DS Forums

 
 

When will soapland's representation of bi men improve?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 24-05-2015, 22:23
Oldnjaded
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Losing the plot and not caring
Posts: 68,960
I'm sorry, but are you being deliberately obtuse?

For a start, it would achieve an increase in bi male visibility and that in itself is reason enough to justify it.

It's right that the soaps represent a diverse range of people. And just because a character is bi, it doesn't mean that all storylines involving that character need to be about their sexuality.
BiB : No it isn't. Only a tiny almost negligible percentage of the population constitute bi males - why do they need representation in a soap opera, as opposed to other tiny tiny minorities and plenty of other not so tiny minorities who never get a look in?
Oldnjaded is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 24-05-2015, 23:14
jsmith99
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 19,936
..................For a start, it would achieve an increase in bi male visibility and that in itself is reason enough to justify it..................
Quite apart from the response above, do you mean that you'd prefer to have plots driven by issues rather than character?
jsmith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 00:01
WanderinWonder
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,338
BiB : No it isn't. Only a tiny almost negligible percentage of the population constitute bi males - why do they need representation in a soap opera, as opposed to other tiny tiny minorities and plenty of other not so tiny minorities who never get a look in?
You couldn't be more wrong. A significant percentage of men are between exclusively gay and exclusively straight, even if they have a greater preference one way or the other.

And even if they were a minuscule proportion of men, it doesn't negate their need for representation.

Maybe we should have a soap where no old, white, hetero men are represented in any way, and see how you like that?
WanderinWonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 00:03
WanderinWonder
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,338
Quite apart from the response above, do you mean that you'd prefer to have plots driven by issues rather than character?
I like to see interesting, well-drawn characters explore interesting, relevant issues.
WanderinWonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 00:14
trevon1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 5,929
yes, it's time Norris in CS had a good storyline...
He needs to start something with Morris from the parcel storyline.
trevon1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 08:44
vaslav37
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: London
Posts: 26,672
It seems to me that, on top of some rather ropey representation of lesbian/gay characters and also bi women, the soaps' representation of bi male characters is extremely poor.

For a start, they're virtually never referred to as bisexual but simply as exclusively gay (whenever someone else feels the need to label their sexuality).

On top of this, they're often portrayed as untrustworthy and are often the villains in their shows (Danny in EE and Rob in ED to give two recent examples).

I get that every show needs a villain (and bi men offer the added shock value of being able to cheat on their girlfriends/wives with another guy).

But just for once, couldn't the soaps depict a bi male who's a likeable character and who is also capable of monogamy? Or is that too much of a stretch for certain soap writers' feeble imaginations?
There is a very poor representation of Bi men in Soaps.
vaslav37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 09:48
Oldnjaded
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Losing the plot and not caring
Posts: 68,960
You couldn't be more wrong. A significant percentage of men are between exclusively gay and exclusively straight, even if they have a greater preference one way or the other.

And even if they were a minuscule proportion of men, it doesn't negate their need for representation.

Maybe we should have a soap where no old, white, hetero men are represented in any way, and see how you like that?
What do you call significant and on what do you base your speculation? At the last Government survey some years ago out of only 6% identifying as LGBT only 0.4% identified themselves as bi. At the time, the LGBT Rights group Stonewall said that the figure was reasonable. Even allowing for some people not wanting to answer, you can hardly spin that as 'significant'.
Oldnjaded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 10:40
WanderinWonder
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,338
What do you call significant and on what do you base your speculation? At the last Government survey some years ago out of only 6% identifying as LGBT only 0.4% identified themselves as bi. At the time, the LGBT Rights group Stonewall said that the figure was reasonable. Even allowing for some people not wanting to answer, you can hardly spin that as 'significant'.
I always take those surveys with a pinch of salt. Until the stigma of being LGBTA is completely removed, the results will always be a bit iffy.

And even if it's true that only 0.4% of the population identify as bi, it's pretty obvious that far more than 0.4% of people behave bisexually. Just because they don't wish to identify officially as bi, doesn't mean they aren't to some degree bi in reality. After all, identifying as bi is no easy picnic.

I also think there's a lot of misunderstanding over what bi actually means. It might be true that only a tiny percentage of people are "50/50" bi (equally and evenly attracted to both genders).

Many bi people lean towards one gender more, and so may well identify as either straight or gay in public, just to save themselves a whole lot of hostility and hassle. There's still a lot of pressure from society for bi people to pass as monosexual.
WanderinWonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 11:20
jsmith99
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 19,936
What do you call significant and on what do you base your speculation? At the last Government survey some years ago out of only 6% identifying as LGBT only 0.4% identified themselves as bi. ...............
I interpret what you've written as meaning that 0.4% of 6% identify themselves as bi. That would be 0.024% of the population (give or take a decimal point ).

I take it that wasn't what you meant?
jsmith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 11:37
Chiltons Cane
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 4,018
Tony from EE many years ago, he dated women and also Simon, Tiffs brother.
Chiltons Cane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 14:34
cas1977
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Costa Blanca Spain
Posts: 6,286
I'm sorry, but are you being deliberately obtuse?

For a start, it would achieve an increase in bi male visibility and that in itself is reason enough to justify it.

It's right that the soaps represent a diverse range of people. And just because a character is bi, it doesn't mean that all storylines involving that character need to be about their sexuality.
Why would anyone want to achieve an increase in bi male visibility?

I agree with you. The storylines involving the character wouldn't have to be about their sexuality, though in that case, what would be the point of them in the first place? If his sexuality was never to be mentioned.

How would anyone know if he was bi then?

Only by showing him having affairs with both males and females, and then of course all his storylines would be based on sex and affairs etc. So it'd end up still being about his sexuality wouldn't it?

It wouldn't work on the Square anyway. Because if a character is seen to be publicly involved with a man, then I doubt it'd be workable in the script for a female character to then be attracted to him as well.

It could work if it were all secrets I suppose.
cas1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 15:27
Nobby Burton
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,837
Bisexuality scares people

It comforts people to think that if they like the opposite sex, they are 100% straight and couldn't be tempted by the same sex under any circumstances

TV bosses are also under pressure not to portray sexuality as fluid
Nobby Burton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 15:31
Nobby Burton
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,837
Also, the idea that only 0.6% of the population is bisexual is absolutely laughable

If people were honest about their potential attractions, there'd be comfortably more people identifying as bi than gay
Nobby Burton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 15:41
Oldnjaded
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Losing the plot and not caring
Posts: 68,960
Also, the idea that only 0.6% of the population is bisexual is absolutely laughable

If people were honest about their potential attractions, there'd be comfortably more people identifying as bi than gay
a) the figure was actually 0.4%, but feel free to double that if you wish - you're still well short of 1% of the population.

b) Your second point sounds like utter rubbish to me, and since you've got zero, zilch, nada to back it up, I'll just remind myself that everyone's allowed an opinion, however fanciful.
Oldnjaded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 17:26
cyrilandshirley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 39,613
It wouldn't work on the Square anyway. Because if a character is seen to be publicly involved with a man, then I doubt it'd be workable in the script for a female character to then be attracted to him as well.

It could work if it were all secrets I suppose.
Why not? They did it with Danny Pennant.

I'm always interested in seeing human behaviour shown believably on soaps.

Not sure what it is about bisexuality that soaps find so hard to get right. I remember when Hollyoaks created Danny Lomax, he was meant to be out and bi, but they wrote him exactly the same as a married closet gay. Then killed him off pronto. It's a mystery.

I'll be really disappointed if it turns out that Robert Sugden on ED is meant to be 100% gay and just "in denial." It would completely rewrite his history and be the biggest load of horsesh*t ever. The guy likes sex with women and, for some reason, Aaron. That's just who he is.
cyrilandshirley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2015, 20:17
lady_xanax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,042
HO had quite a good mix of bi characters: Danny was mainly attracted to men whereas Lockie is mainly attracted to women. Ravi was roughly equal and Kris did his own thing. And then we have Craig who liked women but fell in love with one man. You also had characters who experimented like Zoe and Texas.
lady_xanax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2015, 14:24
Chiltons Cane
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 4,018
HO is the only show who doesn't really label people.
Chiltons Cane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-05-2015, 16:23
Emma_Henvey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,636
HO is the only show who doesn't really label people.
Hollyoaks characters don't have a sexuality. They just shag everyone and everything
Emma_Henvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2015, 16:43
cas1977
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Costa Blanca Spain
Posts: 6,286
Why not? They did it with Danny Pennant.

I'm always interested in seeing human behaviour shown believably on soaps.

Not sure what it is about bisexuality that soaps find so hard to get right. I remember when Hollyoaks created Danny Lomax, he was meant to be out and bi, but they wrote him exactly the same as a married closet gay. Then killed him off pronto. It's a mystery.

I'll be really disappointed if it turns out that Robert Sugden on ED is meant to be 100% gay and just "in denial." It would completely rewrite his history and be the biggest load of horsesh*t ever. The guy likes sex with women and, for some reason, Aaron. That's just who he is.
I agree about Danny Pennant, no idea why he didn't work. Not sure if it were the bi thing, or just his character, and no stories for him.

The thing is though, I don't remember him having an actual relationship with Lucy, it was all a bit hazy if I remember? And I don't remember if he and Syed actually did anything or if it was just steamy looks and flirting?

But the reason why I don't think it would work in EE, is people would find it off putting if they see a man having a full on relationship with say a main female character like Roxy, and then after they split, we see the bi character then getting it on with Max for example.

To me, it'd all be a bit icky, and inevitably the bi character will be one dimensional as his storylines will all feature around his sexuality.
cas1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2015, 16:44
cas1977
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Costa Blanca Spain
Posts: 6,286
HO is the only show who doesn't really label people.
What's wrong with labelling people? We've all got labels haven't we?
cas1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2015, 17:59
cyrilandshirley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 39,613
I agree about Danny Pennant, no idea why he didn't work. Not sure if it were the bi thing, or just his character, and no stories for him.

The thing is though, I don't remember him having an actual relationship with Lucy, it was all a bit hazy if I remember? And I don't remember if he and Syed actually did anything or if it was just steamy looks and flirting?

But the reason why I don't think it would work in EE, is people would find it off putting if they see a man having a full on relationship with say a main female character like Roxy, and then after they split, we see the bi character then getting it on with Max for example.

To me, it'd all be a bit icky, and inevitably the bi character will be one dimensional as his storylines will all feature around his sexuality.
I don't find bisexuality icky.
cyrilandshirley is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:53.