Could my hopes and prayers come true and Lucinda and Luke start working together?

I love the idea of Luke dating.... and Reg was pretty cute (and openly gay and proud of it and he likes to go to parties and have fun and he doesn't have crazy killer daddies and Iraqi wives for him to obscess over instead of you). And Jealous!Noah is always fun. I think the best part of this is watching Luke be petty and rub Noah's face in it. Luke had the right to be hurtful and Noah oh so deserves it.

noah wants the 'break' to be an actual break-up....add that to the fact he can't even look at luke...

luke then tells noah about this reg guy being interested in him, and noah tells luke it's fine and he's free to date whomever he chooses.

noah sees luke and reg, but is jealous and upset over it.

liz goes outside to laugh hysterically because none of this makes sense to her which is not surprising.

:-D

Wait, was Reg the taller, cooller one, or was he the shorter skeavy one one who had the major thigh sweats for Noah?

The taller cooller one, I approve of. Though I love my pocket-gays, the short one was a little too lecherous to be a real threat to Noah, or viable for Luke.

www.thebittersuite.blogspot.com

.... was the taller (and much cuter) one who initially invited the boys to the weekend hot tub party. I don't see Luke even giving Tony (the one who drooled after Noah) the time of day considering that.

... that Noah's harsh words to Luke on Wednesday are not about Ameera's exit (which I think will be quick and quiet and not some major plot point), but about the fact that Noah thinks Luke is dating someone new mere hours after their breakup. At least that's what I'm hoping. The only thing is I don't think the writers are going to bother answering all those questions about Ameera that have been raised over the past few months, especially since she had very little to do during the New York arc and hasn't been seen or heard from since. They, like the audience, want to forget this mess and move on.

PLEASE!!!!!

How about a three-way with Reg and Tony? Noah walks in on it and freaks out. More drama. But Luke doesn't care.

Meanwhile Parker decides to become a hot-tub repairman.

 

What I'd really like to see is Noah walk in on a hottub party for two -- Luke and any-hot-guy (Casey, Matt, Reg) -- and realize what a jerk he's been. Of course, this will never happen and they'll get back together and just as they are about to consumate their relationship -- finally! -- Colonel Nutcase will climb in through the window and we'll be off to the races again!

I know it's too much to ask for, but it would be really nice (and logical) if Luke got genuinely MAD at Noah during this. And I don't mean he just gets mad for a second and then immediately feels bad and blames himself and turns into Saint Luke over the whole thing. I want him to be pissed, and stay pissed, at least for a while. If they insist on putting Noah back with Luke, let Noah WORK for it. No more Luke feeling sorry for Noah OR himself.

It's really kind of pointless to bring them back together if Luke doesn't stand up for himself and tell Noah what he expects from this relationship for Noah to hear him and take the proper steps to accomplish that. For example, if Luke asks Noah when he's going to fight for him, Noah does nothing and they drift back together anyway, then neither of them have learned anything and the breakup was to take up airtime while the writers worked out their next plot arc. Well, realistically, one would assume this is going to lead them into their next storyline, but I'd like for both Luke and Noah to come away from these past few months better able to handle their relationship. It looks like the writers might be heading in that direction, but well.... given some of the other stories on this show, that direction might be downhill.

For the past several months, only the true die-hard Puke fans really give a crap about what happens to these two pathetic individuals. What was once a promising breakthrough on daytime TV, it is now a caricature of the worst idea any soap writers could ever devise. There is no sense duplicating what I have already stated about this pathetic couple. They are both fantasies of some of the most idiotic writers ever. You have totally passive, woe-is-me Luke, who would do anything just to have a boyfriend. Next is less than intelligent Noah who has so much excess baggage, it's a wonder he doesn't have a cart behind him at all times. These two are the furthest thing from a loving couple, be they straight or GAY. The very fact that they are supposedly teenagers with raging hormones and have NEVER had any sexual contact is totally ridiculous. A few sloppy kisses (yea, Luke can't kiss worth a crap), forehead touching, forced hugs, and quick hand holding, do NOT make Puke a loving gay couple. Noah continually looks like he has O.D.'d on Dulcolax with no success and Luke should carry a fanny pack for Puffs since he is ALWAYS whimpering and about to turn on the waterworks.

I just can't see the audience hanging on to this trainwreck much longer despite any new plot arc or storyline. It's shot so full of holes that it's beyond repair. Some were wondering where Puke would be this time next year. I foresee them in the vast TV boneyard without a doubt!

Namely P&G's fear of committing to really dealing with gay teenagers. They want the "buzz" of "breaking new ground" but they're terrified of actually doing so. Consequently they've done everything  imaginable to keep Luke and Noah from having sex, And if they break up for good (as seems likely) there's no indication that P & G will allow Luke to have sex with anyone else.

 

Ever.

although I've been reading that many the ex-gay movement have engaged in some serious language/message modificatiomn in order to stop putting off so many people and to stop having their almost universal failures of proof that they were full of crap.

They now seem to treat homosexuality as something to be "managed" and that their movements are focused on showing options for those who want to lead "better" lives. Some are even talking about how much they are dying for gay sex and have no desire to sleep or love members of the opposite sex, but know that it's not for them.

Even our enemies can get smarter when some of their ideas limit their ability to further their agenda and/or take away their ability to separate people from their desperation money. The AFA still clings to the same tired language and to me are more flamboyant in their communications than any drag queen. I woudl not be surprised to see them make some serious changes to sound less ridiculous with the goal of accomplishing the same tasks.

Guillermo's Media Guillotine: Entertainment, journalism, politics, and popular culture.

http://springintoaction.typepad.com

SPOILER SPACE

 

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

 

Quickly and quietly. She tells Noah she's giving him an annullment, advises him to reconcile with Luke, then hops on a plane to start a new life in Los Angeles.

I am being flip, but looking back Noah has only showed any physical interest in Luke during their towel dance, the kiss, and about a year ago when he had an out of blue episode or two in which he got all horned up as 800 Snyders and maybe his dad were all running in and out of the farm about to have a picnic or grill something.

I wish that the writers would come up with one of their 3 day stories to let us know why he's such a turd. I am envisioning something twisted as we find out that he likes rough sex and that the kid with the all-knowing look that he ran into during the climax of the Cleo storyline (right before nailing Maddie) reminded him of how he almost choked him to death last time they got physical. Brian De Palma material for Noah which could also satisfy the AFA types of they love twisted sex more than most "sinners."

Guillermo's Media Guillotine: Entertainment, journalism, politics, and popular culture.

http://springintoaction.typepad.com

Since this has been a rational, pretty much non-hysterical discussion of ATWT on this thread, I'll insert my contrarian two cents.   I think most of the posters here are totally missing some important considerations.  The one that has bothered me the most is the notion that Luke has to be strong and unyielding, especially to show the straight people that we gays aren’t a bunch of wusses.  There are multiple things wrong with that contention.  First, straight women tend to respect people who hang in there and don’t run away at the first sign of trouble or lack of perfect reactions.  They consider it a strength, and they tend to believe in “true love” and “fighting for your man”.   And why would we ever consider trying to please straight men???  If you do that you’re allowing them to set your personality and regulate how you interact with people.  Also, why would we ever WANT to be like straight men?  Isn’t the whole goal of gay liberation the contention that gay people are indeed different, and don’t have to hew to the conventions of straight men?  To some degree the fight is to allow people to be what they are, regardless of convention or straight expectations.  It really bothers me that we feel we have to “show” straight people anything. 

Actually, what really “gets” straight people about gay people regarding the concept of “weakness” is what’s perceived as a whiny overreaction to small things – the quintessential drama queen.  Here in Minneapolis the most popular morning radio show is often hilarious, but also genuinely homophobic, which is why I quit listening years ago.  I was channel surfing last week, and stopped at this station because they were talking about gay stuff.  There was a story about some gay people protesting something (I don’t recall details), and one of the radio guys said “all the little queenies need their angst and their complaining”.  He actually said that, at which point I switched the station in disgust.  But THAT is where we look weak to straight people – whining about what they consider minor things.  Imagine what that guy and others would say about us whining and bitching constantly because the relationship on a soap opera isn’t up to what we want it to be?  My best friend is a straight guy who has never had any issue with gay people, but he also would be aghast at all the complaining.   

Secondly, the stuff about Noah being a head case also represents a skewed perception.  He’s confused and currently maladjusted, yes, but he’s being eliminated as hopeless and “mental” and a total nutjob like his father.  To me that represents a gross misunderstanding of basic psychology.  I explained in more detail on another thread, but basically, consider these factors:  he’s 19; he just came out a year ago after thinking of himself as straight; he has a grotesquely homophobic father who not only murdered his mother, but tried to murder his boyfriend, he really has no family at all left, he doesn’t know how to conduct a mature relationship because he’s never had one.  To me, anyone who would jettison him at this point because he hasn’t handled things perfectly is someone I could never trust as a friend, and someone who has little understanding or compassion of people’s inadequacies and immaturities.  I defy anyone here to tell me they know someone who’s perfectly mature and has no inadequacies.   

Based on what people here have said, I have to assume that all of you were well-balanced psychologically at 19, and always made mature, rational choices.  Hah!  If you were, then you’re the abnormal ones.  Looking back, when I was 19 I was a nutcase in many ways.  More mature than most people in SOME ways, but goofy and immature in others.  And my experience with other 19 year olds is that such a state is rather common.  Had my life been on a soap at 19 it would not have been an edifying experience.  But should all my friends have rejected me as hopeless, should I have been given no chance to grow and learn and mature?    Perhaps all of you who were models of adult maturity at 19 would say yes, but if you put yourself in that category I think you should think a bit harder of your youth.   So I think people here are being grossly unfair to a 19 year old who came out a year ago, has no family apart from a nutcase, homophobic father, was sort of forced into a sham marriage with federal agents breathing down his neck, and just went through a totally stressful NY experience where his father “died” and his “wife” was hauled off to protective custody.  And now because he doesn’t handle it perfectly we’re going to throw him on the human scrapheap as irredeemably screwed up???  That just totally makes no sense to me whatever.  Actually, it makes me wonder about the judgment and understanding and “human-ness” of the people who want to throw him on that scrapheap.

Finally, it’s totally bizarre to me that people would get so upset about a soap opera.  A soap opera!  With marriage amendments in California and Florida, states where gay people have no job protections, hate crimes, various civil rights issues all over the place, etc.  To say nothing about non-gay issues like Darfur, health care, homelessness, economic conditions, and on and on.  A soap opera!  <Shakes head>.  If we’re talking about psychological maladjustment.....   

Danny says he and his friends talk about this every Friday when they go to dinner.  Is that really the most important thing in their lives???  I think there tends to be an unfortunate sort of “cocooning” in the gay community sometimes, with people having only or mostly gay friends, thinking and talking mostly about gay issues, and focusing almost solely on gay media.  What’s unfortunate about that is that any cocooned environment tends to produce misperceptions of reality outside the cocoon (if not inside as well).  That was one of the flaws of Queer As Folk.  The characters’ social circle was almost universally gay.  And their perceptions were partially warped as a result.  I sometimes pick up indications of those skewed perceptions among people who post here.  And I think the angst about Nuke is symptomatic to some degree of exactly that.

 

First I'll address the show stuff without any mirrors. I just want to be entertained and Nuke bores the living crap out of me. It's an opinion.

Noah is especially annoying to me as his challenges don't interest me on any level. I also think that Noah's portrayer is a lousy actor who gets worse every day. I love the genre and even love navel-gazing movies that everyone hates, but I love them because there is something about the story or a character that makes me want to know more about them, even when it comes to pain. Noah's ennui (if any) has never been presented to me in a way that resonates

When it comes to Luke, I used to like the character as he was funny and observant. I think that his portrayer did a great job and still continues to work around what I see as a trainwreck. I loved seeing him and Reg today. We can talk 'till the cows come home about almost any subject and I enjoy the dance as long as there is logic, respect, and hopefully humor. I have no right to impose my views on you, but your post left me wondering if you might be treating Nuke with an even higher level of "importance" that you project onto Danny with what reads to me like quite the pointed dagger. It's a perception.

I've never met Danny and have not read his posts about his ATWT chats over dinner on Friday. So what if he talks with his buddies about the show? How does those discussions or even aggressive postings on related threads lead you strong conclusions about Danny or many gay ghetto dwellers. You are posting as much if not more than he is and it's not about Darfur so waht gives?

I wanted to put in my two cents about gay cocooning as you jump right into it with a thesis that does not resonate with me. I can't speak for those who live in small towns, but I live in an epicenter of gaydom and can safely say that not ONE of my gay friends watches ATWT. I can also tell you that many who prefer gay cocooning (self-included) enjoy it because so much of our lives (work, entertainment, politics, world events) excludes us to such an extreme that we find confort in spending part of our lives around people who share an element of our that is ignored/ridiculed outside of that cocoon. Our sexual orientation, humor, and experiences bond some of us in ways that we did not have growing up.

Some post-gays "outgrow" those needs and I think that there is nothing wrong with either, but it's great to have choices. I think that what you see as misrepresentations come from your experience as does the cause that you give for said portrayals. Are my views skewed because I live in a gay ghetto. Of course, as would a person who lives in absolute poverty, a McMansion, ________ (pick your poison) .

AfterElton is a forum for gay and bisexual men to discuss gay and bsexual men media, so the focus is going to be on those matters. You totally lost me on your Luke and Noah thoughts as they seem to come a heterocentrist perspective but seem to treat the characters as if they were real people. Are you possibly taking Nuke more seriously than Danny or others who might just be venting in the most of appropriate places?

I don't know about others, but when I go off on Luke not having a backbone and Noah deserving to get kicked to the curb, I am relatively sure that it does not reflect on my humanity as Noah is not real. If the writers wrote stronger material and Noah's portrayer entertained me, I'd mainly enjoy the ride as I do in same the mostly gay-free Lost, which is my favorite show. The same applies to Luke. I want him to be strong (and what you call "unyielding') because he's a core character in a show that used to rock, and certainly not because a straight gay might assume that gays are wimps. I do agree with some of the qualities that you think straight women find attractive, I think that the showrunners have excelled at giving them the finger as most of the female characters are judged and rejected by their men.

Part of me sees where you are coming from, but the example that you gave about the radio seems to contradict your actions. On one hand you seem to say that we should not care what gay men think, but on the other you seem to fall into a school of thought that correlates interaction in this forum as much more than what many see it as. What you call whining, Danny may call venting.

I hate whiners in real life and part of the reason I am not a social whiner is because I get it out via advocacy work, writing, exercise, and praising/going to town on whatever issues are pertinent to the forum at hand. If Danny were going on and on about Darfus on a Nuke thread, them we'd have a problem. We don't know one another enough to jump to sweeping generalizations of who we are.

The smart money would have me erasing this entry before posting it as it does not involve me but just feel (and I might be wrong) that you might be taking this whole subject a lot more to heart than the guy you are pointing the finger at. I could be wrong as I using my skewed view based on seeing a couple of posts you've directed at Danny that seem a little mean to me, especially if you buy into the idea that wanting fictional character kicked to the curb might say something about the person posting it. Food for thought as I am not looking to be right.

Guillermo's Media Guillotine: Entertainment, journalism, politics, and popular culture.

http://springintoaction.typepad.com

I miss the good old days of ATWT bigtime, but changes are inevitable. I am not sure when it happened, but when did some of us become our parents with regard to romantizicing how things were back in the day? So unoriginal and Carrie Bradshaw of me.

I still believe that I would enjoy reruns of the better eras of ATWT more than almost anything put forth today as the content resonated with me by making me laugh and totally by into the drama of the day. The entertainment universe was so limited that I remember being bummed on Fridays during the Holden/Lily beginnings as I would have to wait sooooo long until Monday.

The same applied to the excitement when James Bond movies would open every 2 or 3 years. Now there is so much product that nothing really stands out unless its marketed to death or is so good that a true buzz builds.

At the same time, technology has given us so many more entertainment choices that if one offering does not do it for us, there are many others ranging from the highest to the lowest brow. While we tend to look back at what some call the golden era of TV, some may not take into account that shows like The Wire, Lost, Mad Men, The Sopranos, some seasons of 24, ___________ may be even stronger shows than those that usually pop up. Ultimately, I am glad that there are more product to chose from even if so much of it sucks. I think that daytime can survive if they play up to their strengths as my heart was beating faster seeing Lucinda and Barbara, esp. after the nice little touch (for me) of having Lucinda praising Lily and being the active ender of their chat to get to Barbara. If the show manages to make me so some room for veterans, get some intended and unintended laughs out of me and get me all goofy about one or another couple, I'd be a happy camper.

I obviously read your post and they provided much more clarity to some questions that I had as you are honest and not looking to win a contest. That makes this forum shine.

Looking at so many of the posts, I empathize with where almost everyone comes from and I think that we can sometimes forget that the show can mean so many things to so many people and their fears and perceptions about how these images could impact their lives might be more real to some than others and that maybe we need to step back and possibly not even address whether any subject is being taken too seriously as who determines that standard?

Since I don't want to be too syrupy and love to throw in some food for throught as long as it's not hitting below the belt, I wonder what your postings would be like if Luke evolved into say a Brian from QAF. Right now it seems that both Luke and Noah speak to you in ways that almost mirror your personal hopes/dreams. It such were not that case would you vent or express concern about what said behavior is showing "America" about gays? Would you judge those people who you think are judging you. These are obviously leading questions, but even if the answer is yes, the point would go back to your correct statement that our experiences skew our views. Interestingly enough, even the most similar of experiences can shape people so differently, but that is for another post.

With regard to cocooning, I agree with you that it's a subject that may have as many opinions as there are people and individual choices are to be respected. I agree that exposure to diversity is vital, but I would not jump to the conclusion that cocooning automatically leads to becoming a clone of those around you. It could be argued that your typical suburban housewife living in a fake Poltergeist-like community could know much more about diversity than an urban hispter living in the most ethnically diverse part of town.

We all make personal choices to take in or reject we we are exposed to, and more importantly to me what we expose ourselves to. The AE cocoon has provided me with a wealth of personal and professional opportunities that I would not have had even living in my gay ghetto. AE is a great skew and I think you'd agree or else you'd not be coming back for more. If someone makes it their only destination or does not question everything... that's on them. One of the greatest gifts this cocoon gives me is to keep digging deeper everywhere as one idea leads to somewhere else. Questions and more questions, to feed a need to know more.

With regard to heterocentrism, we can tackle that another day as my posts can be so long that even I fall asleep reading my junk :-)

Guillermo's Media Guillotine: Entertainment, journalism, politics, and popular culture.

http://springintoaction.typepad.com