Fans Protest Soap Opera- Gay Couple Needs To Kiss More

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,244
Location
Edge's beanie closet
(AP)NEW YORK — The love affair between two young men on the venerable CBS soap opera "As the World Turns" has triggered a protest campaign by angry viewers.

It's just not the sort of protest you'd expect.

Fans of the fictional romance between Luke Snyder and Noah Mayer are baffled about why the two characters haven't kissed on-screen since September, wondering whether it's a sign of squeamishness by CBS or show sponsors Procter & Gamble Co.

The fans have started a letter-writing campaign, posted an online petition and even have a Web site that counts the days, hours, minutes and seconds since Luke and Noah last locked lips.

"We totally support this show and applaud the show for doing this story line," said Roger Newcomb, a computer worker from New York's northern suburbs and the man behind the campaign. "We just don't understand why they have to be censored or treated differently."

"As the World Turns," which premiered in 1956, had the first gay male character in daytime drama in 1988. Last August was another milestone- believed to be the first time two gay men kissed on a soap- when Luke surprised Noah with the sign of affection.

They kissed again in September, at a time Noah was still coming to grips with being gay. But since officially becoming a couple, their lips have been sealed.

Fans first sensed the new attitude around Christmas, during a tender scene where the two men proclaimed their love for one another. It was clear they were about to kiss, but the camera instead panned up and focused on some mistletoe.

"I've been watching soaps for decades," Newcomb said, "and that doesn't happen."

Valentine's Day featured fantasy sequences involving several of the show's couples. All the stories ended in a kiss, except for Luke and Noah's. They hugged.

That's when the campaign started.

"There are some people who want to see sex between Luke and Noah," said 34-year-old Theresa Webber, who lives north of Boston. "I've been watching soaps long enough to know that they're a teenage couple, so it's not going to happen anyway. But for them to not kiss at all, it's a little extreme."

The soap is owned, produced and written by Procter & Gamble Productions Inc., a subsidiary of the consumer giant that makes Bounty, Crest, Pampers, Mr. Clean and Ivory soap. CBS executives consult on the series, but the creative direction is set by P&G.

There's no kissing ban, said Jeannie Tharrington, spokeswoman for Procter & Gamble Productions, although she wouldn't say what will happen in future shows. She explained the mistletoe shot as a "creative decision."

"It's always hard to please a diverse audience," Tharrington said, "and we have a diverse audience."

Webber recalls reading a handful of letters in soap opera publications after last summer's first kiss along the lines of "I don't care if Luke is gay, but I don't want to see it."

Barbara Bloom, CBS senior vice president for daytime, said there was a "minimal" negative reaction from viewers about the story line, although she couldn't define what that meant. There was apparently no organized campaign by conservative or parent advocacy groups that monitor television content.

"It's entirely new to me," said Tim Winter, president of the Parents Television Council. "I hadn't heard anything about it."

The American Family Association Web site has a "take-action alert" against Procter & Gamble, calling the company the "top pro-homosexual sponsor on television." The group bases its determination on the number of P&G products advertised on prime-time TV shows with gay or lesbian characters.

"As the World Turns" isn't even mentioned.

Webber and Newcomb said they've been more bothered by other things they have seen on the soap, like when a 14-year-old boy shot a man who was attacking his mother. One character is so desperate for a baby that she slept with her ex-brother-in-law, and was nearly caught having sex in an elevator. Another woman led her children and ex-husband into believing she had a brain tumor, just to get him back.

All are more offensive to her than two men kissing, Webber said.

"It's 2008," she said. "It's something that's real. If they were not going to follow through with it, they shouldn't have started it."

The story's popularity complicates matters. Some 140 scenes featuring the two actors, Van Hansis and Jake Silbermann, are posted online. The message board on Vanhansis.net gets posts from around the world. While competitors "One Life to Live" and "Days of Our Lives" have seen double-digit drops in viewership over the past year, "As the World Turns" is down only 2 percent.

The soap's producers seem to want it both ways, to get credit for having a gay couple but no backlash from long-term viewers for showing intimacy, said Carolyn Hinsey, editor of Soap Opera Weekly.

CBS' Bloom said she would like to see Luke and Noah's romance continue. "If that means there is a natural progression to the physical relationship, I would be in support of it," she said.

Tharrington laughed when asked about any behind-the-scenes debates over showing intimacy between the two men. "You wouldn't even believe," she said.

Producers are committed to telling the story of the romance, she said, adding she hoped the audience would recognize what "As the World Turns" is showing, instead of just what it isn't.

"We feel like we're doing so much right here," she said. "We're telling a story that no one else is doing. We're telling a story that has really engaged our audience."
 
I had to check it out, for research purposes :wink:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVsX9RnoHGk

I used to watch ATWT in HS and college. I can't believe they would back off of this kissing with all the other sex that goes on on soaps. Granted P and G soaps are more conservative, but don't start that to be "revolutionary" then back off of them being physically affectionate- that's hypocritical.

And the way they cut right away to "next week on ATWT"-talk about a buzzkill
 
Last edited:
My wife watches ATWT and Guiding Light, so I catch the odd ep that she TiVo's and watches at night. Now both of these are CBS soaps. GL featured an intimate relationship between cousins that went on for months, but ATWT is squeamish about showing 2 men kissing? Seems strange to me.
 
CTU2fan said:
GL featured an intimate relationship between cousins that went on for months

:ohmy:

First cousins? :wink:

Seriously though, that passes the FCC crackdown? Since that the soaps supposedly can't be as graphic in sex scenes-but that has zero to do with this gay couple on ATWT in my opinion. It was a great kiss too, much more authentic and hot (for lack of a better word) than the straight kissing you see- which is usually just a quick (and often unattractive) prelude to the bedroom action.
 
Didn't ATWT show a kiss between two women?
How often have they kissed then?
 
Last edited:
I agree with the protests, actually. If they're going to push the envelope by including a gay couple, they might as well not be prudish about it, avoiding physical contact. That would be completely hypocritical and pointless.
 
Pearl said:
Didn't ATWT show a kiss between two women?
How often have they kissed then?

That was All My Children that had the lesbian character and the kiss- one of the characters is still on sporadically and she is now involved with a transgendered person. They live in Europe so there's no kissing shown :wink:
 
It's a pathetic world we live in when people actually take the time to write a network letters insisting that two guys kiss more. Geez Whiz.
 
I find it very interesting that on "Will and grace" you had openly gay characters but throughout the entire run of the show you had Grace kissing Ben and her other boyfriends but neither Will or Jack showed ANY affection to ANY of their boyfriends/dates.

I find that strange....and very hypocritical.

Personally, I'd rather see two guys kissing and having sex in a tender act of love then any of the action/violence on TV these days.
 
AchtungBono said:
I find it very interesting that on "Will and grace" you had openly gay characters but throughout the entire run of the show you had Grace kissing Ben and her other boyfriends but neither Will or Jack showed ANY affection to ANY of their boyfriends/dates.

I find that strange....and very hypocritical.

Just goes to show you how prudish the American audience still is...
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Just goes to show you how prudish the American audience still is...

Or, more aptly, how prudish and cowardly our network executives are. Of the ones I'm familiar with, they have pretty much no creativity or, for that matter, an original thought at all. The very few who do, over the course of history, of course, typically end up as "mavericks" who do really well. But most executives are strictly sales and business-centered. They're not asking how they can make a show better; they're asking how they can get more advertisers and how they can get more shows that appeal to the demographics that advertisers want. And, of course, they would never want to do anything that might drive away advertisers, for any reason, so they are extremely conservative and risk adverse.

I think, generally speaking, this is why most American television is the equivalent of the output from a "cookie cutter." That's because it is.
 
On Brothers and Sisters, which is a prime time show, there are gay characters who kiss often. I don't know how it compares to how much the straight characters kiss, I haven't done a statistical analysis :wink: But I would bet it is still less. One of them (who was a boyfriend of the main gay character) is even a minister.

Will never kissed anyone on Will and Grace? Or Jack? I watched that show but at this point I don't even remember. That show was produced by at least one gay man, if I remember correctly. But of course the network still controlled all of that.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:

Will never kissed anyone on Will and Grace? Or Jack? I watched that show but at this point I don't even remember. That show was produced by at least one gay man, if I remember correctly. But of course the network still controlled all of that.

There was one episode where Jack was protesting this very point. That he was expecting to see the first gay kiss on network television but that didn't happen either.

So Jack and Will go down to the NBC offices at Rockfeller Center and after meeting an executive (who was GAY..lol) they go down to where Willard Scott is greeting people. Jack asks Willard Scott how long it will have to take for him to see two men kissing on TV and Will says "Not as long as you think". He grabs his face and plants a big wet one on Jack's lips.

But other than that......nada.
 
This is silly and im not homophobic but there is no way the channel or producers should introduce more gay kissing as it may put of the mainstream viewers as they might boycott the show in protest.

British views on homosexuality are more relaxed than in America so it might not be much of an issue here, but on British tv we often just see gay couples hugging.
 
vaz02 said:
This is silly and im not homophobic but there is no way the channel or producers should introduce more gay kissing as it may put of the mainstream viewers as they might boycott the show in protest.

British views on homosexuality are more relaxed than in America so it might not be much of an issue here, but on British tv we often just see gay couples hugging.

Let them boycott. The producers, writers, etc. shouldn't have to compromise their artistic integrity (I know it's a soap, but I'm sure they have some tiny piece of artistic brilliance somewhere....maybe not. :wink: ) in order to placate some close-minded, bigoted fools.
 
U2isthebest said:


Let them boycott. The producers, writers, etc. shouldn't have to compromise their artistic integrity (I know it's a soap, but I'm sure they have some tiny piece of artistic brilliance somewhere....maybe not. :wink: ) in order to placate some close-minded, bigoted fools.

But sponsorship and advertisement fat cats will boycott and then the channel would have no choice other than to pull the show. Its sad but they would most likely do it. Products wouldnt like to be associated with the show and some male consumers wouldnt buy the products advertised because they feel it would undermine their masculinity.

p.s its tv, they have no artistic integrity, they much prefer sex ( as long as its female - male action), drugs and scandal over artistic brilliance anyday.
 
vaz02 said:


But sponsorship and advertisement fat cats will boycott and then the channel would have no choice other than to pull the show. Its sad but they would most likely do it. Products wouldnt like to be associated with the show and some male consumers wouldnt buy the products advertised because they feel it would undermine their masculinity.

p.s its tv, they have no artistic integrity, they much prefer sex ( as long as its female - male action), drugs and scandal over artistic brilliance anyday.

Well, we agree on the fact that there is no real art involved in making a soap opera.:lol: That being said, they shouldn't have to hold back on this situation because they might be making people uncomfortable. People who are offended because two men are in love are the ones with a problem and the ones that need to seriously re-consider their point of view.
 
U2isthebest said:


Well, we agree on the fact that there is no real art involved in making a soap opera.:lol: That being said, they shouldn't have to hold back on this situation because they might be making people uncomfortable. People who are offended because two men are in love are the ones with a problem and the ones that need to seriously re-consider their point of view.

But would tv networks be willing to risk viewing figures and commercial revenue by doing so :eyebrow: and people who feel offended by two men becoming passionate need to reconsider their position in society because there is absolutely nothing wrong about two people loving each other regardless of gender or sexuality.
 
The networks only care about money and ratings, period, so I doubt it. That shouldn't stop the producers at the soap from at least trying stand up for their position, though.
 
melon said:


Or, more aptly, how prudish and cowardly our network executives are. Of the ones I'm familiar with, they have pretty much no creativity or, for that matter, an original thought at all. The very few who do, over the course of history, of course, typically end up as "mavericks" who do really well. But most executives are strictly sales and business-centered. They're not asking how they can make a show better; they're asking how they can get more advertisers and how they can get more shows that appeal to the demographics that advertisers want. And, of course, they would never want to do anything that might drive away advertisers, for any reason, so they are extremely conservative and risk adverse.

I think, generally speaking, this is why most American television is the equivalent of the output from a "cookie cutter." That's because it is.



yup.

it's all about the bottom line.
 
This is serious business

gays are out to destroy us.


Lawmaker: Gays Are Worse Than Terrorists

on 03-10-2008 14:34

OKLAHOMA CITY, OK -- The Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund has posted a video on YouTube in which an Oklahoma state legislator says homosexuals are destroying America and are more dangerous than terrorists.Sally Kern

State Rep. Sally Kern (R) made the remarks in a speech to a small group of people and did not know that she was being recorded.

"Studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades," Kern said in her speech.

"I honestly think it's the biggest threat our nation has, even more so than terrorism and Islam."

"They're going after our young children as young as two years of age, trying to teach them that the homosexual lifestyle is an acceptable lifestyle."

"One of my colleagues said we don't have a gay problem here in our community [...] You know what, to me that is so dumb. If you got cancer or something in your little toe, do you say you're just going to forget about it because the rest of you is fine? It spreads. And this stuff is deadly and it spreads and it will destroy our young people and it will destroy this nation," Kern concludes.

Kern confirmed to Oklahoma City TV station KWTV that she in fact was the woman speaking in the recording.

She also said that she stands by the comments.

"What is wrong with me as an American exercising my free speech rights on a topic that is a very big issue today?" she said.
 
Makes sense to me, you know those Muslims are also on the level when it comes to opposing the homosexual agenda; common ground for a brighter tomorrow.
 
so ... you're saying i can be a rainbow bridge of understanding between radical Christianists and radical Islamists?

:cute:
 
"What is wrong with me as an American exercising my free speech rights on a topic that is a very big issue today?" she said.

I love how when bigots say something, they always come back to this line of thinking once they get caught.

Of course you are allowed to say it, you're just a moronic bigot for saying it...

Good going Republicans for voting another bigot in...
 
Sally_Kern.jpg


Would this woman lie?

She put her hand on the Bible and took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I love how when bigots say something, they always come back to this line of thinking once they get caught.

Of course you are allowed to say it, you're just a moronic bigot for saying it...

Good going Republicans for voting another bigot in...

These right-wing neandertals forget that "free speech" is a two-way street. She has every right to be a raving bigot; we have every right to call her one. That's the nature of free speech!
 
Back
Top Bottom