Supernatural / Jensen Ackles / Jared Padelecki [merged]

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I dont think Corbin's portrayl was offensive or prejudiced, it was just disappointing that creators, who are aware of their large gay fan base treated the first gay character so carelessly imo. Sure he wasnt gay bashed. But he was kinda treated in a childish Beavis and Butthead, "that gay kid likes you" sorta way. And GLAAD is kinda pathetic in a way. They give awards to sstraight people for doing anything remotely gay, like having a gay makeup artist. A couple years back they gave Jen Aniston some kinda person of the year award. WTF does she do for gay people?

Well none of the ghostfacers characters are taken seriously. That's the point of them. They're meant to be punch lines. And I really don't think it was presented in a way where it was suppose to be humorous that the character was gay and had a crush. I didn't see that at all. They treated it like any other unrequited love story. I mean they didn't ignore the nature of it... "You need to go be gay for that poor dead intern."... but you can't not acknowledge it and to just mention it with kid gloves in passing I think it more cowardly and less respectful than treating it as if it were the plague and you couldn't touch it. I mean it's the nature of the characters as Sam points out...
"Yeah, I mean, it's bizarre how y'all are able to, uh, to honor Corbett's memory while grossly exploiting the manner of his death. Well done."

 

[StlKj]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Didn't say I was offended by the portrayal of the character. I said I hated how he was treated as just a big joke. We finally get a somewhat substantial gay guest character on the show, and it's during a big dumb storyline. He also got one of the more graphic onscreen deaths--a metal rod shoved through his neck. I actually thought, "No, they did not just kill a sympathetic male character with a rod through his throat." Nope, no "deep throat cocksucker" subliminal message going on there.

We're just supposed to always think it's cute how people assume Sam and Dean are gay, and watch Dean squirm when they do. I love the show, but it grows a little tiring the way this happens.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

There's a very active fanbase and the one liners about Sam and Dean being a couple is just a little shout out to them in the same way the fake names is a shout out to their love of classic rock.

As far as the pipe to the throat, I don't think that's anything more than a pipe to the throat. I could see where you could say it's a subliminal cock sucking thing but I don't by it. It's not like they shoved it down his throat. I think it had more to do with the way the character was positioned and lit as dictated by the need for him to be wearing a little hat life and being tied to a chair.

Alos the character HAD to be sympathetic and his death HAD to be graphic or the death echo sequence falls apart. Because we have to be OK with Corbett saving the day rather than Sam and Dean. For that we need to feel for him. We also have to be routing for him to be broken out of the death echo. And the more we're attached to him and the more gruesome the death is the stronger will be the audiences desire for him to be freed of that torment.

I also don't think he was the first gay character. In All Hell Break's Loose Pt. 1 wasn't that one girl a lesbian? She said she touched her girlfriend and she died. I guess you could take it as being the girlfriend=close friend thing but that's not how I did.

I also think they had ulterior motives when they made this episode. I know Kripke LOVES these characters. I know Kripke has a talent deal with the CW. I wouldn't be surprised if he wants us to get emotionally invested in these characters because he wants to pitch a spin off.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

^C'mon lesbians are not the same thing and you know it. People generally think lesbians are hot.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

^C'mon lesbians are not the same thing and you know it. People generally think lesbians are hot.

Wow.... I really feel like I should just pretend you didn't say that.

Lesbians are no more accepted in our society than gay males. That is unless of course they're fulfilling the role of sex object in a pornography or trashy MTV show. That's pretty much the only place you see them. The public doesn't accept their ability to hold genuine relationships and they are much more absent in society than the homosexual male (often present in a feminized form as the comic relief). Lesbians are much harder for the public to accept outside a sexualized capacity (ask Ellen's THREE canceled sitcoms) and they're even oddly absent from scientific studies which seem to always focus on the gay male.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Wow.... I really feel like I should just pretend you didn't say that.

Lesbians are no more accepted in our society than gay males. That is unless of course they're fulfilling the role of sex object in a pornography or trashy MTV show. That's pretty much the only place you see them. The public doesn't accept their ability to hold genuine relationships and they are much more absent in society than the homosexual male (often present in a feminized form as the comic relief). Lesbians are much harder for the public to accept outside a sexualized capacity (ask Ellen's THREE canceled sitcoms) and they're even oddly absent from scientific studies which seem to always focus on the gay male.

I'm absolutely serious. What you say is not reality. Lesbians are definitely more acceptable in popular culture than gay male sexuality. Most lesbians I know readily admit that. The relationship aspect of lesbian couples isnt given the same validity as straight couples but just the image and idea of 2 women being together is totally more acceptable. Trashy or not MTV reality shows are a huge part of popular culture. All TV is mostly about sex and hooking up. Just look at movies. Lesbian movies are 100 times better than gay movies. Because people are willing to put way more money behind them. The only gay movies with any production quality are about AIDS, suicide, and murder.

Look at Brad and Angelina. She is admittedly bisexual and has had relationships with women. She's still one of the biggest actresses in Hollywood. You think the same would be true for Brad Pitt if he used to date guys?

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I'm absolutely serious. What you say is not reality. Lesbians are definitely more acceptable in popular culture than gay male sexuality. Most lesbians I know readily admit that. The relationship aspect of lesbian couples isnt given the same validity as straight couples but just the image and idea of 2 women being together is totally more acceptable. Trashy or not MTV reality shows are a huge part of popular culture. All TV is mostly about sex and hooking up. Just look at movies. Lesbian movies are 100 times better than gay movies. Because people are willing to put way more money behind them. The only gay movies with any production quality are about AIDS, suicide, and murder.

Look at Brad and Angelina. She is admittedly bisexual and has had relationships with women. She's still one of the biggest actresses in Hollywood. You think the same would be true for Brad Pitt if he used to date guys?

Dude... wow... just because the situation is different doesn't make it better nor does it mean lesbians are "more acceptable"
than gay males to mainstream society. The only way lesbians are "acceptable" is if they have double Ds and are making out in a pool and actual lesbians are not just some poseable Barbie dolls. The fact the mainstream media has found itself able to exploit the eroticism of lesbian sexuality and market that to its heterosexual male audiences doesn't mean they're taken any more serious than gay males. In fact if you're upset by the fact a gay boys secret crush was used for a punchline or two I don't comprehend how you're not also upset by the fetishized portrayal of lesbians in the very examples you readily point to as evidence of their 'acceptance.'

They're far scarcer on network television and reality TV in general. When they are apparent as in television or cinema it's more often then not to show the character as some sort of dangerous seductress or slut. Do not make the mistake of accepting presence as acceptance.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Dude... wow... just because the situation is different doesn't make it better nor does it mean lesbians are "more acceptable"
than gay males to mainstream society. The only way lesbians are "acceptable" is if they have double Ds and are making out in a pool and actual lesbians are not just some poseable Barbie dolls. The fact the mainstream media has found itself able to exploit the eroticism of lesbian sexuality and market that to its heterosexual male audiences doesn't mean they're taken any more serious than gay males. In fact if you're upset by the fact a gay boys secret crush was used for a punchline or two I don't comprehend how you're not also upset by the fetishized portrayal of lesbians in the very examples you readily point to as evidence of their 'acceptance.'

They're far scarcer on network television and reality TV in general. When they are apparent as in television or cinema it's more often then not to show the character as some sort of dangerous seductress or slut. Do not make the mistake of accepting presence as acceptance.

You are just wrong on this issue. Its not all about porno lesbians. Gay men interacting in a sexual way is not as acceptable period. Whether they are hot, fat, shirt, tall, blind or deaf. Ellen's sitcoms failing might have nothing to do with her sexuality. It might have more to do with the fact that she doesnt look like Jennifer Aniston. Lots of people have been in shows that have failed a hell of a lot more than Ellen. Debra Messing was on a shitload of failed pilots before Will and Grace. And Ellen is hugely successful now despite not being a hot lesbian with double D's.

You still have no rebuttal to the point that Angelina can have a successful acting career and do sexy roles after dating women yet Brad could NOT do the same if he dated men. Just look at all the absurd and offensive interviews that James Franco and Sean Penn went through for sharing a kiss in Milk. On every show pretty much the hosts asked "OMG was that so weird?" "wasnt that so uncomfortable?" "How can you do that?" Did they ask Sarah Michelle Gellar and Selma Blair that when they kissed in Cruel Intentions like 10 years ago?

Or a common example, if you go out to clubs or parties girls dance all over each other, and no one really cares. If guys did the same it would cause a scene. The idea of 2 guys being together is far more jarring to people. it's just a fact. Your argument is just weird.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

You are just wrong on this issue. Its not all about porno lesbians. Gay men interacting in a sexual way is not as acceptable period. Whether they are hot, fat, shirt, tall, blind or deaf. Ellen's sitcoms failing might have nothing to do with her sexuality. It might have more to do with the fact that she doesnt look like Jennifer Aniston. Lots of people have been in shows that have failed a hell of a lot more than Ellen. Debra Messing was on a shitload of failed pilots before Will and Grace. And Ellen is hugely successful now despite not being a hot lesbian with double D's.

DUDE that makes NO SENSE. Ellen's first sitcom "Ellen" succeeded for four season (during this whole stretch of time she didn't look like Jennifer Aniston). In the fourth season finale, Ellen's character came out as a lesbian. When season five began ratings dropped, a parental advisory warning was slapped on it, and the series TANKED not making it to ever see a season six.

The woman since had to more pilots, both in which she played a lesbian, neither of which secured a season long run. Cut to the talk show which succeeded wildly.

So what changed here? Not her appearance. Not her brand of humor. But the context of her character. Anytime and everytime Ellen was playing in a show which focused on her life as a lesbian it failed miserably (initially even earning her a parental advisory!). Just a year after Ellen got blown out of the water Will & Grace frolliced on the screen managing not only to land in the legendary NBC Thursday night line up but also to snag an Emmy nomination.

You still have no rebuttal to the point that Angelina can have a successful acting career and do sexy roles after dating women yet Brad could NOT do the same if he dated men. Just look at all the absurd and offensive interviews that James Franco and Sean Penn went through for sharing a kiss in Milk. On every show pretty much the hosts asked "OMG was that so weird?" "wasnt that so uncomfortable?" "How can you do that?" Did they ask Sarah Michelle Gellar and Selma Blair that when they kissed in Cruel Intentions like 10 years ago?

Well I don't know what they asked Michelle Gellar and Selma Blair, I wasn't reading their interviews then. I can't say in certainty that they were asked these questions. But I'd be very surprised if Denise Richards or Sarah Michelle Gellar or Neve Campbell Or Selma Blair or any of the other actresses who have shared lesbian kisses haven't been asked what it was like or what it felt like. And the fact Angelina gets a pass on having had a lesbian relationship is directly linked to her status as a sex symbol and the sexualization of lesbianism. So no it doesn't hurt that she's bisexual but when it REALLY counts people are no more accepting of lesbians. Surely you wouldn't imagine that we'd be any more likely to elect a lesbian to public office than a gay man?

And come ON you can't pretend that there aren't gay actors who have and still do succeed.

T.R. Knight, Luke MacFarlane, Neil Patrick Harris, and B. D. Wong are all doing very nicely for themselves on primetime network TV.

John Barrowman has carved himself out a nice role as an action hero.

And being gay hasn't seem to hinder the careers of either Ruper Everett or Nathan Lane. Hell being gay REVIVED the career of Lance Bass.

Pointing out Angelina is bisexual proves nothing. It allows males to see her as possesing a sexually arrousing trait (lesbianism) which can be used to their benefit, as evidenced by the bisexual woman's ability to also be with a man. You'll also note that despite looking incredibly hot always Angelina rocketed into the A list caliber more or less during her Mr. and Mrs. Smith period when onlookers could firmly believe she was primarily heterosexual as evidenced by her affair with Brad Pitt.

Or a common example, if you go out to clubs or parties girls dance all over each other, and no one really cares. If guys did the same it would cause a scene. The idea of 2 guys being together is far more jarring to people. it's just a fact. Your argument is just weird.

Dude, I'm not denying that people aren't taught to percieve lesbianism differently than two men what I'm saying is turning the actions of two loving individuals into nothing more than a purely erotic act meant to titulate a third party is no better than teaching someone to be disgusted by it. Lesbians are no more accepted. They're not taken any more seriously. And the inclusion of a lesbian character has no more or less impact than the inclusion of a gay male. You can just ask Dr. Hahn (Grey's Anatomy) about that. Her lesbian ass was uncermoniously sent packing for having the audacity to try and have a series lesbian relationship. Meanwhile elsewhere on ABC Kevin and Scotty confess their love (Brothers and Sisters) and Lee and Bob live under one roof (Desperate Houswives). I don't think there is a double standard but if there is one, there's more than enough evidence to argue it's in favor of the male/male and against the female/female

 

[StlKj]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I also don't think he was the first gay character. In All Hell Break's Loose Pt. 1 wasn't that one girl a lesbian? She said she touched her girlfriend and she died. I guess you could take it as being the girlfriend=close friend thing but that's not how I did.

Didn't imply he was the first gay character. He was the first substantial gay character. Yes, she was a lesbian. She was tough enough to make it to the final four, but she was dispatched almost immediately after being given nothing to do. We never even saw her use the power she apparently had. And who did she kill with it? Oh, gee, another lesbian. Nothing like a Kung Fu Lesbian Grip.

Corbin's death did not have to be so graphic either. They could have easily chosen to have him impaled from behind, and then showed blood coming out of his mouth. No, we saw a character slowly push a metal rod through his throat--viewed through Corbin's own camera, no less. Then they just lingered on his corpse several times.

Certainly, heteros die on this show all the time. Not saying gay people shouldn't die as well. But when you have only really had two, and they are handled in such matters, it just feels, to me, a little second-class citizen-esque.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

DUDE that makes NO SENSE. Ellen's first sitcom "Ellen" succeeded for four season (during this whole stretch of time she didn't look like Jennifer Aniston). In the fourth season finale, Ellen's character came out as a lesbian. When season five began ratings dropped, a parental advisory warning was slapped on it, and the series TANKED not making it to ever see a season six.

The woman since had to more pilots, both in which she played a lesbian, neither of which secured a season long run. Cut to the talk show which succeeded wildly.

So what changed here? Not her appearance. Not her brand of humor. But the context of her character. Anytime and everytime Ellen was playing in a show which focused on her life as a lesbian it failed miserably (initially even earning her a parental advisory!). Just a year after Ellen got blown out of the water Will & Grace frolliced on the screen managing not only to land in the legendary NBC Thursday night line up but also to snag an Emmy nomination.



Well I don't know what they asked Michelle Gellar and Selma Blair, I wasn't reading their interviews then. I can't say in certainty that they were asked these questions. But I'd be very surprised if Denise Richards or Sarah Michelle Gellar or Neve Campbell Or Selma Blair or any of the other actresses who have shared lesbian kisses haven't been asked what it was like or what it felt like. And the fact Angelina gets a pass on having had a lesbian relationship is directly linked to her status as a sex symbol and the sexualization of lesbianism. So no it doesn't hurt that she's bisexual but when it REALLY counts people are no more accepting of lesbians. Surely you wouldn't imagine that we'd be any more likely to elect a lesbian to public office than a gay man?

And come ON you can't pretend that there aren't gay actors who have and still do succeed.

T.R. Knight, Luke MacFarlane, Neil Patrick Harris, and B. D. Wong are all doing very nicely for themselves on primetime network TV.

John Barrowman has carved himself out a nice role as an action hero.

And being gay hasn't seem to hinder the careers of either Ruper Everett or Nathan Lane. Hell being gay REVIVED the career of Lance Bass.

Pointing out Angelina is bisexual proves nothing. It allows males to see her as possesing a sexually arrousing trait (lesbianism) which can be used to their benefit, as evidenced by the bisexual woman's ability to also be with a man. You'll also note that despite looking incredibly hot always Angelina rocketed into the A list caliber more or less during her Mr. and Mrs. Smith period when onlookers could firmly believe she was primarily heterosexual as evidenced by her affair with Brad Pitt.



Dude, I'm not denying that people aren't taught to percieve lesbianism differently than two men what I'm saying is turning the actions of two loving individuals into nothing more than a purely erotic act meant to titulate a third party is no better than teaching someone to be disgusted by it. Lesbians are no more accepted. They're not taken any more seriously. And the inclusion of a lesbian character has no more or less impact than the inclusion of a gay male. You can just ask Dr. Hahn (Grey's Anatomy) about that. Her lesbian ass was uncermoniously sent packing for having the audacity to try and have a series lesbian relationship. Meanwhile elsewhere on ABC Kevin and Scotty confess their love (Brothers and Sisters) and Lee and Bob live under one roof (Desperate Houswives). I don't think there is a double standard but if there is one, there's more than enough evidence to argue it's in favor of the male/male and against the female/female

You make no sense. Obviously lesbians face discrimination. But it is significantly less than gay men. If many lesbians agree with that I dont get why you are trying to argue. Sure the Ellen show's downfall likely had to due with homophobia. Lesbians do face homophobia but less than gay men. Will &Grace is a terrible example. Will had the most inactive dating life and served mainly as Grace's gay who would support her through her romances.

All your other arguments fall flat. Rupert Everett has said many times that his sexuality has hurt his career tremendously. Lance Bass has said the same thing. He wanted to do acting and many agents have told him to his face he cant be marketable because he is gay. If you do any research you can find out both. T.r., Luke, Neil, and BD all play supporting characters. None of them are leading men.

And lastly, do you think a song called "I Kissed a Boy" by a male vocalist could possibly be a number 1 smash. Definitely not. And Katy Perry's song is not about fetishizing lesbianism. It really is about girls doing something for themselves not to entertain or amuse guys.

 

[StlKj]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Certainly, heteros die on this show all the time. Not saying gay people shouldn't die as well. But when you have only really had two, and they are handled in such manners, it just feels, to me, a little second-class citizen-esque.

Sigh. I can't stop the edits.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

You make no sense. Obviously lesbians face discrimination. But it is significantly less than gay men. If many lesbians agree with that I dont get why you are trying to argue.

Just because you say 'most the lesbians I know agree!' doesn't even remotely resemble evidence that "many" lesbians agree. You seem to be missing the very basic concept I'm putting out which is basically that being tolerable because people view you as a sexual outlet/going through a phase doesn't equate to acceptance.

Sure the Ellen show's downfall likely had to due with homophobia. Lesbians do face homophobia but less than gay men. Will &Grace is a terrible example. Will had the most inactive dating life and served mainly as Grace's gay who would support her through her romances.

That's ridiculous. Will had homosexual relationships. Not to mention the existence of Jack. But more over for Ellen to be literally labeled as "containing offensive material" by the federal government and thensuddenly be sent off into the TV wasteland after four years of prior success is HUGELY different than Will and Grace getting a freaking EMMY nom for it's Pilot! CLEARLY the public, or at least the network, was more accepting of a sitcom about a gay man than one about a lesbian. And for you just write that off with 'oh he doesn't have that many boyfriends anyway' is just silly especially when in the series it's being compared too Ellen only had I'd say 2 love interests.

All your other arguments fall flat. Rupert Everett has said many times that his sexuality has hurt his career tremendously. Lance Bass has said the same thing. He wanted to do acting and many agents have told him to his face he cant be marketable because he is gay. If you do any research you can find out both. T.r., Luke, Neil, and BD all play supporting characters. None of them are leading men.

These arguments mean nothing because I'm not arguing that there ISN'T discrimination against gay men. I'm saying that the discrimination against gay men is not greater than the discrimination against lesbians. In order to prove your claim you need not simply prove that gay men in Hollywood face repression (a point I don't dispute) but to prove that lesbians in Hollywood have succeeded above and beyond gay men (a point I do dispute) So if these gay men have declared they face discrimination in order to prove your point you'd need to provide statements in which lesbians claim their sexuality did NOT hinder them. You've pointed out that many of the gay men play supporting roles; then your task is then to show that lesbians play lead roles in prime time television.

I'm saying not that gay men don't face discrimination but in general there are less roles out there for lesbian, less reconginition, less of a presence (mainly because of our male centric society views issues with males as innately of more importance). Lesbians like Wanda Sykes and Portia De Rossi have reached the same heights in supporting roles, coniciding with my assertion that they're equal. And some lesbian/bisexual roles (almost ALWAYS bisexual to allow the male viewer to retain his ability to fetishize the character) have begun to crop up like Thirteen on House. But if you feel like looking at the statistics on the GLAAD website only 26% of the LGBT characters on network TV are women (and 6% are transexuals male to female but that's a whole different discussion). 66% of the LGBT characters are gay males,11% are lesbians, 14% are bisexual women. Only 3% are bisexual men (probably the most berrated group from both sides of the aisle) When you make the jump to cable there are still more male LGBT characters 53% than women 44% (the remainder is once more trans characters). As far as gay male characters, they still make up the majority 51%. Lesbian characters shoot up to 36% on cable (which couldn't have anything at all to do with the graphic nature of cable stations which allow for the increased eroticizing or lesbian relations)

It's also notable that the lesbian shoe seems to fall second the "L Word" didn't come around until AFTER "Queer As Folk" "A Shot At Love" didn't appear until LONG after "Boy Meets Boy." Our societies sexist nature just leads them to deal with male side of the equation first.

And lastly, do you think a song called "I Kissed a Boy" by a male vocalist could possibly be a number 1 smash. Definitely not. And Katy Perry's song is not about fetishizing lesbianism. It really is about girls doing something for themselves not to entertain or amuse guys.

If you don't think that song is about fetishizing lesbianism then you must think that the Madonna/Brittney/Christina kiss was a step forward as apposed to the shameless attempt to expolit sexuality to create controversy... but anyway back to the dearest Mrs. Perry.

Well first off the video begins with a montage of various female body parts and then pans up from Katy's highheels to reveal her petting a pussy(cat) while coyly flirting with the camera. And continue cuts to her assorted body parts firmly entrenches the video in a sexual world.

She also right off the block informs us that she was drunk off her ass. Then after telling us of the scandalous act she hides herself behind a fan (a long time symbol of feminity) and sings "I hope my boyfriend don't mind it." Making clear her submission to the male hierarchy and alluding to her intent to actually be with a man despite "kissing a girl" and liking it. She goes on to make very clear that there was no substance to her act of lesbianism "Don't mean I'm in love tonight/No I don't even know your name/It doesn't matter/You're my experimental game" Shortly after we're reminded of Katy's overriding heterosexual intent/desire in the chorus, which also reminds us once more that she's not in love (She just loves being naughy!!!! Giggle giggle how silly giggle). Now there has been sexual imagery this entire video but perhaps it has reached its peak in stereotypical male fantasy of a pillow fight. And we're back to the chorus (which is discussed before so I won't reiterate it's importance). And the video ends and guess where she is... guess..... IN BED WITH A MAN.

Silly Katy just has naughty lesbian dreams in which she worries about her boyfriends approval about her emotionless, erotic, naughtiness....

PLEASE this is not any sign of acceptance of lesbians at all. It's the male centric society basically allowing the female to have sexual contact with other females when it is meaningless and when there is a guarentee that the woman returns home to the male. Really dude you're a bright guy. How can you NOT see this? It's blatant. The male ego doesn't have to feel threatened by these 'lesbian' relations because they are devoid of any substance. They exist only as a sexual outlet that entices and excites the male. As such they are allowed. But that is a far cry from saying lesbians (REAL LESBIANS not some Double D distortion of vapid whores) are accepted by society.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Sigh. I can't stop the edits.

Well I get what you're saying. But I think it's just circumstances surrounding the specific characters. I mean all the special children had to die and I'd say the girls death was far less gruesome than that of Andy and Ava.

As for Corbett, like I said the more tragic the death... the more powerful the death echo sequence. At least that's how I see it from a writer's POV.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Falcon this will be a neverending argument, which i do not want. We will never change each others minds so I'm gonna drop it and enjoy supernatural.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I agree that straight women can look at 2 men and think of the relationship as a valid relationship more readily than straight men looking at lesbians. But straight men generally dont look at straight love stories and think about how this amazing love is captured on film either. Men think about everything more sexually than women.

And I always agreed that real lesbian relationships and families were not more acceptable than gay ones. My only point was the imagery and visibility of 2 women together is more acceptable than 2 men. I wasnt really talking about the relationships. That's what it started out as.

But also, as a bisexual you cannot deny that if you told girl you were interested in that you have dated men in the past, most girls wouldnt be ok with that. But on the other hand if a girl told her man that she has dated women, many more men wouldnt have a problem with it. And its not just because they imagine 3somes in their future. A lot of straight people think women being attracted to women is more "natural". Ive heard this a million times.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I agree that straight women can look at 2 men and think of the relationship as a valid relationship more readily than straight men looking at lesbians. But straight men generally dont look at straight love stories and think about how this amazing love is captured on film either. Men think about everything more sexually than women.

And I always agreed that real lesbian relationships and families were not more acceptable than gay ones. My only point was the imagery and visibility of 2 women together is more acceptable than 2 men. I wasnt really talking about the relationships. That's what it started out as.

But also, as a bisexual you cannot deny that if you told girl you were interested in that you have dated men in the past, most girls wouldnt be ok with that. But on the other hand if a girl told her man that she has dated women, many more men wouldnt have a problem with it. And its not just because they imagine 3somes in their future. A lot of straight people think women being attracted to women is more "natural". Ive heard this a million times.

Dude, this is probably the last thing I'll post on this topic because as you've posted we're not going to agree. But PLEASE stop relying entirely on anecdotal evidence when I'm providing you with facts and figures. this started in a very simple way. You basically said that the addition of a lesbian character in a primetime network TV show didn't count as being important. You more or less devalued the significance of portraying lesbians because they 'are more accepted.' And I pointed out how little sense that made considering that there are less depictions of lesbian than gay men in mass media and when they are included its typically as sexual objects. So the inclusion and portrayal of a lesbian is no more or less significant than that of a gay male.

 

[willsboy84]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

^^^ you all make interesting points, but can we talk about what REALLY matters... how fucking CHOICE Sam Winchester was looking in last weeks ep. usually i'm all about Dean, but Sam was just so ON!!!! i dunno what it was. i guess the shirtless thing didn't hurt...although they really could've shown a bit more skin.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

^^^ you all make interesting points, but can we talk about what REALLY matters... how fucking CHOICE Sam Winchester was looking in last weeks ep. usually i'm all about Dean, but Sam was just so ON!!!! i dunno what it was. i guess the shirtless thing didn't hurt...although they really could've shown a bit more skin.

Shirtless Sammy is always VERY VERY nice. I mean I'm totally a Jensen man but body wise Jared totally wins out.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Um...what? I have told girls this and I've had girls be fine with it. I hate to sound cocky but for the sake of this argument, let me dispense with modesty: I've never really had a problem getting girls. Yes, even when they know I'm bisexual. It's an individual thing. And either way this doesn't really refute my earlier points now does it? You're trying to qualify something (lesbians are more accepted by the dominant culture than gays) that can't be qualified.

I guess its a matter of opinion and i don't have a psychology journal. So i'm not gonna continue to argue the point. But I will correct myself in a way. I think it is the type of girls you date. Ill be honest that there are cultural differences when it comes to people's accepting of sexuality. Speaking as someone who is multiracial, I think ethnic minorities tend to be more sexually conservative. For example, I think if you dated mostly black girls they would not be ok with you having been with guys. Most people translate that and other things as black people being more homophobic but imo they tend to more close-minded about sex and sexuality in general for different cultural reasons.

And to be fair Mr. Nik, I was referring to the average American. You dont necessarily socialize with guys and girls who go to a community college in arkansas or work at waffle house. You're around people who go to Yale and are very educated. Obviously they tend to be more open-minded.

But back to SUpernatural for people who are gonna get pissed about how this thread got hijacked. i always thought the WInchesters will find out they have a long-lost sibling. I doubt John was on the road all that time without knocking someone up.