You are not exaggerating. I've read about this in about seven different places on the web. A lot of people are pissed.
I kind of feel that way myself.
@SoapArmageddon: given that the soap audience is mostly straight women and black at that... Also that daytime has mostly cast those characters (from what I have reviewed as gay) minus the stereotypes that this character would be so continuous?
I mean if you are not the targeted audience for daytime, it would be in my opinion a little over blown. Also given the history of gay characters it would appear to be going a different direction.
There is now an update to this story. Apparently the blogger in question after reading RC's remarks of his blog has now issued an apology.
Yes, RC and FV are both openly gay men. I was one of those OLTL fans that used to love Kyle and Fish aka Kish and was irritated at ABC for getting rid of the couple and little Sierra Mist.
As for the new gay character on GH, I'm more annoyed that he's tied to Sabrina!
I didn't think FV is gay?
FV and RC are both openly gay men.
What am I missing here?
I hope I can say this correctly. Many people I know, believe it or not, do believe the stereotype version of gays. These same people are not prejudiced, just misinformed.
I think that is why in genres like daytime I would rather see the regular folks and their lifestyle. I know a lot of gay people and they are not flamboyant. I don't want to say normal because I think that is the point of article. Straight folks have flamboyant members also but they are not fighting for place in society so to speak. There are many popular flamboyant gay celebrities.
I still think the forum has to be considered and I think on soap operas it is better fit to show there are conservative gays living very low key lives.
Just to add, for me flamboyant straight characters get boring for me also. I can only take them in small doses. I am not going to name the characters I am thinking of because that is not the topic. Just sayin....
Thanks, I honestly didn't know this it goes to show you...you learn something new everyday
I am going to get crucified for this, but let me just say, I find it majorly ANNOYING that people get up in arms over a flamboyant gay person on tv. And its mostly gay people who get offended by it. In life there are many different types of people, just like FV said.
Every gay person on tv isn't going to be some down-low thug, or some over-the-top attractive dude that just happens to be gay. There ARE feminine gay men in the world, and I feel like the same way masculinity is shown in the gay world, femininity should be displayed as well. And even if he DID walk around with lipstick because he WORE it, that's the character and it happens in real life.
How can gay people expect everything to be equal, when they don't want every representation of the lifestyle to be represented on television?
I'm no huge fan of FV...in fact, I think GH, next to Days, is the worst soap on the air. BUT, right is still right. Black people had to see illiterate, poor, broke down street urchins are representations of themselves, and while I personally didn't like it completely, there ARE actually people in the world that way. And then we had professionals, like Neil Winters, and Lexie and Abe, Dr. Angie Hubbard...so it balanced. Point is, there can't be just a masculine gay person representing the entire gay community. It's just no realistic. Everything should have a balance, and it seems like self-hatred for people who don't like to see feminine gay men. It makes no sense.
And while I'm venting/rambling, I personally find it refreshing. I'm so tired of seeing actors who are clearly effeminate, try to portray something that they AREN'T just to make themselves seem more appealing. I find it disgusting...but that's life I suppose
I could care less that Felix is flamboyant, because I loved, loved, loved, OLTL's Delphina. I'm annoyed that RC/FV decided to tie Felix to Sabrina when there are existing Hardy/Webber children and grandchildren missing from the show as we head toward the 50th anniversary next year.
@SoapArmageddon: Stoney actually answered most of it for me. But the part that is left is if you are not the targeted audience or if you don't make up enough of the audience to warrant things for the television series is it wise to complain or have a problem with the inclusion or lack of inclusion of certain demographics?
Black women make up the majority audience. That gives them room to make request. But since daytime is targeted toward women who remain its largest demo (gender wise) why would anyone be upset?
I don't get the outrage over this either. To me (also a gay man) it just seems ANYTIME any show introduces a gay character the focus is on the "gay" and not the character.
I like to point to the example of Rafe on Y and R. While never a major character the way he was introduced was actually refreshing. We saw him as a character before the focus was on his sexuality. I don't remember if it was Victoria or Heather, but when he came out they had a normal reaction and more or less said something like, "we need to go out sometime and hang out"...something to that effect. Normal. Like a lot of us gay men experience life each day regardless of being feminine or masculine.
The issue for me was that it seemed as if we were going to get a character that was a caricature. It has now been explained to my satisfaction.
It's all good.
I am not a gay person, but I think I understand the outrage. When there is limited representation, you hope that what you do have represents the best within your demographic. That way, it is less foreign to others and becomes "normal". While on one hand, it is good to have any representation, it is bad when that representation focuses on what can be seen as negative stereotypes.
I liken it to the black experience. There is an uproar when everytime a black female is cast, she is the bitch. Or all black men are drug dealers. Or every movie about a black school needs a white person to save it.
I think it is a growing pain myself. There is still lingering outrage when these black stereotypes are shown, but we also have some real, human, black characters on TV and in movies. Its a small step, but it is a step.
Anyway, I think it is the same thing.
I am not a gay person, but absolutely loved OLTL's Kyle and Fish separately and as a couple. Kish was a love story and then they had little Sierra Mist followed by big bad ABC kicking the trio off the show.....Boo!
1. This was blown so far out of proportion.
2. Good for RC for standing up for his writing.
3. People bitch when there isn't a gay character. People bitch when there is a gay character.
I love that RC took this original blogger to task. Anyone who's watched soaps for a hot minute knows that there is usually more to a character than meets the eye and that was proven today when RC tied this character into 1) Lucy Coe's history, 2) The precious Nurse's Ball fans have wanted back for 141 years, 3) The return of YET ANOTHER GENERAL HOSPITAL veteran actress and character Lucy Coe.
Everyone is looking for something to gripe about and point out as being classless, homophobic, etc. The fact of the matter is there are gay men out there like this new character. Hell for all we know this character could be a Drag Queen...
I happened to be watching GH in the break area at work with several people and everyone both gay and straight kind of scratched our head at this character. Could they have thrown one more stereotype onto this character? Someone said that the character met all of the quotas all in one package!
Ok a flamboyant gay male. WOW thats new. But fine.
Ok a gay male who is a nurse. Unimaginative but fine.
Ok a gay male who sales cosmetics for Lucy Coe. Understandable and unoriginal but fine.
Ok a gay male who is also black. Great.
But run all those things together and it is too much. It is like the kitchen sink version of stereotypes.
Stereotypes are just exagerated archtypes. But when only one archtype gets pushed on us, that is when it becomes a problem. Gay people are just people and come in all sorts of types.
stoney07, I agree with you completely. The stereotypical flamboyant gay man IS a fact of gay life, and I see no reason why every gay person on TV has to be able to "pass" for straight. Historically, gays on soaps have been pretty "straight acting," even the ones that weren't in the closet to begin with. And I don't see this character as being egregiously over the top, no more so than Jack on "Will and Grace." If he were white, I wonder if people would be so upset. It occurs to me that it's always riskier to flirt with stereotypes when people of color are involved. (I happen to be a gay man of color.) "Days" has had a few "queeny" gay characters in the past year (Kate's assistant, the French guy Madison and Brady were doing business with), and I don't recall any uproar over them. But then those roles weren't as high profile, so maybe that's why GH is catching flak now.
All that said, I don't think the character is necessary. But then, neither are Sabrina and Britt. I hate seeing Patrick stuck in this adolescent storyline and Liz relegated to the role of Sabrina's sidekick. With Spinelli, Ellie and Molly (oy, the rhyming names!) all on canvas, GH has reached its quota of geeks, and the show certainly doesn't need any more comic relief!
I think the character, as explained on a recent show, is that he works for Lucy so that will be the reason for her to come back to Port Charles. Ron C. always seems to connect characters so well. I can't wait to see Lucy Coe, and hopefully the Nurses Ball again.I think this character will be great with Lucy. And, I'm starting to like Sabrina, it will probably be a Cinderella type story but I love that stuff. Patrick is definetly a Prince Charming type.
[quote=jezza]stoney07, I agree with you completely. The stereotypical flamboyant gay man IS a fact of gay life, and I see no reason why every gay person on TV has to be able to "pass" for straight. Historically, gays on soaps have been pretty "straight acting," even the ones that weren't in the closet to begin with. And I don't see this character as being egregiously over the top, no more so than Jack on "Will and Grace." If he were white, I wonder if people would be so upset. It occurs to me that it's always riskier to flirt with stereotypes when people of color are involved. (I happen to be a gay man of color.) "Days" has had a few "queeny" gay characters in the past year (Kate's assistant, the French guy Madison and Brady were doing business with), and I don't recall any uproar over them. But then those roles weren't as high profile, so maybe that's why GH is catching flak now.
I an sorry but being "effiminate" or "flamboyant" is not exclusive to gay men. There are as many "queeny" straight men out there in the world as gay. It is the range of being human that there are people of a certain gender that "act" somewhat more like the other gender than the norm. It is nothing out of the ordinary to behave one way or the other. It is simply the range of being human. It is easier to notice flamboyant people than straight acting people and people assume that all flamboyant men are gay. That is simply not true. It is also assumed that gay men are all flamboyant and swishy. Also not true. I work in an industry where I have worked with straight men and I was the "straightest" acting man in the room. It isn't an act, though, it is simply who I am. Most people don't meet me and think "fag". I have nothing against queens, or effiminate men or metrosexuals. I simply am not one. I have nothing against gay men being portrayed on tv in that light either. However I do have a problem when a one dimensional character is introduced who is just a cardboard cut out of what American thinks is a gay man. I would be equally offended by a stereotype of any type of person. If someone were to put Butterfly McQueen's Beulah on as the Quartermaine's illiterate maid from Harlem , I would think the same thing about that.
I never said that being "queeny" or "flamoyant" is exclusive to gay men. I simply said that it is a fact of gay life, and it is. And why do feminine characteristics automatically make a gay guy "one-dimensional" -- because it's being played for laughs? There are a number of gay men in real life who behave the exact same way who are far from one-dimensional and who are funny. Or do we have to sidestep a realistic characterization simply because it represents a cardboard cut out of what many Americans think a gay man is. So what?
There is nothing negative about being "queeny" or flamboyant, so why does it matter? I don't want to get too political here, but I'm going to go there: I think it is a problem mostly with gay men with internalized homophobia who think there is something negative about being a feminine gay guy. Otherwise, what's the problem? Is it because he's a nurse? Well, the show is called "General Hospital." Should they have made him a hairdresser? Or a stylist? Or a fashion designer? Or must we now also give gay characters neutral or masculine professions, like a miner, because we don't want to fool anyone into thinking that some of them are nurses and hairdressers and stylists and fashion designers?
Furthermore, this just seems to me like a lot of hoopla for a day player who doesn't even have much back story. How many multi-dimensional day players are there? Perhaps if he sticks around, we'll find out that he was a high-school quarterback star who used to date girls. If he were using the same mannerisms but had an ex-girlfriend (like Hannah's ex on "Girls," who also behaves stereotypically gay and could be the same character the actor plays on "The New Normal" -- yet nobody complains about either of them), would he still be considered one-dimensional?
Personally I don't think that is what Mark was saying or at least that isn't what I read into his post. I'm not queeny myself but yes am effeminate male but I don't get the uproar once again it's the discrimination within are own gay community just like if a woman is more masculine she's considered a "dike". This banter between masculine gay men and effeminate gay men has been going on for eons and I came out as senior in high school. It started long before that and will continue. The uber masculine gay men (not lumping all masculine gay men) are those who are display the most prejudice toward other gay people men or women or at least what I have experienced. Many str8 men are metrosexuals today and there is a prejudice against those men by other blue collar type str8 men. Gay people comes in all sizes, race, backgrounds, and ethic morals and are multi-facet and are not one dimensional which Mark wasn't commenting about but what I took from reading is the diversity among gay people.
I love the new character LGBT comes in all shapes and sizes. Does every gay that enter soap must be in the closet and afraid of how other react around them? I love FV and RC to see that and add to the mix. The character is flamboyant, confident, vain and loves attention and entertaining. Must gay character look like Will on Days. I like will agod love him but his facial expressions he looks constipated and has I got to shit face in every scene. Did people react like this to Zoe and Bianca? TPTB have been daring different and the formula works. They are amazing and single handedly saved ABC soap and I believe more may be added. There are a lot of men that are gay in nursing, teaching, chefs, CEOs and etc. this one is more real and relatable. Can you name me one gay character on daytime that has never came from Money? Everyone that watches soaps are not rich. Give it a chance. If you guys can be open about Alexis and Shawn then be open about this character.
KRONEY1972,I liked your views about the character. I think he'll be great ,especially in scenes with Lucy Coe. I have faith in Ron C.'s writing, look how much he has improved GH!
Thankyou Harlee for actually reading my post and taking it at face value . I do not think it is right to label someone as a homophobe because they object to a characterization of a gay men as being an effiminate, nurse, who is also a makeup sales person, and to top it off another minority as well.
I never one time said that I thought it was something wrong with being effiminate, or flamboyant. I simply believe that we have moved passed that image and can examine a larger range of gay man. The boys on Days seem perfectly fine as gay boys go. Gender identity and homosexual are two different things. They do not go hand in hand. To lump them together in such a tidy package is alienating to men (and women) who do not fit into the catagory that people want to put them in. Basically, if I don't camp it up, I lose my gay card? I find it objectionable that people can not accept an effiminate male as a straight man or a masculine gay male is just a homophobe. It is much easier to classify people into a neat little folder than to examine ones own misguided beliefs.
Honest question, have any of daytime's previous gay male characters been portrayed the same way as Felix? I can't recall any off the top of my head.
This whole gh “controversy” is quite odd considering how there are a ton of unique lgbt representations on soaps and primetime soaps and primetime shows and films. glee alone has how many lgbt chars: guest chars sebastian and sandy. black gay char unique who dresses like a female. santana and britney. kurt obviously is the lead. there's a new white gay char to be romantically paired w/ kurt. and there's blayne who is portrayed by a part Asian actor and yet the char was whitewashed. there could be more bec I stopped watching glee bec of the racist episode w/ matt bomer where blayne was whitewashed. that's 8 lgbt chars and that's only 1 show.
LA Times and Pew Research reported that Asian americans make up 6% of the US population. cnn reported that only 3% of the us population is lgbt and they wouldn't get that wrong bec the "face" of cnn is openly gay blanderson cooper.
there are tons of unique representations of lgbt chars from hollywood especially white gay chars. it's bec hollywood's run by white gay guys and thus white gays are the "right kinda minority" for hollywood.
hollywood keeps proclaiming how they're "liberal" and for "diversity" and yet they openly whitewash the better Asian american roles by giving them to white actors while they cast Asian american actors for stereotypical and harmful chars. hollywood is hypocritical bec they'll scream "homophobia" at the slightest portrayals of lgbt chars that they don't like but they're openly racist to Asian americans.
it seems like people erupt at the slightest “flaw” of an lgbt char and yet it’s completely acceptable how is openly racist towards Asian americans thru their portrayals. There was a film called “the goods” starring jeremy piven where an Asian american char was physically bashed by his white colleagues bec of pearl harbor bombing. The bashing of the Asian american char was done comedically w/c made it all the more disturbing and it furthered the stereotype that all Asian americans are monolithic bec the char was not Japanese. Would hollywood ever gay bash an lgbt char and portray that comedically? Highly doubtful from the "tolerant" hollywood crowd.
Exactly, Marcelle. Some people are acting like Felix is the latest in a string of effeminate gay male characters in daytime, or like this one character is supposed to represent the entire spectrum of gayness. Considering the paucity of gay characters in daytime overall, I'd say the genre has done a pretty good job of examining a larger range of gay men. If one doesn't have a problem with effeminate gay men, and one acknowledges that there are people like this in real life, then what's the problem with Felix? I simply don't see how the character is an insult to gay men (like myself) who are not campy or effeminate, or how he can make us feel alienated or like we might lose our gay card. If we don't want to feel alienated, we can always turn on "Days" and see what's going on with Sonny and Will, or look at old "OLTL" "Kish" clips on YouTube. I'm certain there are a lot of gay men out there who act like Felix who are probably happy to see a gay character more like themselves on a soap. You see, this alienation thing does work both ways.
And just to reiterate, I never said that the people who are complaining because they have a problem with stereotypical representations of gay man are homophobes. I said that gay men who see queeny or flamboyant behavior as negative are likely struggling with their own internalized homophobia. There is a big difference.
It's bec the manhattan mainstream media and hollywood is influenced by a vocal segment of old gay guys that are white. thus the majority of lgbt chars must be white gays guys who are rich. it's to brainwash the broader pop culture's definition of the lgbt community. it's to shape the narrative on how majority lgbt chars are portrayed as rich and white.
however a new gallup poll contradicts that very warped narrative that the manhattan mainstream media and hollywood is forcing upon the pop culture. gallup poll reported that more people who make less than 25000 identify as lgbt. yet that's being suppressed by essays written by mainstream manhattan media. these essays are drenched w/ white supremacy. manhattan media and hollywood are against this gallup poll bec they want lgbt community to only be thought of as rich and white bec they want advertisers to think they're a group that can be profitable.
it's a form of white supremacy when advertisers are being fooled by the manhattan media's false representations of lgbt and hollywood's skewed portrayals of lgbt to butter up the image of the lgbt community. this explains lgbt's pathetic attempts to "steal" the model minority title from Asian americans.
LA Times reported that: Asian americans are graduating at higher rates compared to every group and not lgbt. Asian americans are the majority among professional and managerial roles compared to every other group and not lgbt. Asian americans shop more than any other group and not lgbt. Asian americans have the spending potential of more than 700 billion and not the lgbt. Asian americans are 6% of the us population and are growing at faster rates than Latino americans.
while cnn reports that only 3% of the us population identify as lgbt. yet there are far more white gay portrayals from hollywood than Asian american chars. this is a form of white supremacy from racist white gay guys.
Ron and Frank gave us KISH, and people complained. Now they give us a fierce dude (Felix) and people complain. Personally I don't mind the character. I am also not offended by his flamboyance. I wish there were more flamboyant gay male characters or 'butch' lesbian characters (Stephanie on B&B is dead) on screen!
I know people like Felix in real life, so what's the big deal?
What nobody has mentioned so far is that the gay community has been fighting negative stereotypes in movies and television for decades now. In this sense, the character of Felix IS a step backwards. I am thrilled that GH has added an out black gay character to the show. However, when I first heard Felix speak, I just cringed!
IMO, Andy Towle should not have apologized to Ron C. Yes, Ron was right that characters like Felix have every right to exist on daytime and elsewhere, but where he went wrong is not (yet) casting a counterbalance as well i.e. a masculine gay character. Ron being gay himself should have been able to anticipate the negative reaction to Felix. I personally believe Felix's first scenes were specifically written to annoy the LGBT community and create a "news" story like this. I'm just hoping Dr. Lucas Jones shows up at GH soon and becomes the object of Felix's desire.
BTW, I lost respect for Carlivati and Valentini when they did not resign in protest from OLTL after Frons fired Kish.
IMO all this has been blown way out of proportion. When I first heard the talk about Felix after the first time he was on the show, I kept imagining a Boy George type of character. Felix is far from it.
He is NOT even all that feminine. When he first walked on to Sabrina, I thought "Damn, who is that hot guy!" I don't think that way about guys who really are feminine. The lipstick is an afterthought.
And yesterday in the scenes with Sabrina and Lucy Coe, he was a perfectly normal man. He looked great in the suit and HE was calming Sabrina down, who was over the top. And with Lucy, she stole the show (naturally). A flamboyant and feminine gay man is not going to be quiet and let anyone steal the show.
And the fact is, people like him, and people FAR more feminine than him do exist. A LOT. So his portrayal is only one realistic portrayal of a man.
The thing that bothered me WAY more was the propping of Sabrina. Why does she, a newbie herself, get a best friend, another newbie? Both have no connection to anyone.
And the other thing that has always bothered me: The notion that the gay man is the girls best friend. I don't buy it. I know it is that way a lot in the world, but I have seen those types of relationships and the ones I have are not equal, healthy, nourished friendships.
does the lgbt community really have to be this selfish? screaming abt an effeminate gay guy is ridiculous! there are tons of effeminate gay people and their are tons of unique representations of lgbt characters from hollywood w/c is completely lopsided considering how according to cnn only 3% of the us population is lgbt and they wouldn't get that wrong bec openly gay anderson cooper is the "face" of that ratings mess cnn. openly lgbt actors get supporting and lead roles most of whom are white gay guys. and closeted white gay actors get tons of lead and supporting roles.
lgbt are screaming abt an effeminate gay char on a low rated show like gh yet there are no complaints when hollywood openly bashes asian americans thru their racist portrayals. it's bec hollywood's racist. hollywood employs "realism" to remove people of color from storylines like on "mad men" and then claims "artistic" bs when there are still no people of color on ny based tv shows like "girls" where white privilege is glorified.
yet hollywood disregards "realism" when they cast white people as chars of color. hollywood uses all kinds of mental gymnastics when they cast white people to portray people of color and particularly the better Asian american roles.
then hollywood leaves the harmfully stereotypical Asian american roles to Asian american actors like the nerdy Indian american char w/ accent that's mocked.
then hollywood screams "reverse racism" when white actors take roles of Asian americans. that is a dumb concept bec it assumes that whites are qualified and people of color are unqualified to portray their own roles.
bottomchef, as someone who is part Asian and a couple of other minorities, I totally understand your point of view. I just don't see why you need to single out LGBTs for expressing a legitimate concern.
I also don't get why you need to subject the other posters on DC to your periodic rants. Well-written though they may be, I rather think you're preaching to the choir. Why not address them to the TV networks, studios, and executives?
soaparmageddon: it's quite frankly very manipulative for some lgbt people to bash an effeminate gay character as homophobic when what they want is to control how all lgbt characters must be portrayed. an effeminate gay character is clearly not homophobic. there are tons of effeminate gay people. and there are tons of unique portrayals of gay characters from hollywood. not all the gay chars are effeminate.
how the hell is hollywood being homophobic to gays by portraying an effeminate gay char when hollywood prioritizes lgbt characters and especially prioritizes white gay characters? how the hell is hollywood against lgbt community when white gay actors that are closeted have become a listers and gotten many roles and have often become named people magazine's most handsome and get a lot of press and perks?
this whole "controversy" from vocal and quite frankly warped lgbt people is to foment fake anger at an effeminate gay char and thus force everyone to conform to their standards of how gays should be portrayed. they want to define any portrayal they don't approve of as "homophobic" and yet all their screaming does is minimize real discrimination and bullying.
and btw the huffington post has reported that it is Asian american students that get bullied the most among all groups. yet where is hollywood to scream against that kinda bullying?
gallup poll reported that majority of people that identify as lgbt make less than 25000 and yet hollywood and the manhattan mainstream media were vehemently against that report bec it goes against how they shape the narrative on the lgbt community. there are many unique gay characters from hollywood but a vast majority of them are portrayed as rich and white bec hollywood and the media want to brainwash people to think of lgbt as such. hollywood and the media want to make advertisers think that the lgbt community is profitable. it's abt status and class and yes it's a form of white supremacy from the "tolerant" hollywood and manhattan mainstream media.
I think that Hollywood/New York Media do portray gays especially as wealthy and white, except on Law and Order:SVU. I cant remember the guy's name, but he was played by BD Wong, and he was Asian and Gay. So that is 1 good portrayal of a Gay Person. He was shown to be very professional, competent, and great at helping Stabler and Benson catch criminals.
Those of us who live in Metro Detroit. We know the buying power of diverse clients. Asians, African-Americans, Latinos, everybody. I think the World is slow to show change, but it is happening gradually.
I find Felix D. an incredibly refreshing character on GH which is a show whose main theme is death and violence. GAWD, Felix is a breath of fresh air. Major points GH! Stoic young gay couple of DAYS. Check. Fun fem gay on General Hospital. Check, check. I say we have a gay daytime balance. I'm good with that. I agree with poster who said the gays making a big deal about Felix are self-loathing. Felix is fun and if he puts a smile on the faces of GH fans then the producers have done their job successfully.