Jump to content

Seriously, Dude, I'm Gay


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

22 replies to this topic

#1

Spider2814

Spider2814

    Channel Surfer

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 1:01 PM

This is the only article I've found on it but considering some of the other reality shows on, this isn't much of a streach,and surprise surprise it's on FOX.

#2

ShadowDenizen

ShadowDenizen

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 2:09 PM

Sadly, I've actually heard about this: since it's on Fox, they'll probably air the first few episodes, realizes it sucks and yank it shortly thereafter. (Playing it Straight or Forever Eden anyone?)

#3

M. Darcy

M. Darcy

    Stalker

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 2:18 PM

There was an article about it in today's Washington Post Fox Puts Foot in Its Mouth, Kicks Self

#4

TGC-64

TGC-64

    Fanatic

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 5:11 PM

Considering that a senior member of the Murdock family is very tight with the Sydney gay community; why does the family allow their executives to come up with such hateful programming.

Yeah, the Old Man a bit of a gay-baiter....but.

#5

NovacScott

NovacScott

    Fanatic

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 5:47 PM

realizes it sucks and yank it shortly thereafter. (Playing it Straight

...except this week's TV Guide said that they will be airing the rest of this series later.

#6

katisha66

katisha66

    Stalker

  • Location:Gold Coast, Australia

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 6:33 PM

Hoo-boy. I'm not gay, but if I were, this show would potentially be raising all sorts of red flags with me. I have visions of hetero guys trying to "act gay" by trotting out all sorts of offensive stereotypes, from John Inman to Kenneth Williams.

#7

Schroeder

Schroeder

    Stalker

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 6:38 PM

Who?
John Inman and Kenneth Williams? Who they hell are they?

#8

katisha66

katisha66

    Stalker

  • Location:Gold Coast, Australia

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 6:45 PM

John Inman and Kenneth Williams? Who they hell are they?


Sorry - Australian/British references!

John Inman was the incredibly camp Mr Humphries in the British sitcom Are You Being Served, which aired during the 1970s. Kenneth Williams was the incredibly camp actor who featured in most of the British Carry On series of movies. If you've ever seen one, I wouldn't need to point out which one he was!

The thing is, I'm wracking my brains to think of US equivalents to these characters and I can't. Were there no gay characters on US TV until Will and Grace?

#9

LAgator77

LAgator77

    Couch Potato

Posted May 14, 2004 @ 6:52 PM

Hey I've got a great idea for a show! Two white guys have to paint their skin black, move to the projects, and eat fried chicken and watermelon. You know, immerse themselves in "black culture." They even have to date a (get ready!) black woman in order to convince their friends and family they're black in Fox's upcoming reality spectale "Yo Dawg, You Hear What I'm Sayin...I'm Black."

I really wish someone would call Fox on their bigoted sterotyped programs they try to pass off as entertainment. If this were any other minority (except maybe overweight people) the progamming executives at Fox would be fired by now. This show should not only offend gay people but you know, the entire human race.

#10

Basileus

Basileus

    Fanatic

Posted May 15, 2004 @ 6:27 PM

I'm gay, but can't say as I am terribly offended by the concept of this show. FOX has pretty much cornered the market on Reality shows where lying is the basis of the game. See Joe Millionair, Obnoxious Fiance, Playing it Straight, etc.

Who knows, this show might even do some good. I noticed that the two contestants have to "come out" to their families. Not sure I like the idea of something so tremendous for a gay person as coming out shown for entertainment, but it might make people think a bit.

I'll reserve judgement until I see the show. Then I reserve the right to be outraged.

#11

TGC-64

TGC-64

    Fanatic

Posted May 15, 2004 @ 6:57 PM

Who knows, this show might even do some good. I noticed that the two contestants have to "come out" to their families. Not sure I like the idea of something so tremendous for a gay person as coming out shown for entertainment, but it might make people think a bit.


The Fox!Idiots aren't paying gay people to come-out. Fox paid straight guys to PRETEND to be not-straight, come-out to co-workers, etc... They falsely "come-out", collect their judas-money, then go back home and tell Mamma that they were "just kinding". There are no real-world consequences, .......just cash, and a nice vacation for Mamma once she recovers. Grrrrr......

And the judges were a panel of gay men; so the losers are the gay judges with faulty gay-dar. Ha ha ha, laugh at the stupid gay men. Grrrrrrrrr.r.r.r........ What?, no straight people were available to look fooolish and prejudiced also?


Let's face reality as it really is...as far as straight-boys "gay-acting"....

One one end of the spectrum you have metrosexuals and swishy straight-boys. But they don't want to have sex with guys. On the other end are the rough-trade boys and the gay-for-pay guys who are straight-looking, but have sex with guys for various reasons without REALLY being gay or even bisexual. Nothing provided there other than gay-sex as vocation, or recreation, is not orientation.

So what's the point of the show? Reverse-stereotyping? What's the point of their successfully PRETENDING to be "gay"? Money? Straight-guys performing in gay porn are "pretending". Many even enjoy the sex-part, but that doesn't make them "gay" either. IT"S CALLED [jv]"acting".[john-lovitts-voice]

That's what this is. It cheap g-rated gay porn for frightened straight people nervous about their neighbors....and their sons.

Edited by TGC-64, May 15, 2004 @ 7:25 PM.


#12

NovacScott

NovacScott

    Fanatic

Posted May 15, 2004 @ 7:24 PM

I'm gay, but can't say as I am terribly offended by the concept of this show. FOX has pretty much cornered the market on Reality shows where lying is the basis of the game. See Joe Millionair, Obnoxious Fiance, Playing it Straight, etc.

Yeah, I don't quite remember all the articles about people being offended at Playing it Straight because gay men were *gasp* pretending to be straight.

#13

TGC-64

TGC-64

    Fanatic

Posted May 15, 2004 @ 8:06 PM

Yeah, I don't quite remember all the articles about people being offended at Playing it Straight because gay men were *gasp* pretending to be straight.


I think that part of the uproar and high-dugeon (sp?) is that while Playing It Straight and Boy Meets Boy involved gays straight-acting and straights gay-acting; they were "shows in a bottle". Separated from the real-world and contained within the players....a fantasy. It's Fantasy Island where nothing is real, and all your wishes are granted...though maybe not how you intended. And everyone's entitled to be a little foolish when it comes to their love-lives while on vacation. The embellishments, the white lies about jobs at home, hot hot your 'ex was...or wasn't, the size of your....apartment. The little "stories" about ourselves.....

There were no off-screen consequences afterwards for the straight or gay contestants afterwards for the lie, and plenty of time for damage-control to loved-ones. (Yes, the one gay guy did get thrown out of the Navy, but that was a consequence of telling the turth about himself. He paid the price for Stopping the Lie.) And the ones made to look foolish were all players in the game who knew they were being played, not outside observers. And everyone knew what the rules were, even if they were mislead as to where the goal-posts were.

And the ones making the gaydar mistakes were one ones with hot, warm tongues in their ears. They had a personal stake in the matter, which is also an element of humor. And the audience had to review their own prejudices and stereotypes while watching since we didn't know who was gay or who was straight. We didn't know who was "acting" vs. just being themsleves......so we apply our misconceptions and are proven right or wrong.



But the point of this show is which of the two known straight guys acted "gay" most convincingly in the real world of consequences. "Immersing in gay cluture and the community"? ...We the audience know that they are both flying false-colors from the start and are a party to the lie from the very start. We aren't having our stereotypes challenged, we're just co-enabling the reinforcement of anti-gay prejudices and gay stereotypes.

Edited by TGC-64, May 15, 2004 @ 8:30 PM.


#14

Jer2002

Jer2002

    Fanatic

  • Location:Nashville, TN USA

Posted May 28, 2004 @ 3:27 AM

Fox decided to pull the plug on the show.. GLAAD must be one scary bunch.

#15

jegrant

jegrant

    Couch Potato

  • Location:Indiana, USA

Posted May 28, 2004 @ 7:09 AM

It really says something about a show when FOX decides it's in poor taste.

And I mean "something" in the sense Vitamin C did on SS-USA when she told a contestant that they had a certain special "something".

It'd be interesting if it turned up on cable somewhere though; it could be re-edited and used as an example of a reality show gone too far. Something about that really smells like a VH1 special. I don't think Bravo is that ghetto. Maybe E! - they are ripping off VH1 left and right lately.

#16

techgirl

techgirl

    Fanatic

Posted May 28, 2004 @ 7:34 AM

Hmph... replacing this one-time special with a showing of "American Pie II". I guess it is a no brainer that the advertisers were already lined up and wanted a certain demographic.

Was that demographic upmarket gays and metrosexuals? Um, no.

#17

ShadowDenizen

ShadowDenizen

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston

Posted May 28, 2004 @ 7:45 AM

GLAAD must be one scary bunch.


I think it's more the Pink Mafia the suits should worry about.
Seriously, though, I'm so glad they yanked this show.

#18

Bungalow Joy

Bungalow Joy

    Stalker

Posted May 28, 2004 @ 4:17 PM

It'd be interesting if it turned up on cable somewhere though; it could be re-edited and used as an example of a reality show gone too far.

If the new Logo network is smart they'd do just that and make a big splash of it.

#19

mbridgii

mbridgii

    Fanatic

Posted May 28, 2004 @ 8:09 PM

I am curious, though. What would it take to be "convincingly" gay?

I mean, if you put Tiger Woods and Method Man before a panel of real-live black folk, who would be considered "more black"? They both have the skin, so they both win. If the guy had relations with another guy, Ding Ding Ding he wins, right?

Maybe if they both ended up "Punk'd" at the end (pun not intended). They go through all these tasks, going so far as to tell Mom and Dad, then are told that they are on "Jamie Kennedy" or something? That would be hysterical, in a "Superstar USA" grotesque kind of way.

People WILL do [b]anything[b] to get on TV, huh? How far would they go for their 15 minutes? That there is the $64 question.

#20

Bungalow Joy

Bungalow Joy

    Stalker

Posted May 29, 2004 @ 12:31 PM

Why not give them $100K to sleep with another man and be blatant about the TV prostitution? 3 episodes of build-up, 2 episodes of "the special evening", 4 episodes of aftermath. They'd make bank on pay-per-view.

#21

TGC-64

TGC-64

    Fanatic

Posted May 30, 2004 @ 2:14 PM

If the new Logo network is smart they'd do just that and make a big splash of it.


More like retitle it "...When Breeders go Bad" and re-edit it with a snarky Queer eye/Iron Chef voice-over on how pathetically wrong the contestants are while "playing gay".

#22

Hawkwild

Hawkwild

    Fanatic

  • Location:New York, NY

Posted Jun 2, 2004 @ 3:29 PM

Bungalow Joy

Why not give them $100K to sleep with another man and be blatant about the TV prostitution? 3 episodes of build-up, 2 episodes of "the special evening", 4 episodes of aftermath. They'd make bank on pay-per-view.

Hell yeah, I'd watch that. May I suggest Seann William Scott and Jimmy Fallon for the first celebrity edition?

#23

Shanimal

Shanimal

    Video Archivist

Posted Jun 28, 2004 @ 3:13 PM

A little tardy to the party, but wait, wait, wait - hold the phone ......

Considering that a senior member of the Murdock family is very tight with the Sydney gay community

Rupert Murdoch's gay ?!?!?! No way, dude!

I think it's more the Pink Mafia

Really? I thought it was more the Lavender Menace.

Morally, I'm really, really glaad that Fox pulled the show. Selfishly, I'm really upset because the potential snark factor was off the charts.

Edited by Shanimal, Jun 28, 2004 @ 3:14 PM.