Star Trek was actually had the first multi-racial kiss on US TV as well, back when it was still very controversial. It is no use as an example of middle of the road television.

Why do people insist on pretending that Strictly is a dance competition? It's an entertainment show, nothing else and a light entertainment show at that. Using what happens is the world of ballroom dancing as a benchmark doesn't illuminate the discussion because like is not being compared with like.

Given its rather elderly demographic I suspect that some viewers may piss themselves in shock at the idea of a same sex couple and never watch again but the majority will give it a go largely because any prejudice is largely superficial and not deeply held in most people. Ultimately what will matter is the quality of the performers and how the BBC plays it.

Considering the BBC's history of representing gay people (and women, non-white people, people who don't speak with certain accents, working class people, foreigners, trade unionists etc) I'm not optimistic that it will be done well. I suspect it will be played for laughs and if this is the case I'm sure it will generate the brick bats it deserves.

Each year we tend to have a controversy around the token black candidate, older woman/man not getting the votes s/he deserves because of his or her age or skin colour and no doubt there will be controversy around people (not) voting for a couple just because they are a same sex couple. This is human nature. We can live with it as easily as we live with bitching about this year's ringer or wag, Craig's expertise or lack of it, Tess and Claude

Re : "family show" : Strictly airs after Pointless (gay couples), Dr Who (gay couples) and before Casualty (gay couples) and Merlin/Robin Hood/Atlantits (no gay couples but the fanbases certainly try their damndest to make them up). It's hardly going to stick out on a Saturday night.

I saw the original Strictly as a reality entertainment show and the best one IMO.

There is an entertainment element to the competition in that if a celeb is lacking in dance potential, they have a chance of staying around if people want to see more of them.

To me it seemed to work best when the celeb and pro had to form a team and had an objective to aim for in terms of learning to dance - one which was outside the celeb's comfort zone. Having a fixed set of rules (not strict dance rules, but a fixed version so there was a 'fair' competition in relation to the dancing) meant that the pro and celeb could feel that their destiny in terms of dance score, was largely in their own hands and that could lead to more commitment and bonding and more emotion being generated.

The more interference and control of the performances and results and the less it matters what they do, the more it becomes a light entertainment show and less of a reality show. I can care about it as a reality show concept, but as just a light entertainment show, its quite a weak format.

Given its rather elderly demographic I suspect that some viewers may piss themselves in shock at the idea of a same sex couple and never watch again but the majority will give it a go largely because any prejudice is largely superficial and not deeply held in most people. Ultimately what will matter is the quality of the performers and how the BBC plays it.


This comment can only be made by a small minded bigot with a superiority complex
Since when is it older people who would be shocked by same sex dance, it is the older generations who introduced much of the same sex dancing and difficult for some to believe but same sex anything is not new
their comments would have some value were they not so small minded

Remember that homosexuality was only decriminalised in 1967. Like it or not, people are a product of their era, and many people educated before that time were taught that homosexuality was both a crime.and a sin against God.

Strange but I have known a whole generation of people now in their seventies and swear I have never met more than one or two who considered homosexuality was a sin

Consider the age of the decriminalising generation and us oldens are their children ?

I must just say, in defence of my elderly relatives, that they are more accepting of a lot of things that much younger people struggle with. My 90+ year old aunt was a fag hag long before there was a name for it

Danny La Rue, Liberace, Lily Savage, Julian Clary.

My grandma (born 1918) and great aunt's (born 1921) favourite celebrities.

To be strict, most religions including the CoE still consider homosexuality to be a sin. Nobody takes any notice of them though.

strange where I keep bringing the topic back to dance and in particular competitive ballroom latin but others insist the topic is acceptability of homosexualty

I do not care who kisses who goodnight but do care that the wonderful world of movement and characterisation of music in strict tempo is allowed to continue to show its traditional brilliance

That brilliance built SCD

But unlike gay people, they have a choice and so can either change their stupid out-dated and completely wrong opinion or put up with it as gay people are not going to walk around in the shadows just to please stupid people.

Was only legalised in 1967? Yup that's coming up for 50 bloody years ago and now we can get married - Move on people!

Why are they even mentioned? They have not provided any evidence to support this God nonsense in all of history so what they think is of no importance and not even valid.

BIB - Some of them have guns - and I don't mean the ones Tess keeps going on about.

The only point I see as relevant is that the dances were designed with two different roles for a man and a woman dancing together.
It does get a bit less clear on Strictly as the pro ladies often are leading the men in the dance, or dancing around the mistakes they are making. The male pros often manhandle their celeb around the floor, or in Anton's case, sweep the floor with them or bowl them across the floor (not a dig at Anton, just a reflection on the partners he tends to have).

If you design a dance for a same sex couple, then I think it would be designed differently.

No thank you. I agree with James Jordan.

got gay friends but i still dont want to watch a beautiful dance, danced by same sex couples.

A suit, a stunning dress ... combination of both. Even if they have no chemistry i will enjoy it far more than watching 2 suits or 2 dresses swirling about.

Sick to death of all this box ticking, but no i wont be watching

Watching is entirely voluntary you know unless you happen to be a TV critic so no one will
be forcing you, but why decide on the basis of what you think you might like or not like, why not give it a chance and then make up your mind. Who knows, you may be surprised, if not, you've lost nothing more than a couple of minutes of your time.

I think this is all, CRH mouthing off.
It's the BBC's best rated show. They won't change a "winning" format, so it ain't gonna happen.

Have just read the full Horwood comment and it ends;

You just have to decide who goes backwards darling

A complete and utter insult and proof that his lack of feel or understanding of the ballroom world would / does justify his removal from SCD

Imagine the slur felt by the likes of Natalie who have and continue to offer such beautiful talented contributions to a discipline of dance Horwood so clearly shows his ignorance

I don't think they'll remove Craig from the judging panel - he by and large fulfils the role he's given and does it well - he's there to be the pantomime baddie who the audience boo - he's meant to be the 'controversial' judge who comes out with barbed comments and fusses over thumb positions and splayed hands.....I'm not saying I think he's an 'expert' on ballroom because I know he isn't, and I do disagree with him sometimes and find him infuriating but I do think he's got enough knowledge for a show like strictly.

Cat amongst the pigeon...Ola has a same sex partner...I'd love to see what James would tweet about that. On 2nd thoughts, maybe not.

He may be a qualified dance fool at panto level but he not only lacks in depth knowledge but respect for the basic ingredient that has built SCD, competitive ballroom and Latin

You can call the show whatever but simple respect for the basic discipline and the men and women involved is essential, the brilliant contribution to competitive ballroom by so many highly professional women has been essential to existing standards and traditions

If you have doubts as to his suitability try to remember him ever demonstrating a point or issue involved whilst in hold ?

I understand that you don't respect Craig's opinions or his dance experience - but I doubt if anything is going to change re the judging panel in the near future, unless any of the judges decide to leave voluntarily - I mean if we're talking about 'qualifications' then Len is the only judge on the panel with a solid ballroom background and some of his decisions, marking and judging I've found highly suspect, especially in the last two series - I personally don't think Darcey is that great a judge either, but at the end of the day - I think it's more light entertainment than a competitive dance contest - as long as the judges are doing what's required of them by the producers, then I can't see anything changing,

He's just a pantomime character and they can be easily replaced.

I've no time for him as he knows sod-all about ballroom.

It was reported on here years ago, that in his first season on IT2 where he gave a critique of the competitors, his "remarks" were actually those of an experienced ballroom judge (who the poster named on here) who had seen the clips and wrote them out for him, he was that ignorant.

Any of the judges can be easily replaced though....but they won't be unless they decide to leave.

I don't agree with everything Craig says but he comes across as more knowledgable than Darcey and Bruno.