Before I get beaten down JP has spoken to DS about the fact that the show now has no gay characters since Chryed left.. So clearly JP is recognising this too...
And you couldn't have added this to one of your other threads because? This just looks like we've jumped into a conversation half way though without hearing the rest
That's the same interview he gave after Chryed left. They just dressed it up and put it out under a different title. The comments they're quoting are from that older interview though.
That's the same interview he gave after Chryed left. They just dressed it up and put it out under a different title. The comments they're quoting are from that older interview though.
I suspect it to be the case too.
JP once said that he left with Marc Elliott not just to give Chryed a happy ending - such as it was - but because the writing for EE's only gay couple was poor, so I don't think John would want to see new gay characters rushed into the show without proper thought behind it.
The OP should remember that Christian and Syed were badly written for by the producers and shouldn't want to see new gay characters treated the same way.
vaslav37 why don't you write in and complain about the lack of gay or lesbian representation in the soap, you seem quite pressed with the matter for EE to have some kind of gay character in the show, it doesn't really have much effect on here other then being vetoed.
Oh well, if John Partridge says it then it must be an undeniable truth. It couldn't possibly just be a simple case of more than one person sharing a similar opinion about something. Anybody who disagrees with you must be wrong if John Partridge; one of the greatest minds of the 21st century; is backing you up.
Anyway, if I remember correctly, Partridge said something along the lines of 'bring in some hot new gay guys!!'. How enlightened.
Surely what any soap needs are interesting characters. Their sexuality is irrelevant. And why does John Partridge want hot gay characters? What's wrong with normal looking gay characters?
Surely what any soap needs are interesting characters. Their sexuality is irrelevant. And why does John Partridge want hot gay characters? What's wrong with normal looking gay characters?
Didn't you know that you can't pass the gay qualification test without being at least a 9 (out of 10) on the hotness scale? Uggo's need not apply :cool:
You know it does have to be said that Syed and Christian were completely wasted once Diderick Santer left EastEnders. Christian for his final year in the show may have just been an extra.
For goodness sake, they've been gone 5 minutes! EE shouldn't bring in another gay character UNLESS it's the right time. Just bringing in somebody purely to be the token gay guy is a little demeaning to homosexuality, surely??
For goodness sake, they've been gone 5 minutes! EE shouldn't bring in another gay character UNLESS it's the right time. Just bringing in somebody purely to be the token gay guy is a little demeaning to homosexuality, surely??
Have you seen the new bbc 'love' trailer?
Its all straight couples. There is minimal to zero representation on the bbc. At the moment even tokenism would be welcome.
I dont think ln is the right producer to do it though.
Its all straight couples. There is minimal to zero representation on the bbc. At the moment even tokenism would be welcome.
I dont think ln is the right producer to do it though.
That's not the issue here is it. We're talking about EastEnders, not the whole of the BBC. Bring somebody in and if they're homosexual, fair enough but don't bring them in BECAUSE they're homosexual.
That's not the issue here is it. We're talking about EastEnders, not the whole of the BBC. Bring somebody in and if they're homosexual, fair enough but don't bring them in BECAUSE they're homosexual.
As far as i remember ee is part of the bbc. Its a problem across the channel
As i said i think ln is too interested in tweeny romances to do it properly.
That's not the issue here is it. We're talking about EastEnders, not the whole of the BBC. Bring somebody in and if they're homosexual, fair enough but don't bring them in BECAUSE they're homosexual.
But the whole point of creating a character is going to be based around their sexuality. They can't just make up a character for a storyline without the sexuality being part of it can they! Every single character that has ever been gay in soap or TV/film and their sexuality plays a large part in the reason they are there.
Soaps have always had most of their storylines based on relationships and families, sexuality therefore plays a major role in that so you can't just cast someone who is homosexual but that wasn't in the planning!
Dont worry Im sure there will be some fresh gay males arriving soon on the square. I'll give it until the 1st March.
There are empty boxes that have to be ticked dont you know
But the whole point of creating a character is going to be based around their sexuality. They can't just make up a character for a storyline without the sexuality being part of it can they! Every single character that has ever been gay in soap or TV/film and their sexuality plays a large part in the reason they are there.
Soaps have always had most of their storylines based on relationships and families, sexuality therefore plays a major role in that so you can't just cast someone who is homosexual but that wasn't in the planning!
Okay maybe I've worded it wrong. What I meant is why create a homosexual storyline just for the shire publicity? If bringing in a gay character is right at the time then do it...But don't just bring one in purely because there aren't any at the moment.
If they're gonna be hammy stage school vest wearers then I'd rather they didn't bother.
Where's all the normal, average looking homosexuals? Although having said that, Christian and Syed were hardly the best looking blokes in the world were they? Lol.
Okay maybe I've worded it wrong. What I meant is why create a homosexual storyline just for the shire publicity? If bringing in a gay character is right at the time then do it...But don't just bring one in purely because there aren't any at the moment.
The trouble is soaps have a very large gay following, and having gay characters that they can associate themselves with I think helps particularly younger people who maybe confused about their sexuality and it does help some to come out. Look at how popular Ste in Hollyoaks has been since he came out on this morning. There were a number of viewers who felt they had the confidence to after he had gone public and without gay characters in soaps it wouldn't really reflect reality would it?
I understand why you think its wrong to just create a gay character because the last one has left but soaps always play a line of being politically correct and it would certainly receive a lot of criticism if it doesn't have plans for any more gay characters
Comments
I suspect it to be the case too.
JP once said that he left with Marc Elliott not just to give Chryed a happy ending - such as it was - but because the writing for EE's only gay couple was poor, so I don't think John would want to see new gay characters rushed into the show without proper thought behind it.
The OP should remember that Christian and Syed were badly written for by the producers and shouldn't want to see new gay characters treated the same way.
Keep the rest of the cast warm by hugging them
Anyway, if I remember correctly, Partridge said something along the lines of 'bring in some hot new gay guys!!'. How enlightened.
Didn't you know that you can't pass the gay qualification test without being at least a 9 (out of 10) on the hotness scale? Uggo's need not apply :cool:
I am of course joking before anyone gets uppity
Have you seen the new bbc 'love' trailer?
Its all straight couples. There is minimal to zero representation on the bbc. At the moment even tokenism would be welcome.
I dont think ln is the right producer to do it though.
That's not the issue here is it. We're talking about EastEnders, not the whole of the BBC. Bring somebody in and if they're homosexual, fair enough but don't bring them in BECAUSE they're homosexual.
As far as i remember ee is part of the bbc. Its a problem across the channel
As i said i think ln is too interested in tweeny romances to do it properly.
But the whole point of creating a character is going to be based around their sexuality. They can't just make up a character for a storyline without the sexuality being part of it can they! Every single character that has ever been gay in soap or TV/film and their sexuality plays a large part in the reason they are there.
Soaps have always had most of their storylines based on relationships and families, sexuality therefore plays a major role in that so you can't just cast someone who is homosexual but that wasn't in the planning!
There are empty boxes that have to be ticked dont you know
Okay maybe I've worded it wrong. What I meant is why create a homosexual storyline just for the shire publicity? If bringing in a gay character is right at the time then do it...But don't just bring one in purely because there aren't any at the moment.
Where's all the normal, average looking homosexuals? Although having said that, Christian and Syed were hardly the best looking blokes in the world were they? Lol.
The trouble is soaps have a very large gay following, and having gay characters that they can associate themselves with I think helps particularly younger people who maybe confused about their sexuality and it does help some to come out. Look at how popular Ste in Hollyoaks has been since he came out on this morning. There were a number of viewers who felt they had the confidence to after he had gone public and without gay characters in soaps it wouldn't really reflect reality would it?
I understand why you think its wrong to just create a gay character because the last one has left but soaps always play a line of being politically correct and it would certainly receive a lot of criticism if it doesn't have plans for any more gay characters