I think that a larger issue beyond just their lack of physical intimacy is their lack of any real vigor as characters.

They are incredibly dull and shallow characters as written these days, and there is something almost sullen about Van's and Jake's portrayal.  Their relationship is being written as very ambivalent and as I have said many times, if they were a straight couple being written this way, the general fan base would be calling for them to be written off.

As things stand, it feels like P&G has just been milking the "groundbreaking" nature of Nuke to generate buzz in the press, which in turn attracts attention to the show.  But then the actual use of the characters is weak and it seems that the hope is that new viewers will instead be caught up in the other characters' stories.

To me it smacks of exploitation of the "gay issue" and I don't really like us being used this way.

I am in complete agreement that TPTB at ATWT and P & G are milking the Nuke storyline with all the publicity to hold onto the newer audience. I doubt that they can maintain that since Nuke is now neutered and beyond boring. They have been that way since before last Christmas when they began morphosis into the sad, dull couple they are today. It's really frustrating to watch Van and Jake try their best to play this couple after the tremendous build-up from last summer. Unless this storyline changes dramatically in the coming weeks, it's a death sentence for further support as far as Nuke goes. Doubtful that it will change with their physical intimacy frozen with NO chance of a thaw!

Just write them off, send them out of town to come back, perhaps in 10 years when "we" will be able to marry!

and then give Luke (Van Hansis) someone to have a real relationship with.

Hell, the show should be dropped in general. why are soaps written so poorly?

I remain ever-hopeful that TPTB will turn this around and give our boys some, er, meaty material to play with; this Ameera s/l is a complete disaster and Psionycx is right that the even outside of this the characters are being written in a lifeless manner (they make the usually dull Paul/Meg relationship seem like the ultimate in romance by comparison). So, if they can't fix this within the next few months, pack them off to Chicago, so Noah can go to Northwestern as he always wanted and Luke can cheat on him with some gym bunny from Boystown.

 

 

Check out my blog: http://radicalsexy.blogspot.com/

Seems like the internet is rearing its ugly head in the face of TPTB over at As the World turns... Guess a couple of years ago, we would be all like 'Oh, they KISSED... TWICE!! How groundbreaking!', 'Did you SEE the Valentine's Special... can you even believe it- they were included AND they held hands!!!"

But then we get glimpses of shows from my home country, like VERBOTENE LIEBE, where men sleep with each other even BEFORE they have a relationship, or the UK's HOLLYOAKS, where the resident gay character is treated just the same as any other character on that show and all of a sudden Luke and Noah can't feel anything but dull.

In its defense, ATWT is targeted at older stay-at-home moms who want to watch their stories, while the two foreign shows are targeted at the 14-29 demographic who probably won't write to whatever version of their home country's FCC to complain about the 'horror' of seeing two guys get it on.

On the other hand, ATWT's IIC brought it on themselves when they promised us a couple that would be treated just as any straight couple on the show. That has clearly not happened. I'll keep on watching for now, but with YouTubers catching up on those really more promising storylines, my interest is quickly fading away...

--

Check out The Gays Of Daytime

Well, I know I've said this before, but has anyone else noticed that all the Nuke publicity still photos that you see scattered around are way sexier than anything we actually see on the show?

I mean everything about them.  The clothing that they wear, the poses that they're in, the whole deal.

On the actual show Luke and Noah are usually bundled up under several layers of unflattering clothing (as opposed to the muscle-hugging shirts they wear in publicity stills), barely touch each other and definitely do not exchange the smoldering looks you see in pictures from Soap Opera Digest.

This is why I feel that they are a viewer trap.  Meant to lure the curious, who will then ideally be hooked with scenes of shirtless Hotprechaun instead.

Sadly, it's time to write them off. They're just too boring to live. Put Nuke out of their (and our) misery. Let the older viewers revel in whether Jack and Carly really get back together again (as if anyone could possibly care).

Hi, I'm writing from Spain.

I am very surprised to see the comments coming from those against this relationship.In real life people just love each other no matter if they are men and women, men and men or women and women.

I find it strange coming from a country as modern as the US is supposed to be. For many things you are still very far back.

In Europe something like this does not create tension even if you can find voices against public show of love. But concerning TV shows we can be proud here in Spain of being one of the first in airing a soap opera where a teenager came out of the closet and kissed another boy onscreen.Its title "Al Salir the Clase" (something like "After School") the subject: the common lives of teens in and after school. And this was no big deal. Now you can see gay relationships sometimes but the thing is not important as we must arrive to treat these stories as the most normal things.We must stop considering a gay relationship like something strange.

I guess the major problem for those conservatives is that they cannot assume two people can love each other no matter what. It is sure that the first thing that comes to their minds is sex when it should be love.

Concerning ATWT story of Nuke which I have watched on Youtube I should say that if they don't want to present it as real as possible it is better to take it off the show because it won't be credible. If you compare this one with the straight ones you see the difference instantly. For example Maddi & Noah. They hadn't met for long when they where already naked and in bed, but nobody complaint. Same thing with many others. Instead, these two boys kiss just once and it's scandal.

Many things must change with many people and if this show has to contribute writing a realistic storyline I think they should do it.

Thank you for letting me say this. And sorry if I made some mistakes.

Cheers, Tony

But you know what, living here and originally being from Europe - most people are not as backwards as the few crazies would make you believe.

I know not a single person (and I know many so-called 'good Christians') that has an issue with Luke and Noah (or any other gay or lesbian couple for that matter) kissing on TV. But unfortunately, those who grab the headlines and attention are those people that will single out a gay couple as the worst thing a daytime show could possibly show, while all the murder, adultery, incestous behavior and so on and so on doesn't seem to bother them all that much.

--

The Gays Of Daytime

.
The story and characters should be cut. Luke should be banished to Chicago. ATWT is not about to treat this or any gay couple the same as any straight couple on the show. There will be no true romance for Luke.

It's cowardly to be caving into the AFA on this issue, if that's what P&G are doing. But I wonder if they are actually doing that. They have chosen to write about a "New Gay" relationship, one where the couples are platonic eunuchs. It's exploitation and that is base and evil.

I still think the show and the couple have some merit and I even actually watching them. Sometimes. I do have my problems with the way the show has handled some things and I wish things could be different, but also I think that there has been FAR more good than bad done and nothing is served by taking them off the air. I'm of the opinion that those who don't like the couple or the show or the way they are depicted and if they are ever so annoyed by what is or isn't happening on screen should stop raining on everyone else's parade by calling for an end to the storyline and simply stop watching themselves. Problem solved!

If they're just going to keep on this way with the blatant double standards, then a large part of me thinks that they should drop Nuke. I think it sends a bad message that two guys being in an intimate relationship is somehow too shameful or scandalous to show, compared to everything else they do show. But another part of me thinks that P&G should be allowed to continue with their charade, because it puts these double standards out there for people to see and talk about. It puts a spotlight on the continuing problem of inequality via all these discussions and media articles.

Ideally, Nuke would just be treated like any other couple and it wouldn't be ground breaking or grab attention for anything other than being well-written. It would be so commonplace to have a gay couple on soaps that ATWT/P&G wouldn't be able to milk Nuke for publicity JUST because they're gay. If they wanted publicity for the couple, it would be ONLY because their stories were well-written. Right now, I think the only thing they can fall back on is the relative novelty of the couple, and that's not enough.

What's so infuriating is that TPTB is more conservative than their audience. Anyway, all people who would drop the show at the sight of male teenagers kissing must have already left, because Luke and Noah already kissed. Apparently, there weren't much of such viewers because ratings were actually up! So, the risk was taken. It paid off. Ratings didn't drop, ATWT got some publicity and something somewhat fun in otherwise mostly deadly dull show. And NOW they decided, for some unfathomable reason, to backtrack, instead of capitalizing on their success and enjoying paid off risk. It's not only offensive, it's bad business as well. As for middle aged housewives, I bet that significant amount of them are "slashers" or potential slashers. A huge amount of slash fanfiction writing is done by women who long time ago stopped being teenagers. Pretty boys making out and having somewhat angsty relationship is female equivalent of two hot chicks not exactly lesbians having sex for straight guys. It makes total sense for soap operas to target straight females and gay men. And young people who mostly don't have problem with this kind of portrayal. I don't know how many ultra conservative viewers ATWT has and what business they have watching very explicit and "unwholesome" show like this. Of people who can be upset at this storyline, I can imagine only insignificant minority actually dropping the show other this. So, ATWT TPTB are shooting themselves in the foot for no reason whatsoever.

Either way, they must take SOME risks, because soap opera format is dying.

The soap opera couples are there, in BIG part, for viewers to drool over. It's not high drama, not Ingmar Bergman movie. If viewers can drool over heterosexual couples (or why do you think soaps cast so many hunks/hot chicks with well cared for bodies), they should be allowed to drool over gay ones, too. It's not real people, it's fictional characters, and viewers are supposed to live vicariously through them. To get upset over it is silly, in my opinion. Real life couples are different, but why would anyone take unhealthy interest in real life couples? Personally, I am not annoyed at all at men being turned on by beautiful women in any shape or form. It's natural. It's basic instinct (eta: for heterosexual guys, duh). People can get their jollies whatever way they want as long as they live and let live.

I am not sure how well I express my point, but you completely misinterpret it in ridiculous way and then attack it in classic case of "straw man argument". The sheer WTF of it is staggering. Maybe you should reread what I said.

 - not, it's not the ONLY factor, but it's an important factor. My point - to be upset and offended that many heterosexual women drool at the sight of attractive m/m couple is as pointless as to be offended that they live vicariously through hot male/female pairing or that many gay viewers appreciate hotness of male actors.  Of course good character drama should be main attraction, but there is nothing wrong with shallow pleasures as well, especially in face of almost total absense of such good drama. Parker's trial was ridiculous, btw. Good courtroom drama it was not.

  - HUH? I don't even know how to reply to something so moronic. Where did I say that? How do you compare insulting portrayal of minorities, propaganda of racial hatred and actual sexual assaults with men having fantasies that involve f/f sex? ort women enjoying homosexual pairings on screen? Sure, it's exactly the same as joining nazi party! Anyway, you broke Godwin's law. You fail. I am willing to continue discussion of this point, but with reasonable person. And yes, it's ad hominem, but I can't see how that can be avoided at this point.

  - Not showing physical affection between gay characters has nothing to do with catering to female viewers. They LIKE seeing that, like seeing boys kiss, be affectionate with each other. I bet that huge part of anti-kiss ban protest consists of women. Of course they do not only care about eye candy, but - and more so -  the social part of the issue, but from beginning many of them were attracted to the couple simply because of their chemistry. Tons of women want to see mm affection on screen, and not only for righteous reasons. I thought you found it offensive! So which it is?

 Soaps absolutely do explore sexual attractivity of their stars and couples. I don't see why it's totally fine thing to do with heterosexual onscreen couples but a horrible crime when it comes to gay ones. I don't see the problem at all, really. Maybe I am not puritanical enough or something.

 

 

 

Sweetums, I don’t see how it’s pointless to point out logical fallacy that makes entire argument pretty much – well – pointless. Straw man argument is precisely what you do – you put words in my mouth and then argue with the points I’ve never made. You seem to be under impression - or pretend to be under impression, because I don’t know how you could possibly be – that I am defending P&G treatment of a couple. No, it’s not portayed fairly – or well at all. Absolutely, “Nuke” should be treated as well as any couple on the show. When did I say otherwise? Where did I say that you should be proud at existence of female fans of m/m pairings? It would be rather silly to be proud of it – or annoyed by it. They just exist. It’s not something to be proud of but I don’t see how it’s harmful either. What does porn have to do with it, btw? The problem is lack of intimacy on screen, not porn-y scenes – there are no such scenes, well, for gay characters anyway (straight couples have pretty explicit sex scenes). Again – WTF?

I stated my argument in my first post, it’s not my problem if you’re incapable of comprehending it. In fact, you seem determined to misinterpret anything I say in weirdest way possible.

- Yes, they should be.

- Slashers idea of gay romance is far from sexless. In fact, I am sure that at least 80% of slash fanfiction has porn in it, well, those are not exact numbers of course, but I’d say at least about 70% or some such probably has NC-17 sex scenes. P&G does NOT cater to female fans of the pairings when they do not show signs of affection between them, in fact, they rob them of the reason to watch, because while drama of relationship is all well and good, couple that doesn’t even kiss feels somewhat lackluster. You seem to have strange idea of female slash fans. Even teenage girls who write slash usually write porn as well, quite horribly written usually, but that’s not the point.

- No, that’s not what straight women want, non-homophobic ones anyway (the majority I hope), I have no idea what PG is thinking (their logic is weird and alien), and I have no idea why you think I meant to agree with PG's backwards policies

I don't know about non-internet fans, but I haven't seen a single Nuke fan, male or female, gay or straight, who wasn't bothered by the non-kissing. Fans may disagree over whether the show has also had some positive content. (I believe that there have been some good things about Nuke.) But everybody agrees that the non-kissing is unfair and hurtful to the story.

I do continue to see some good things in this show, especially the great acting done by Van Hansis (and Jake Silbermann too). There have been moments of great dialogue. My only complaint is actually the kissing.

Dear Nukely,

Perhaps you haven't stopped using drugs fast enough. I heard some of them have permanent effect on the brain activity. Perhaps this is why you cannot comprehend simple sentences, lead coversation in logical and polite fashion and think it's fitting to callously - and rather offensively - bring up sexual assault and racism propaganda in topic which has nothing to do with either. In fact, it would actually explain a lot!

I don't understand you either, I am afraid. Avenue? Slash doesn't need "avenue". Huh? Perhaps if I put your posts through babelfish translator I'd understand what you are trying to rant about. Is ATWT right show to watch for slash purposes? Sure, it has actual gay couple in it!

Anyway, it's okay that you don't understand me. Perhaps if I actually did use drugs, and same ones as you, we'd be wired same way. As it is, I don't think the situation can be helped. Well, I could try to explain my point in very simple sentences, but it's easier for us just not to interact. 

 

Censored? Who censores you? Your posts are getting progressively ridiculous, now you sound paranoid. You said that you don't understand what I am trying to say, and I say - fine, don't read my posts then. Is this what you consider censorship? I guess your understanding of this term is about as correct as your understanding of "slashers"'s mentality, correct argumentation practices and common logic. *** I would like what "avenue" has to do with anything, as well. You mentioned it first, not me. *** Who are "we"? Speak for yourself please. I am going to reply separately to different people, right now I am talking to you. (Why I do it is a good question. I guess I try to find at least some sort of logic in this insanity). *** Anyway, you admitted that you don't understand what I am saying. But you get offended and all bothered by it anyway? Yeah, it makes sense, sure... O_O Listen, I'd like to help you understand, but at this point I am not sure I can find words simple enough to achieve that. Perhaps - if simply not reading posts you're incapable of understanding is not an option to you - you can point out, as coherently as you can, what exactly you don't understand? Try - hard as it may be - to stay away from ad hominem attacks and non sequiturs, and I will try to explain, I promise! Hey, I'll try it either way, I am willing to make allowance for aftereffects of that ex-drug use of yours. - ETA: I have to leave my PC for awhile, and may be a little busy, so it's possible I'll only be able to reply on Sunday. Apologies in advance. (*** - Signifies new paragraph. Otherwise, my post appears as one huge text block of doom)

See, I wish I could  help you as well, would that I could! It’s almost tragic, and touching – two people who want to help each other, and can’t, isn’t it? *Sniff* But what am I to do if you don’t understand simple concepts expressed in English? You can’t even say what  exactly you find difficult and confusing in my posts. I don’t think I had this problem before with anyone esle, so I can’t help thinking that the problem is in you. Obviously – and naturally – you think otherwise.  Like in Greek tragedy, we were doomed from the beginning. You think I can’t explain – I think you’re unable to understand. I guess we’ll just have to live with that. I know that I can.

Dear Nukely, Perhaps you ...

"I don't understand you either, I am afraid. Avenue? Slash doesn't need "avenue". Huh? Perhaps if I put your posts through babelfish translator I'd understand what you are trying to rant about. Is ATWT right show to watch for slash purposes? Sure, it has actual gay couple in it!"

Lucky for me I have a built in translator, so I can understand some of what your trying to say. But, I never used the word avenue. The first place it's found on this page is in your message. Does anybody have a clue what she means by "Slash doesn't need "Avenue"?