and worthwhile point. Unfortunately, you stated it in far too simplistic terms. Yes, a relative life of privilege (whites in relation to blacks, straights in relation to gays) does TEND to make people less able to understand the injustices and frustrations faced by the minority in question. However, as you state it you're saying that all complaints by the minority are always valid and just not seen properly by the majority, that no complaining or pissiness is ever excessive or whiny or inappropriate, that all members of the "privileged" class are incapable of understanding these issues apart from the minority being "uppity", and that no members of the minority class ever have invalid or excessive reactions to things.
I'm a gay person who was raised in extremely poor circumstances, and was a pathologically shy nerd/geek all through school. I was anything but a member of the privileged class. But I (and judging from other posts on this thread, many other gays) see a huge amount of excessive complaining on the part of my fellow gays. There are people who are never satisfied, and not justifiably so, and who descend into the very whiny caricatures that straight people often talk about. The fact that many or even most straight people aren't really able to understand where we've come from and the obstacles we face does not change that fact. And, unfortunately, those people harm our cause more significantly than much of what they spend their lives railing about.
We have significant issues to deal with and rally either for or against. But that doesn't mean we should descend into lives of non-stop whining and complaining. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to tell the difference between Proposition 8 and an evolving soap opera that doesn't progress to showing gay sex as fast as we'd like. Being in a minority does not provide license for illogic or inability to discern proportion, or focusing only on the negative while denying the positive, or falling prey to UNNECESSARY victimhood. (There's enough real victimhood out there.)
A couple of posters on this thread have resorted to slavery analogies (referring to "massah" and the like) to describe their feelings about a soap opera that has been constantly evolving in a very positive way, and a gay organization that they essentially consider to be an Uncle Tom organization for recognizing the positive aspects of that soap opera. Slavery analogies??? Really???
I like ATWT... also have a question
I enjoy As The World Turns... though it would have been nice if "Buttars" would have gone through an experimental phase with Luke... just kidding... sort of. I enjoyed GH: Night Shift too.
Anyway I think ATWT has done a particularly great job placing Luke and Noah into the crazy world of soaps - after all, by their nature, soaps have lots of twists and turns and frustrating developments which is part of what makes them fun to watch. It's wonderful that Luke and Noah are not exempt from the mayhem (was Luke's skull infused with adamantium like Wolverine and that's how he survives all those head injuries without brain damage? :P)
Okay, my question is... in a soap, an entire hour episode can jump around its focus on the many different characters, oftentimes showing events that are happening simultaneously so a single hour of real time can be just a couple minutes of time in the universe the soap is set in. So, during the 211 real days Luke and Noah didn't kiss, how much "soap time" passed in Oakdale. Does anyone know? Was it just a couple weeks of "Oakdale time"?
Interesting question
That's a very good question, and one I never considered. I recall that when I originally started watching ATWT in the late 80s it was not uncommon for one day to take 6-7 screen days. There would be a function at Lisa's club or something, and it would go on and on, day after day. Things seem to have speeded up a bit lately, but it would still be interesting to know how many actual days went by.
On the other hand, in a way it doesn't matter because the seasons still go round and round, and the holidays are observed or mentioned. I'd be interested to know how many soap days actually occur between Christmases, for example. In the old days it wouldn't surprise me if it was less than 100 days. Just one of those goofy things you have to go with if you're going to watch soaps. And what about weekends! They never have them in soapville. Something occurs on (real time) Friday, and then takes up from the same place on Monday. Saturdays and Sundays simply don't exist.
NUKE KISS TIMELINE
This is something I've always wondered as well.
December 25
Definitely kissed on Christmas day (even though it was panned way)
January 1
On New Years Eve they left the party to "go somewhere more private"
February 4
Noah kissed Luke on the cheek
April 23
Noah grabs Luke and kisses him in Olde Towne (kissing ban over?)
So are we counting from December to April?
Or are we counting from the kiss the Col walked in on to April?
At least that was how I remember.
"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)
The 211 days was in between
The 211 days was in between actual kisses shown onscreen, so it spanned from the kiss that the Colonel walked in on in September, until the kiss in Old Town in April.
The Christmas kiss/pan was one of a handful of times that it was implied that the guys were still kissing...it just wasn't being shown.
"They also send a message
"They also send a message to anyone else considering adding gay characters that they better think twice. After all, with ATWT being called homophobic while actually including gay characters, what TV producer wouldn’t think twice before risking the same fate by adding a gay character to their show?"
Seriously. If I worked for a soap opera, I'd probably look at this whole thing and decide it wasn't worth the headache. I mean, if the anti-gay people don't like it and lots of gay people don't like it, why bother? Of course, lots of gay people do like Nuke and ATWT, which is why I'm glad you wrote this. Sometimes I think the complainers are ten times louder than the people who are generally satisfied. I pretty much quit the Nuke online fandom because having to put up with all the complaining was making it not fun anymore. And I do enough not-fun things in my life without not having fun watching a gay soap opera couple!
Hmm. . .
. . .at the risk of sounding like a whiny, bitchy complainer (as Marauder likes to paint all of us), I don't see what all the fuss is about over As The World Turns. I had some time free recently to spends a few hours over the course of two weeks to tune into the show, and I was very bored. (Sorry, Marauder; 'tis true). Of course, considering ATWT has no competition whatsoever, the award presentation is a gimme; a "no-brainer". Call me crazy, but I think I have a little more to worry about these days than some soap opera featuring two gay men that (by-the-way) none of my straight friends in these parts watches anymore. And dat's da name of dat tune!
Excuse me, I have to library some of my Judy Garland albums. LOL!
I think all gay guys are
yeah, the show...
the show did make some mistakes (due to pressure i think from sponsors probably) but from what i hear (i dont watch it as much anymore) it has definetely gotten better.
sometimes people just wanna bitch for the sake of bitching. this may be one of those times.
The GLAAD Award is DIFFERENT
Hi Michael,
If AfterElton gave out an award for best daytime TV drama series to "ATWT," I would cheer that as good and appropriate, yeah, but GLAAD is different. It's an organization that exists to fight discrimination in the media so I strongly feel it shouldn't be doling out awards to media groups that discriminate. It sends out the impression that we're sooooo grovelingly grateful that Massah has acknowledged us that we'll just forget for a sec or two the treatment we got back at the woodshed.
As for "The Kite Runner," that's EXACTLY the kind of movie that GLAAD should've acknowledged in its awards. The whole point of the film and book is the tragedy that unfurls when a boy cuts off a valued friendship, then punishes his old pal because the pal had been the victim of a homo rape. It's a shattering drama about the price people pay for gay discrimination, a price so grave that the story's protagonist returns to the Mideast and risks his life to rectify things later. GLAAD bestows awards to media that illuminate the fight against gay discrimination. Why do you consider "The Kite Runner" inappropriate?
Tom O'Neil Gold Derby, TheEnvelope.com / LATimes.com
BRAVO!
Great article O'Niel and Branco miss the bigger picture. I agree with everything well done!
People fear what they don't understand.Thats why homophobes are so scared of gay people.
DESERVE THE AWARD?
If The criteria for an award from GLAAD were based strictly
upon a gay couple being treated EXACTLY THE SAME as the straight couples on a given show then there is NO SHOW that would meet that standard.
No American or Canadian show would be worthy of a GLAAD award, ever, not even Will and Grace (whose main character was gay).
Not GH Nightshift, Not Degrassi TNG, Not Brothers and Sisters
GH NightShift
Kyle and Eric kissed twice and hugged once and had some lovely, wonderful conversations. The writing on that show was better. They only had 5 episodes but they did a lot with little. I enjoyed the storyline very much but it was not the end all be all of gay romances and the characters barely had any scenes on the show overall. Kyle and Eric were great but they were not created equal.
There was nothing "equal" about how Kyle and Eric were treated except that they got to kiss on screen. Meanwhile, Robin and her doctor man had sex in the elevator, in the shower, in the storage room, all over the hospital (and she was like 7 months pregnant at the time) with all kinds of implied and partial nudity.
As for the award category, maybe in the future GLAAD should change the category to be inclusive of both Daytime and Evening soaps but that's something for next year.
If people think that GH NighShift was more deserving then ATWT then it clearly isn’t about “equal treatment”.
Degrassi TNG
While it was ground breaking for Canada, the relationship between Marco and Dylan was even LESS intimate than NUKE was in all of 2007 and 2008 combined and their story spanned 4 seasons (the last of which they were living together and sharing a bed but we NEVER saw them alone together, not even once). It was also on in the evening and was a very provocative show that prided itself on “pushing the envelope”. But not for its gay characters.
They had a whole episode about Marco not being allowed to give blood because he was gay and sexually active (he had been dating Dylan at that point for a year) and the viewers didn't even know that Marco had slept with Dylan because we’d never seen them alone together. There were never even seen in a “room” alone, not to mention a bedroom (and Dylan was a college student living in the dorms).
Every other major character's "first time" was like an episode and a half. Marco? Nada. If we're looking at equal treatment, every other couple or character on Degrassi TNG had a bedroom scene or heavy making out scene (while there were still in high school even). Dylan and Marco were never even seen making out. Ever. On a show where everybody made out with everybody all the time and for long stretches on screen. On a show where a teen-aged girl practically does a lap dance for her boyfriend in her panties after which he openly discusses his erectile dysfunction.
Degrassi TNG was a primetime show and yet didn’t go nearly as far as NUKE in terms of expressions of intimacy and even touching (even during the kissing ban)
The two shows above are shows that people (including myself) have rightfully praised for their portrayal of gay men. But were they perfect? No.
Progress (particularly in the US) comes in stages. Anyone who doesn’t recognize that is choosing to be obstinate.
All soaps plots seem crazy and illogical and OTT to me. The writing is always hit or miss and continuity is very loose. But I don't see NUKE having any more "unrealistic" story lines or "bad" writing than any one else on ATWT. Unpopular story lines? Yes. Worse than Paul being psychic and Dusty coming back from the dead? No.
What's really at issue is the lack of sex and kissing in 2007 and early 2008. That's really the only critique folks can make about how the couple has been portrayed "unfairly" in comparison to other characters on ATWT.
It's not a little thing but it's not the end all be all either and the lack of sex wasn’t “degrading” or “homophobic”. It was the wrong “cultural” choice (but then so is making all the black women on soaps straighten their hair).
We as gay people want/need to see ourselves represented as healthy sexual beings in the media. Of course I get that. We've spent our whole lives watching straight folks sex it up on screen and we want to have our moment.
But it feels like were can be completely uncompromising. We want it RIGHT and RIGHT NOW OR ELSE! That's neither realistic nor reasonable.
When has the representation of any “minority” character been perfectly executed right out the box on American television? It takes stages and steps of development to get it right. Degrading and homophobic are unfair terms to be thrown at the writers of ATWT.
NUKE is leaps and bounds past Marco and Dylan. The characters even talked about sex (when they weren't having it) in at least every other episode either directly or in the "I want to be alone with you" kind of talk (and this was during the kissing ban). They talked about how they weren't having sex. They even tried to have sex twice and managed to get to the shirts off stage more than twice.
A teen-aged gay couple talked about having sex, with each other, on a US soap opera, in the afternoon. Perfect or not, that’s progress.
Had January 12 been spoiled and promoted ahead of time, ATWT would have been accused of pandering for ratings. As a viewer, I didn't want to know. I wanted to be surprised. It worked for me.
We cannot expect tv shows to get the representation of gay people exactly right and exactly to our liking right of the bat which is why reviews and critiques are necessary.
Figuring out how much you can get away with (with the censors, sponsors, viewers) and what is right or appropriate for presenting characters is part of doing something new and clearly ATWT has been working on getting it right as the storyline has moved along.
Progress is progress whether it took 2 months or 2 years.
GLAAD's job is to encourage and reward the good stuff, and critique the bad stuff and make suggestions for how shows can do it better.
To ignore a groundbreaking (still) phenomenon like the NUKE storyline on ATWT would be short-sighted, spiteful and antithetical to encouraging more and better gay characters on television.
Clearly there is something about the saga of NUKE that speaks to folks because the NUKE storyline has been translated into Italian, German, Dutch, Spanish and French (and is viewed in countries that more regularly show gay male couples kissing and having sex without nearly the amount of censure we experience in the US yet they still love NUKE).
I would never look to or expect a soap opera to be a force of social change or individual growth but my observation of the reception of the NUKE beyond A.E. (particularly by young Americans and young people in non-western countries who view it on Youtube) is that is has the potential to be exactly that.
It’s sad that so many of us don’t recognize that fact.
"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)
Never was about the pucker
While I am ready to applaud P & G for what they do today and tomorrow, the award period (the period of time that the award is suppose to address) covers a very despicable time in their history which P & G has yet to explain ("artistic license?", that alone is insulting but I don't believe P&G can tell the truth without looking like total asses.) So, I am either lead to believe that they were in collusion with the AFA, as the facts point to, or they were using us, exploiting the gay couple to 'create' a controversy no matter how it made gays look, which looks like their later strategy.
Look, they showed many near kisses after Christmas, after V-Day, well, for how many fricken days? Which only served to prove that two men kissing was too despicable to show - not fair treatment or anywhere near that. (How many times on Degrassi did the camera pause before a gay kiss only to dramatically pull away from the affection? Never. Right?) ATWT created ridiculous cock blocks as well, again and again and again; which happens on no show to no characters gay or straight; again highlighting the fact that it's just too bloody disgusting to imagine gays together.
And what finally did happen when they kissed, when they finally hooked up? The show did not get canceled. As expected: nothing damn well happened. So, until P & G come up with a better excuse for their crappy treatment of gays, I assume the obvious: they meant it to be like that because they have a low regard for gay people; or perhaps a much, much higher regard for our detractors, which amounts to the same thing.
But go ahead people, continue to reward the homophobic behavior and make excuses and pretend that none of this matters. And when you're done with that, I've got some boots that need licking, too.
We are talking about an award here, remember. At one time an award meant that you had merit. When someone 'gets it right' you give them an award. If nobody gets it right, you ignore everyone. It is called positive reinforcement. But what we're seeing, and what GLAAD and others want to reinforce is negative behavior, shoddy treatment and exploitation. Fine, if that's what you want to do, I have a right to call you out on it. Just don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
For your information, up until now soaps have been a force of social change. But portraying something like the first interracial couple doesn't give you the right to depict them as unclean because someone in your audience might otherwise object. When you do that it's called exploitation. It’s sad that so many of us don’t recognize that fact.
Nukely...I agree completely
Nukely...I agree completely with what you are saying. The complaint isn't about what is taking place on screen today, but about the time period in which the GLAAD Award was presented to ATWT. And during this time period there was some dispicable action taken by P&G and TPTB over at CBS. As you have pointed out it was a shameful time. We had...
The pan away at Christmas.
No kiss at Valentines while every other straight couples were having some serious lip-locking time.
When Luke and Noah were at the Farm by themselves, instead of using that big old bed even for a little cuddling while fully dressed, the writers decided they should jump up and down on it like a couple kindergarden kids. I still laugh at that image.
Ameera and shot gun daddy.
I remember when they even danced on the odd occasion, no body contact for these guys.
Then the endless months as a kissing ban was in place with just a few hugs and hand holding to satisfy fans, who at this point were greatful even for a little romantic look Nuke would give each other. I remember fans getting so excited if they held hands for a few seconds. It was just sad.
Naturally the fans became desperate and decided to send in hersey's kisses. This very site implimented a clock counting down the days without Luke and Noah sharing a kiss.
So, is the way TPTB show inclusive and fair representation of their gay characters? Am I to believe that the haters were so powerful that Luke and Noah couldn't kiss or even share a decent hug for what went on for months on end. I'm just not buying it. I took it as P&G felt that showing two men kissing and showing affection was not good for viewer consumption. Something shameful to see.
I couldn't watch ATWT again consistantly after the mistletoe event, it was so upsetting. But I did watch the odd episodes when fans pointed out in anger again and again how luke and Noah was blocked from even giving each other a decent hug.
It's not complaining or whinning, it's about why a show, which clearly didn't demonstrate fair and inclusiviness was presented with an Award?! on the contrary, they should have been given a raspberry. And remember, the dispute is about the award being given for that late 2007-2008 time period, not for 2009 episodes
The Award Period
Thank you for stressing that about the award period. The thing that I have found most frustrating about his brouhaha is that no one seems to be getting that these awards are for the previous calendar year and, thus, a lot of irrelevant things are being brought into the discussion that just muddies the issue. Anything not included in the year up for discussion is completely irrelevant in terms of deserving the award. Last year, O'Neil included events in 2008 for why ATWT shouldn't have gotten the award for 2007. Those events were completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. This year, Jensen includes events from 2009 in his defense of ATWT getting the award for 2008. Again, those events are completely irrelevant. In these very comments, we have people praising the show for things that happened in 2009 and damning it for things that happened in 2008, but insisting that they deserved the award for 2008! All I want is for people to get their facts straight! For the record, I think ATWT deserved it last year (for 2007), but not this year (for 2008). 2007 was a big step forward for gay representation in daytime television overall, but ATWT took big steps back in 2008. I don't think anyone should get an award from an organization like GLAAD for going backwards with that representation.
Established Disestablishmentarian - You've seen worse
GLAAD AWARDS
Dating?
ATWT GLADD AWARD
Well, ATWT will have competition next year!
Next year's Daytime Drama GLAAD nominees