They'd do worse than to add another facet to one of the many bland existing characters. To make Oscar question his sexuality, or Chris, or even Evie could be believed.
I was desperate for Xavier and Dexter to happen. But it's Home and Away, so remains a fantasy. Like gay people in general.
The norm now for soap operas is to portray gay characters so for Home and Away to be so careful to ensure that they don't raises questions. The funniest response I've seen on here was that you don't get many gay people outside of Sydney. Whether that is true or not I don't really care but I think it's amusing and telling how someone will use that as justification when Home and Away is know for it's non realistic, far fetched and hyped up storylines.
I think someone needs to point out to the producers that not every boy facies a girl and vice versa! This is a shame because ironically aussie soaps were originally the best for showing gay people as just normal people back in the 70s/80s on cell block h.
I cant speak for the welsh & Irish soaps as I dont see them, perhaps they are worse than h&a but I dont know.
The best soaps for gay activity are h'oaks & river city, in my humble opinion. They treat gay people exactly as they do straights.
This is true. Programmes like Number 96 and Prisoner Cell Block H spear-headed the way.
What would a gay person do in Home and Away? Heres what!
- Chat to Irene and Leah
- get involved with a gang of some kind and do drugs and get into trouble
- find themselves in a life / death situation once a month
- have an affair with someone in the closet
- help Leah peel veg in the diner
etc
I'm gay and I really don't get why people need to see gay people in every show. All I care about is whether I like the characters or not (which is why I stopped watching Neighbours).
I don't watch Home and Away but it could be because of the location of the show, although the interior scenes are filmed in a studio in Inner City Sydney. LGBT people in Australia are most likely to live in Sydney, Melbourne or on the Gold Coast.
Neighbours is set in the suburbs of Melbourne which could make a difference but H & A are ignoring a whole demographic of society with their exclusion of LGBT characters.
The idea that a small seaside town wouldn't have many gay people living in it is perhaps true but very easily curbed-they could have a career specific to Summer Bay like fishing or be introduced as a relative of a pre-existing character or heaven forbid actually as a teenager in foster care!
I understand the concern over tokenism but for a near 30 year old soap to have never properly explored this treasure trove of storylines especially when it's original USP was kids coming of age is indicative of some very conservative thinking.
I agree with the OP. Even if you took Neighbours out of the equation, Home & Away is literally the only soap that doesn't have even at least one LGBT character. I don't see how anyone can't see that as somewhat strange.
Imagine if there was a soap which had mainly gay characters and straight people said there weren't enough straight characters - there'd be an uproar.
Comments like this are annoying. Its like on coming out videos and someone posts "why make such a big deal about it". I say 5/80 characters in a soap at least should be of a non straight sexuality. That includes recurring characters.
The idea that a small seaside town wouldn't have many gay people living in it is perhaps true but very easily curbed-they could have a career specific to Summer Bay like fishing or be introduced as a relative of a pre-existing character or heaven forbid actually as a teenager in foster care!
I understand the concern over tokenism but for a near 30 year old soap to have never properly explored this treasure trove of storylines especially when it's original USP was kids coming of age is indicative of some very conservative thinking.
I agree with the OP. Even if you took Neighbours out of the equation, Home & Away is literally the only soap that doesn't have even at least one LGBT character. I don't see how anyone can't see that as somewhat strange.
I am gay and really not expect or need to see a gay character in every show I watch. But if there is one or two, and they are great characters, it can be a wonderful thing.
It is likely true that you'd find greater concentrations of gay people in inner city Sydney and Melbourne than in a small seaside town in New South Wales. However, there probably would still be a few gay people there. Gay people from small towns might move to Sydney or Melbourne but later choose to return to the small town they hail from. Some gay people might prefer the relaxed pace of a small town and never make the move to Sydney (which can be a pretty intimidating place not to mention prohibitively expensive). Soaps are fantasy anyway - they don't need to present any reason why a gay person would live in a small town.
I do not think there really are any deep dark secrets about H&A not including gay characters. I mean, despite the claims that suggested otherwise, there were only 15 complaints in Australia when Charlie engaged in a kiss with another girl. I think the people running the show have hit on a basic crime drama formula that has proved popular, and just aren't bothered about changing that as long as it continues to bring in ratings and advertising dollars. Not that I'm defending them.
Are the producers of H & A aware that this is been raised on social media? I doubt very much if every single writer or actor who is involved in the show can't think it's a little bit odd that the show is ignoring the LGBT demographic.
Why should they have a gay character just to fill a quota. They don't have many ethnic people, they don't have any aborigine's, they don't have characters from New Zealand or Maori's and they are their closest neighbours. They don't have any English characters and there are thousands of Brits in Australia. I would rather they spent their time developing believable characters rather than bringing in random characters to fill the gay quota.
Why should they have a gay character just to fill a quota. They don't have many ethnic people, they don't have any aborigine's, they don't have characters from New Zealand or Maori's and they are their closest neighbours. They don't have any English characters and there are thousands of Brits in Australia. I would rather they spent their time developing believable characters rather than bringing in random characters to fill the gay quota.
They do have an English character in Home & Away - Nate Cooper.
The actor and the character are both English. It has been mentioned one or two times in the show.
H&A is the worst for all minorities. There aren't any. And yes, every show should have lgbt characters and minority characters, that's just normal life.
It's just that nobody cares. Not every programme has to obsess about sexuality. H&a is fiction. There are plenty of programmes which are more realistic.
Maybe you've just articulated your point wrongly, but I kinda feel your whole post is offensive. I don't see how pointing out that a 27 year old soap has zero gay characters (and hasn't done since the Charlie/Joey debacle) can be seen as "going back in time".
I agree that it's important to have well written characters with personality and interesting storylines, but it's equally important for viewers to see and feel represented. H&A isn't set on Mars, and there's really no reason why they couldn't include a gay character or two. Of course it may not be realistic for a beach-side town to have much diversity, but realism is played with in a fast and loose way for other aspects of the show, so why not this?
I don't feel the OP is making a big thing out of being gay by wanting the show to create a gay character. You've acknowledged that gay people want to be treated with equality, so surely having a gay character would be a step in that direction? It's no different to people wanting the show to reflect Australia's multicultural world by having more characters who aren't white.
FYI: I don't think this thread was needed, as I'm sure there was one created a couple month ago. I find these threads relating to H&A and diversity tiresome, b/c they crop up so often, rehashing the same old points. And nothing ever changes. The H&A PTB are useless at listening to viewers.
Why are you telling us that you feel the post was offensive? How is that relevant?
The idea that a small seaside town wouldn't have many gay people living in it is perhaps true but very easily curbed-they could have a career specific to Summer Bay like fishing or be introduced as a relative of a pre-existing character or heaven forbid actually as a teenager in foster care!
I understand the concern over tokenism but for a near 30 year old soap to have never properly explored this treasure trove of storylines especially when it's original USP was kids coming of age is indicative of some very conservative thinking.
I'm sure I remember a gay storyline only a few years ago. And so what if one soap is more conservative than another? Do you think all soaps should simply cater to your views?
Comments
I was desperate for Xavier and Dexter to happen. But it's Home and Away, so remains a fantasy. Like gay people in general.
Then in actually Sydney? Link?
This is true. Programmes like Number 96 and Prisoner Cell Block H spear-headed the way.
- Chat to Irene and Leah
- get involved with a gang of some kind and do drugs and get into trouble
- find themselves in a life / death situation once a month
- have an affair with someone in the closet
- help Leah peel veg in the diner
etc
Neighbours is set in the suburbs of Melbourne which could make a difference but H & A are ignoring a whole demographic of society with their exclusion of LGBT characters.
I understand the concern over tokenism but for a near 30 year old soap to have never properly explored this treasure trove of storylines especially when it's original USP was kids coming of age is indicative of some very conservative thinking.
Comments like this are annoying. Its like on coming out videos and someone posts "why make such a big deal about it". I say 5/80 characters in a soap at least should be of a non straight sexuality. That includes recurring characters.
I completley agree with this.
It is very strange, when you think about it.
It is likely true that you'd find greater concentrations of gay people in inner city Sydney and Melbourne than in a small seaside town in New South Wales. However, there probably would still be a few gay people there. Gay people from small towns might move to Sydney or Melbourne but later choose to return to the small town they hail from. Some gay people might prefer the relaxed pace of a small town and never make the move to Sydney (which can be a pretty intimidating place not to mention prohibitively expensive). Soaps are fantasy anyway - they don't need to present any reason why a gay person would live in a small town.
I do not think there really are any deep dark secrets about H&A not including gay characters. I mean, despite the claims that suggested otherwise, there were only 15 complaints in Australia when Charlie engaged in a kiss with another girl. I think the people running the show have hit on a basic crime drama formula that has proved popular, and just aren't bothered about changing that as long as it continues to bring in ratings and advertising dollars. Not that I'm defending them.
They do have an English character in Home & Away - Nate Cooper.
The actor and the character are both English. It has been mentioned one or two times in the show.
It's just that nobody cares. Not every programme has to obsess about sexuality. H&a is fiction. There are plenty of programmes which are more realistic.
They aren't widely considered to be offensive terms. You say they offend you. So what?