Two Gay Guys video blog: When Gays Attack!

How about none of them. GLAAD should have told ATWT and P&G. "Thanks for the token storyline but you've really dropped the ball. See ya next year." ATWT is only doing the storyline to grab some attention...people are tuning in to see what's gonna happen. GLAAD's too busy with the Hollywood handjob.

GLAAD is there to fight people who cave to homophobia and anti-gay people in the media...not reward them.

Interesting that you mention Philadelphia, 1993 and the no kiss.  2008 and still a fear of a gay kiss.  Thanks GLAAD...you've accomplished so much.  When you're not planning one of your 13 award shows perhaps you can take your head out of your ass.

This is going to sound a lot like another recent comment I left on this site. But I'm going to be repetitive and boring anyway.

I'm again, getting older. And gaining some perspective, which I think Brent and Michael are trying to provide. Part of me feels the passion exhibited by many other AfterElton readers, that it's now 2008, and I don't see why we can't be treated like everyone else - I live my life expecting to be, and for the most part am. But it's an equality movement, and we have to see that ATWT is providing that movement towards equality, even if it is moving at a glacially slow pace. They didn't have to bother, and yet they did.

When I was younger, and more ambitious, I had an attitude that I could conquer the world, and was on my way to doing it - I made a lot more money and lived a more exciting life than I do now. I always played to win. Now I play to not lose.

That's a very different thing, and something I couldn't have done in the past. But it's part of growing up - the passion and energy it takes to play life cutthroat, I just don't have anymore, and I've also come to realize that diplomacy wins more wars than fighting bloodsport.

Is ATWT everything I want? Heck, it's not even well written anymore (I watched 20 years ago, it made some sense back then) - just look at the never-dying ventriloquist dummy. It's showing a sweet, normal gay couple to middle America, and not a serial-killer gay, or some other negative view, to middle America. And visibility is diplomacy. It's the way to win the war of equality. This is not high budget, high art, political commentary. But it's more than we had a year ago. And I'll take that as not losing.

Dear Michael and Brent,

 Oh please, spare me!  Frustrating that a writer & probably a producer at ATWT somehow persuaded the suits & CBS to allow a kiss between two teen guys who are both physically beautiful and actually developed some romantic chemistry between them?  Yes it's frustrating when shortly after their romantic relationship was established, the AFA scared the "hovno" (Czech word) out of P&G, CBS, and ATWT execs! And Luke & Noah's romance was history!

But your absolutely most outrageous statement was, "'All' art requires compromise!"  Oh please!!!  Tell that to every new artistic group that came along whether in music or painting or sculpture or My God what about the opening of the Rite of Spring or Manet's Dejeuner Sur l"Herbe?!" or the Impressionists or Dadaists or Picasso?  They were excoriated by the press!  BUT THEY HAD TO BE TRUE TO THEIR ART!! You've got to be kidding!!  ART NEVER REQUIRES COMPROMISE, TRUE ART REQUIRES NO COMPROMISE; IT REQUIRES REVOLUTION AND PERFECTION OF THEIR ARTISTIC IDEAL!  You two are idiots!

Lose perspective - give me a break again!  Change does not occur by caving in to the AFA and right wing groups that are out there trying to push us back in the closet - and make no mistake about it, that's exactly what the AFA & affiliated groups have done to P&G's and CBS's and ATWT's gay teens Luke & Noah.

Our anger is real, it is justified, and while I don't care a whit about the GLAAD awards, I do care passionately that a teen, gay couple on ATWT has been quashed.  I watched the last episode which portrays Luke as this sad, puppydog following after Noah and Ameera with a hangdog expression that is truly pathetic.  Of course, that is the nature of daytime soap operas - we all know that.  But the gall of ATWT was never allowing a true romantic teen gay relationship to develop beyond a couple hugs, ridiculous (given the nature of all other daytime soap couples) longing looks, and two kisses that basically first was a shock and the second a "horror" blow as str8 America (a la Colonel Mayer) dictated zero romance between the two.

Mad!  Angry!  You bet!  Justified!  You bet!  Should we reward ATWT for nothing?  No!  Why, because every episode following those two kisses has told young, gay Americans to be afraid, to hide and to be ashamed of their feelings!  That, dear Michael and Brent, is why the two of you are full of crap!   Oh, and what do you suppose came of that brave young writer &/or producer/exec who ok'd that first kiss?  My guess is that he or she has long since been fired.  And if not fired, then 100% squelched.  Either way, it's a sad commentary on the fear that still grips network America in 2008!

And finally, that fear will always be there until we "Stonewall" the tv networks and express our frustration and anger!  If we do not or do nothing, then nothing will "ever" change in daytime or network tv!  That should be clear even to you two idiots!

i think we all are going in circles with this ATWT stuff...but here I go again....

I think what gets me more pissed off with ATWT is this: look at where we are in time.....we're no longer in the early 1990's...it's 2008...we've come a pretty long way since then i like to think....more public figures are coming out successfully, the show QAF was a huge success and um...Brokeback Mountain anyone? 

there will always be controversy and i get that....but I think from what i have mentioned above....the positives usually outweigh the negative.

Now, i know it's daytime and i would fully understand that, except wait....they have all sorts of crazy crap going on in those soaps.....adultery, mass murders, and so on...

that's my beef. people just want a kiss from time to time. not a full blown sex scene QAF style....

so yes...kudos for the show having them....and i know it's a show, but if we can show people doing other stuff such as what i mentioned, then i reeeeallly doubt a kiss is going to harm CBS or ratings.

First of all, I totally agree with those that are writing letters and campaigning to let it be known that fans want truly equal treatment for Luke and Noah. I've written letters myself.

But, on the other hand, I'm not ready to throw out the baby with the bathwater. ATWT truly has accomplished something by having a likeable, relatable, gay character. It does make a statement when viewers tune in to see a gay person as just another cast member. One of my online penpals mentioned that she would not be quite as understanding of gay people, if not for Luke Snyder on ATWT. She's now a big Luke and Noah fan! That's the power of television, and ATWT is the only soap, besides AMC, to have used that power.

Of course, I completely agree that ATWT is not doing as much as it could, and should, be doing. They're playing it "safe" instead of trying to push the envelope. I hope fans will continue pushing and pushing at them to quit being afraid of a simple kiss. But I am impressed w ith the fact that Luke and Noah exist at all, and with how relatable they are.

I have to agree with the angry mob on this one. In 2008, the mere existence of a gay character is not nearly enough. Luke and Noah are so neutered at this point that they aren't really sexual beings at all. They are the perfect gays for Bush America. Gays who don't ever actually do any gay stuff...except marry the hot foreign girl so she can stay in the country. Is that really our only real function?

 How is this any progress over the sexless gay sidekicks of the past? No, my love and respect for Van and Jake and what they are trying to deliver in these roles is boundless, but the mere existence of an asexual yet loveable gay character is not acceptible and should not be receiving any awards.

This won't be a popular view based on the comments here, but I have to weigh in on this discussion.  As a 30 year soap viewer I just keep thinking how few and far between soap storylines featuring gay characters have been and how much the fact that two college kids in a relationship--albeit a mostly off-screen one--is progress.  Many of the people above are correct in stating that this is 2008 and not the early 90s.  And Luke and Noah prove that.  The last couple of gay characters on soaps include Nora's murderous gay husband on One Life To Live, and the character of Kevin on All My Children--a gay high school student who came out and was promptly disowned by his parents.  That storyline was used to promote tolerance and demonstrate that gay people weren't so scary.  Beloved legacy characters came down on both sides of whether it was ok to be gay and some learned lessons.  Bear in mind this was long before Bianca became "Lesbianca"--as Greenlee used to call her. 

Anyway, I'm rambling.  The point here is that in 2008 the mere existance of Luke Snyder--a member of a core family on a soap and his boyfriend living under one roof and obviously dating, even if not wholly onscreen, is progress.  And for people in parts of the country who still feel gays are scary, or who think they don't know anyone gay, getting to know Luke and Noah and seeing them as relatable is the best we can hope for now. 

Ed mentions that he's getting older and learning.  I feel that way too.  The "kids" now come out much younger than many of the guys my age (34) did and they seem to expect the world to embrace them.  It's a wonderful idea and a lofty goal.  But today as I was walking through the building where I work past a group of teenagers as I passed one boy told his friends, "Yo, that guy's a f*ckin' flamer."  Not how I'd describe myself at all, but this is going on in 2008.  CBS probably did cave on this storyline.  I'm not disputing that.  But to think they shouldn't because in a perfect world it would be wrong is to deny that there are people in America today who do not accept or respect the idea of anyone being gay. 

Besides, it's a soap.  I love them and I'm not denigrating anything about the genre.  But As The World Turns or One Life To Live or any of the other exotic soap towns--Port Charles, Pine Valley, etc--exist as melodrama.  This is escapist television.  None of us should look for total accuracy in storytelling or for public service stories everyday.  However, summer is coming and the teen set will again take center stage.  And you can bet Luke and Noah will be back on the frontburner in July and August. 

However, ATWT is getting intolerably BORING. Currently, my only association with ATWT is reading Brian's liveblogging. Brian is the only reason to read anything about ATWT. If it weren't for Brian's humor I would completely ignore ATWT.

Bottomline, ATWT has become completely irrelevant. It is simply not worth watching. If the producers of ATWT want to have more viewers they have to have Luke and Noah behaving as a real gay couple would. We should not watch just for the sake of watching.

Since I sort of defended ATWT, I want to add that I COMPLETELY agree that it's not good enough, what they are doing with Luke and Noah. They put this story to the side much more than any other storyline, including those in their age group. Plus, even when they have good scenes, they're not allowed to show natural physical affection. If it continues like this, I defnitely don't think the show deserves a GLAAD award for 2008.

However, in 2007, some good things did occur with Luke and Noah. The summer where Luke and Noah fell for each other was done well, and it was interesting (unlike many other ATWT stories). Fans had been waiting for a long time for Luke to get a boyfriend, and he finally got one. For that period of time, Luke and Noah were treated like any other character, including the physical side. It was a good plot arc, and, for that, I don't object to GLAAD giving the show an award.

I am happy that the non-kissing is getting so much media attention, because I want whoever's in charge to know that people aren't just going to not notice. But, I won't go so far as to say I want their GLAAD award rescinded.

When Gays Attach addressed their perspective on several issues pertaining to ATWT, the GLAAD awards, the movie Philadelphia, art, “strategy,” just to name a few. While I interpret it as nothing more than an editorial, I can see why some people, self included, don’t agree on some observations, certain associations made, and what could be interpreted as a universal imperative on there being only one way to address valid frustrations.

I only thought about this today, but remembered that the GLAAD awards coincided with the tail-end of a grassroots campaign lead by the many of show’s fans to generate as much media attention as possible to let ATWT know that they would not allow it to rest on its laurels, especially since the show seemed to be moving further away from a place that it had reached so long ago. I think that the timing of the show receiving a pat on the back by GLAAD at the very moment when the fans were seeing the fruits of their own labor in print, may have made many upset at GLADD. I am not a proponent of taking any award back, but there may have been a way for them to stick to their guns but also finding a way to respectfully express that they’d be watching as the boys were now stars. It would be have smart PR on the part of GLADD, but this is about When Gays Attack.

What I found could be interpreted badly in this video blog offering was the not so subtle reminder about who our “friends” are supposed to be, that expressing “frustration” via anger somehow represents a “loss of perspective,” and that there is some meaningful correlation between “disrespectful” activists who denounced the movie Philadelphia and those who want to call attention to their beliefs that Nuke is not only not even remotely simmering, but that they are taking steps backwards after promising big things. Many just don’t think that Nuke qualifies as even “pretty good” and would rather they removed from the canvas as at least it would send a message that they are not going to tackle something that they once thought that they would be able to.

While I agree that Nuke might be great diplomats for gays in a big scale, some are not looking for diplomats on ATWT but to be entertained on a personal level and they are not. I’d rather watch a great show that has no gay characters to speak off than a lousy one that may happen to have one or label one as such.

Also, while the TV Guide piece by Michael Logan probably came out after this video blog was filmed, it serves as another example that all is not well in Nukeland. When it is “revealed” the show’s executive producer is forbidden to speak to the media, and the head honcho at CBS daytime gives statements that almost seem tailor-made to support the hypothesis that the network is loving the controversy and milking it for all that it’s worth, I can see why many want to tell CBS where to stick its show. Are these our friends at this moment in time? Barbara Bloom does not sound like anyone’s bud.

All cows eventually do run dry and end up at the slaughterhouse, and that is something that not only P&G needs to remember, but it applies to CBS as many Nuke fans (which are in no way limited to gay men) feel cheated, don’t want to be talked down to, or used for publicity.

While I am about to stick my nose where it does not belong, I think that amadeus27 has some extremely valid points about the mess at ATWT, but it’s not acceptable to call Michael or Brent “idiots” as they are anything but, and doing so makes you seem like one, which you are not either. An apology would be nice and would show that anger can be coupled with respect and does not represent a loss of perspective.

Michael seems quite happy with seeing these guys and it’s reflected most weeks in his end of week column. While I was annoyed/felt cheated yet again the French kiss/no kiss fake-out, he also saw them “loving each other and planning for the future.” I did not see that at all, but even it’s his right to express his opinions, especially as he was not calling other members idiots for feeling differently.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=518130334

Somehow the memory of Stonewall fades from our consciousness.  Guillermo, I called Michael and Brent idiots for two reaons - the first, was for the idiotic statement that "Art requires compromise!"  How ridiciulous - Art is based on noncompromising principles.  The second time I called Michael & Brent full of crap was because they were praising ATWT as a program that by having a gay couple (though one could hardly call Nuke a gay couple) they deserved some kind of praise or award.  Bullshit!  What ATWT has done by neutering Luke & Noah is a huge disservice to the gay community - especially young gay Americans.  The castration of Luke is especially galling and I see absolutely no possible way to put a positive spin on the s/l as it is now on ATWT.

Many of you apparently believe that just by calling Nuke a gay couple, ATWT deserves praise.  I cannot in good conscience share in that belief.  I leave it to you.

Because I did sense a special chemistry between Luke & Noah in those few episodes last summer, I really wish that they could have found their way and their story onto a cable network so that it could have been developed in a truly positive way for all Americans and especially those of us who are gay!   

afhickman

"It takes a village (to make Village People)"

I agree that "art requires compromise" is an idiotic statement--but, remember, it was made by two otherwise thoughtful and caring guys.  They are doing more with this website to promote gay interests than the rest of us will do in a lifetime of watching soap operas, no matter who gets to kiss or take his shirt off.  Soaps are ratings driven.  They will do what they have to do to sell--soap.  There is nothing sinister about their sqeamishness when it comes to depicting out gay characters.  What I've seen of ATWT has been on afterelton, and I'm grateful to Brent and Mike for the exposure to a show I might otherwise never get to see.  That said, I would never expect the writers on that, or any other soap, to start concentrating their attention on fully-developed, well-rounded, recognizably human characters, gay or straight.  And I'm not sure I'd want a soap opera to take on the really pressing issues of the day, like gay kids getting bashed and even killed in school.  Yes, I want validation from TV (I need TV, when I got T-Rex?), but I'm not naive enough to think I'll find it there.  I look instead to "art" in all its other myriad forms: fiction, painting, sculpture,  Independent Film, and, god help me, even comix.  And I'm not disappointed.  Expect Hollywood, and especially soap operas, to catch up when gay is indisputably commercial--not to mention boring.

Thanks, BobbyBaby.  Your post sums up my feelings exactly. Nuke, as it's being presented now, is NOT progressive, nor is it much of a step forward.  Back in 2007 it seemed like it would be, which is why we were all so excited.

The only thing partially redeeming it is Van and Jake, who obviously are trying their best to capture the physical intimacy so glaringly absent from the writing.  They've also tried to stay focused on doing their jobs as best they can despite all the controversy.  It's really a shame the show didn't end up on Bravo or someplace where they could be given more free reign.

Bottom line:  censorship is alive and well in America 2008.

Indeed, there are many interesting comments generated by this discussion.  But for me, the essential truth to the current Luke/Noah s/l is unfortunately and sadly a very, very "anti-gay" message!  There was for me for a brief moment last summer, a glimmer of something positive - and from a soap for God's sake!  Alas, it lasted but one brief shining moment and then was gone. 

Yes, we're talking about a soap, but guys and gals, soaps do have an influence on popular culture and in that vein, I object strenuously to the pathetic and extremely negative portrayal they have made Van and Jake play.  My view is that ATWT is now an openly and actively anti-gay soap opera.  It does anger me; in fact it makes me mad as hell that in 2008 this is still promoted on network tv.

BTW - this is the "other" reason that I called Brent & Michael idiots - because they seem to think that ATWT is "still" out there "for" gays in America.  Get real, guys, ATWT is anything but supporting a gay lifestyle...in fact, in my view, as I stated already in this blog, it is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.

That's "the gay lifestyle" on ATWT.

Yes elsewhere in Ferndale -- at Raymond Burr State College -- you can find gay hot tub orgies. But Nuke wants nothing to do with that.

This crap is impossible to justify.

There is so much of what amadeus27 has say that has so much merit, but the continued strong stance regarding the name-calling only supports some of the subject matter of Brent and Michael’s video blog. I am bothered by it as it’s not only disrespectful to in what is in essence a small community, and on a personal level because I feel that this video blog provides a great opportunity for people to be candid about how they feel about this show.

While I don’t agree with some of what was said in the video blog or the rationale behind their commentary, the opinions expressed does not qualify them as "idiots." I want to focus on that word before I move on as it sounds as unspecific and useless as kids at school calling one another “gay.” What's the point?

After reading the comments and seeing the video blog yet again, I think that the statement that “art requires compromise” probably did nothing but take away from some valid points made about how some people express their dissatisfaction with ATWT as it could arguably been seen as a little arrogant statement, with I don’t think was the intent. In practice, I fully agree with Brent that all commercial “creative endeavors” (to use alternative language to “art”), require compromise. One would be hard-pressed to find any person in any field not making compromises on a daily basis. This includes daytime drama or welding. I assert that even the creator of The Sopranos could tell tales of compromises that he had to make during the run of the show. Is ATWT art? I’ll leave that to others to decide.

I do disagree with Michael’s opinion that the rage expressed against the writers and executives is somehow inappropriate, that they are doing the best that they can, or that what we see on the screen is the result of some corporate decision that is entirely out of their hands. There is much that can be done as all that the suits care about is spending as little money as possible, generating high ratings, and trying to keep the gravy train going.  I find it hard to believe that CBS/P&G is micromanaging ATWT so much that suggested/demanded that the scribes write a story about an annoying Iraqui girl who would get in Nuke’s way.

For all the fear that we project on these companies having about everything, tackling Iraq is a lose/lose as it’s divisive by nature and recent history has shown that no one (even independent film buffs) are ready to embrace tales involving this war. Gay and political too? I think that the suits would have been just fine with Nuke joining Casey, Matt, Ali, Aaron, et al in the dorms as long as whatever limits are respected.

Just as I blame Jean Passanante (Head-Writer ATWT) for lowering the bar on story-telling, and Chris Goutman (Executive Producer) for mismanaging corporate resources, including the permanent loss of many assets that took years to nurture, I also blame myself for continuing to support a show that has wronged me, and not just when it comes to Nuke, but way back since its last head writer left for what seemed like greener pastures. The creative teams gets the glory, but they also have to shoulder the blame as this is about more than just a few kisses.

I certainly hope that if Michael’s bosses demanded that he run a daily hard-core porn clip, told him that he could never be critical of a Viacom-owned show, then asked him to run gay blind items, he’d eventually tell his bosses that they would need to find someone else to run this site. The point is that we all have or professional integrity and while we all need employment, most self-respecting people have to draw certain lines about what they will and won’t do.

If Passanante was told that Nuke could never be getting horizontal because of ________ (fill in your fear), that does not prevent her from trying to write something that is not so awful. If she can’t, someone else who can should step in. A fun storyline need not boldly announce that it will include elements that a show is not ready to tackle. No one asked this of them and the least that they could do is to entertain us.

Could someone argue that the show might be doing some good by “educating” America that gay men can be martyrs who don’t necessarily have to be feared nor spend their days mounting one another? I suppose so, but isn’t that better left for a PSA, Oprah, or a special episode of a weekly series? Should the gay/bisexual man support a show that some feel is giving them the finger much more so everyday? I don’t think so, and I do think that it’s absolutely ok to call for the dismissal of Jean Passanante and Chris Goutman as it comes with the territory. I also think it’s not idiotic to have a different opinion, as long as it remains an opinion and not a singular way to feel or act when one seeks change.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=518130334

. . .thanks to the Writers Guild strike, soaps on daytime television took a very direct hit. . .

. . .as I'm hearing it from friends in the business, Days of Our Lives may not make it to their 2009 expiration date.

 I suspect Proctor & Gamble are doing their damndest to keep what remaining fans they have left. . .

. . .it's the bone-headed choice, but I can understand.

Tom

Been there, done that, bought the soundtrack!

ITA, guys.  

One great point is that it is time for the some of us to take that frustration we're feeling against ATWT and focus on those daytime shows that don't show positive gay images? Or any images at all. Let's bombard them with our rage and discontent and make them account for themselves.

Yes, it is 2008 and we don't have any shows in the U.S. that have starring (not supporting cast) but starring a gay or lesbian character.

At least for now I have my Luke and Noah and if that's accepting crumbs well point me toward the loaves of bread because I'm not seeing any on my screen.

While this show keeps calling Nuke gay, they seem as gay as Sofie Duran is Latin. They have been a little more respectful of Oakdale's biggest doormatt, or maybe have not thought of milking her race/ethnicity like they do Nuke, to show that they are an inclusive show. Since this doormatt is now being pursued by 3 different guys it may be the time for "Mama" to join the canvas. I am obviously being very flip, but while I really want to see gay images of all sorts, I'd rather get them presented honestly via gay-centric features or like they do on something like Despearate Housewives. Some are upset by them, but I find them funny in a show that is silly and never promised to take us to Nukeland.

I keep going back to the point that for me, my entertainment is much more important than being bored or supporting something that may possibly make one person in some place I've never heard of hate me a little less because they saw that gays can be martyrs too. Those same people are probably the same ones writing P&G saying that they are sick of having these gay gays shoved down their throats every day. I wish ;-)

Duran has not been made to wear La Raza t-shirts to gets points with the Latino audience http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=518130334

Guillermo makes sense and a valid point.  And like Guillermo, I do not see these meagre crumbs making even half a slice of bread - in fact no bread at all.

At this point in the Luke/Noah non-gay story, I would prefer that ATWT simply did away with both of them.  The image they are forced to play is so negative and detrimental to those of us who are gay that the disservice far outweighs all other aspects of these two characters.

The sorrow and sadness comes of course from a promise never realized nor portrayed except for one all to brief moment.

afhickman

"It takes a village (to make Village People)"

Pop quiz, hotshot: Read the article on the website "Stuff White People Like" and see if you recognize yourself in article #88, which is entitled "having Gay Friends.  Here's an excerpt:

"It is generally accepted that a gay black friend with a child is considered a once in a lifetime opportunity - like a quarterback who can pass, run, kick, and play linebacker. White people will crawl over each other for the opportunity to claim this person as a friend and add them to their roster of diversity."

Follow the link: http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/ 

I wrote this after watching the vlog, and before reading all of the comments. I do want to add my comment on the merits of the show and GLAAD.

My anxiety isn't that there is a light at the end of the tunnel, it's that the train has been slowly trudging up hill and now we are watching it slide back down again and groups like GLAAD are the one's putting it into reverse.

ATWT isn't Philadelphia, and it certainly isn't a pretty good gay story line. Not lately.

The categories for the GLAAD Awards are arbetrary. According to the rules, if no soap opera shows a fair and accurate gay character or story line, than no nomination is suppose to be given. The characters on ATWT are demeaning in a unique and affected way. The characters are not pretty good, but demonstrate that something as simple as a kiss is too disgusting to view.

Perhaps I have been too hard on GLAAD and ATWT. They didn't create the bigotry that exists in the world and they are trying to do thier part to end it. Maybe they're more like the citizens of the town of Auschwitz who pushed bread crusts through the fence to the prisoners. We can't blame them for not having the strength to stand up to an evil empire.

I do give AfterElton a lot of credit for allowing the discourse to continue on this subject when it has been clear that Logo and the Editors of AfterElton believe that ATWT deserves the GLAAD award and should be commended as a friend and ally no mater how poorly they have portrayed Luke and Noah as of late, but I can't shake the feeling that I am being baited. Please don't take the clock down until well after Sweeps week.