P&GP are getting their money's worth out of their mouth piece Jeannie Tharrington. I feel like I have been having a private conversation with her in public message boards since Febuary 14th. I've analyzed or attacked pretty much everything that she has said since then and she keeps coming back with a slightly modified, a more polished message. It hardly matters because the story-line still sucks but continues to draw heaps of free press over treating a gay couple as second class citizens.

She answered 5 questions recently in Soap Opera Weekly, (April 22, Too far? Or not far enough?) where Tharrington claims the show is 'goundbreaking' and that's why there is resistance from "both sides." With out elaborating, she draws lines. You can decide where you stand.

Speaking for P&G she used the word that's sort of like what I called them on for not using. I think P&G should feel honored to tell a gay story. She said, "... a) We're very proud to be doing this story, ..." I have always felt that the gay community has handed P&G a chance to tell a beautiful story, our story. A story about gay love. If you are responsible to gay issues, than you'd consider it an honor to be able to tell the story. But Tharrington seems to believe that 'pride' is a buzz word, because she goes on to explain where P&G finds their sense of pride, "... Because it's so different than anything else that's being done on daytime today ..." They are likely to be just as proud of the Cowboy Jack character, a somewhat psychotic ventriloquist's puppet, which also was certainly more different that anything else that's being done on daytime T.V. But to her credit she does describe Nuke as having a 'relationship' rather than a romance.

Continuing to explain the shows stance on the controversy, she says they have a second thought: because viewer reaction has been overwhelmingly supportive, "Obviously that means we've done something right with Luke and Noah." Meaning none of the criticism has struck a cord with the producers? Basically, they feel they are telling a story that is "different" and the fans are eating it up, so it doesn't get any more complicated than that.

Tharrington says that the real appeal to the Nuke story is the "old-fashioned" love story pacing. But she does admit the pacing was intentional because "it's so new for the daytime audience to be seeing a gay couple," that they wanted to take their time to do it right. I guess they really do intend to advance them and plan to move Nuke one seat at a time from the back of the bus.

She makes a kind of backhanded complement, saying they always listen to what their "passionate" fans say. Is it the dispassionate and logical critiques they wish to ignore? And they are really looking forward to seeing luke at the front of the bus one day, by bringing more of the "romance and the love between Luke and Noah." Which could mean anything from collar straightening to luscious kisses on the forehead.

She describes their future as a "coming-of-age story of two young boys." A boy to me is anyone under the age of 18. Age of consent is generally 16 in the U.S. Anyone of college age is a man.  (Luke and Noah are both in college, Noah's second year.) Often anyone over the age of 16 is referred to as a young man. A young boy is prepubescent or younger. She calls them "young boys," which again confirms my original suspicion. P&G are uninterested in them as a gay couple, they want to make them into eunuchs, safe, non-sexual, My Little Pony Dolls that young girls can admire without fear of losing their purity by having to think about the nasty things that adult, consensual, gay men do together. Isn't that a kind of sexploitation? It's not a fair representation of gay men, nor is it anything like the portrayal of the straight characters on the show; it's non-inclusive. With that as their future, gays sitting on the front seat on the bus is a good 20 years away from being imagined on a P&G show.

Tharrington goes on to explain the cut-aways, which she finally admits implies were because "a lot of the audience wasn't ready for that" But she excuses them, like it was their fault, because "they didn't recognize Luke and Noah as a couple yet, and they really weren't expecting them to kiss." That's bizarre. Up till now, they have been saying that Luke and Noah had a romance, now they have a relationship that was unrecognizable as love. Why, because it was between two men or just bad story telling?

She explains the workings of the minds at P&G by detailing their reaction to the people who hated them for allowing a gay kiss on T.V. "What we thought is, 'Let's make sure people understand the relationship between Luke and Noah before we try to move too fast.'" And that's what they've been doing, she assures us. What I am seeing is a neutered gay couple, and P&G are hoping that once everybody (like the phobes) understands that, they won't be so shocked if Nuke kiss during sweeps week.

The interview ends with the familiar refrain that P&G are trying to be sensitive to all the people who watch the show. Why does that always sound like a lecture from a grade-school teacher who reminds us that the actions of a few will ruin it for everybody.

I really don't believe that ATWT will allow Nuke to kiss until they have totally alienated their gay fan base. I mean the ones who are interested in human rights over profit and exploitation. Once enough people like me leave the show, and it happens every day, they will have a core audience who are firmly committed to watching two gay boys hold hands and make moony eyes at each other on TV, with out throwing up. Is that huge, people? Is that ground breaking? If it is, I think I'm going to go throw up.

Of course, P&G are always ahead of the spin. I am not surprised to see that P&G might be listening to their gay fans, if just to deflect criticism and modify their message. But the message is clear. A) They have done a piss poor job of showing a gay romance and making this couple believable. B) They are still operating in response to letters they received over 6 months ago after the first kiss.

In a related note, in a recent Soaps In Depth blurb, Van Hansis admits his aspirations for future, heady, stage work. "I just want to play an adult!"