GLBT - Four letters not found in CSI:NY

[Top41]

I think Kristine brought this up in one of her reviews.This may just be my black and living in the south...can we get all kinds of diversity on television. Most shows I have seen from other countries while at home, or even while I was in other countries seem to be way less ethnically diverse than I would like (I just graduated with a journalism degree, so I have been traveling a lot)...even within all three CSI franchises they have exactly two people that are minorities returning for next season, Hill Harper and Adam Rodriguez. 14 white cast (main)members...even with one leaving at the beginning of the season...Bigotry is bigotry...that's all I'm going to say about that.

The lack of ethnic diversity in the CSI shows is frustrating as well, and it's even more maddening that the characters they do have on the shows often get shafted for storylines, like Hawkes and Alexx. Miami actually has the most ethnically diverse cast (at least before the departure of Alexx), and both Delko and Natalia get a fair amount of storylines. Warrick on CSI does as well. NY really needs to stop neglecting Hawkes.

If I thought the storyline would be handled appropriately, I wouldn't have any objections to it. The problem is, as much as I love the writers, they just suck at romance. I haven't been inspired by any of the romances they've presented us with thus far, and the only relationship they've managed to put any real depth into is Mac/Claire.

Yeah, ultimately it does come down to that. I'd like to see a go at it, but at the same time, like you, I think we'd be wincing.

I'm not arguing whether or not we should have homosexual romance on tv; the Torchwood episode where Capt. Jack meets his namesake is probably the most beautiful kiss in all of televised history; I just don't think the writers of CSI: NY could do it proper justice, so I'd rather they just leave it alone.

If they can manage to make D/L less contrived and make it feel less like badly written fanfic, I might have more faith.

I think they're at about 50/50, with Stella/Frankie and Danny/Lindsay on the terrible side, and Mac/Claire, Mac/Peyton and on a smaller scale, Danny/Rikki and Flack/Angell on the realistic side. But I do agree that it would be a big gamble. Still, we could have a gay character introduced without a romance at least initially. Though if they think Montana is another planet, I would fear for that character a bit. :lol:

I do agree that the story has to be there, which is why I like the idea of exploring something that isn't coming out of left field. As my example, I've always put forth Flack having romantic feelings for Danny, because I think if you look over all the things Flack has done for Danny over the last four seasons, well, there's an argument to be made that Flack's feelings aren't simply platonic. The feelings would probably be unrequited because Danny seems to be both heterosexual and not romantically interested in Flack, but again, it could be a natural jumping off point for a storyline that would give us insight into the characters.

Oh no. No, no. Danny would sleep with Flack for all the wrong reasons and it'd ruin their friendship.

:lol: I think by season seven, Danny could probably have slept with all of the characters in the main cast for all the wrong reasons. :lol: Danny just kind of gives it away. :lol: But I think even if he did sleep with Flack for the wrong reasons, it wouldn't ruin their friendship. Flack seems able to put up with anything from Danny.

Besides, it's totally Flack/Mac. All that saving of life stuff and then boiling anger in Season Three, and all the confiding and comfortable teasing this season...*happy sigh* Off-topic, sorry.

LOL, yeah, the bond between those two is great--I really like how it's evolved.

I think a better couple would be Danny/Hawkes. They come off as far more slashy to me and although I don't think Danny is technically gay, Hawkes has always sort of come across that way to me. Then when Danny sleeps with Hawkes for all the wrong reasons, Flack can at least still be his friend and have his back. And I mean that in a totally non-slashy, completely mature way.

:lol: Danny needs to stop being such a slut and sleep with someone for the right reasons. Somehow, I feel that when the show airs its last episode, we'll still be waiting for that... :lol:

Actually, a fun thing to do is have Flack's sister be a lesbian. It could open a lot of possibilities into why there's conflict in the Flack family, and the producers/writers/network can stay away from the scary idea of actually making a main character gay.

Not a bad idea if they're going to make her a recurring character.

 

[Sammy11]

I wouldn't object to finding out Hawkes and Adam had been going at it in the broom closet for the last season, because we know little about these characters' romantic lives other than that both have dated women in the past.

Oh Top, thank you for that image!

Is there a thread for them on the Shipper board?... If not someone might have to start one now.

Nerdy and Hot! WOOF!

Back to the point though.

Here is the UK as has been mentioned we do actually show G/L relationships, there are gay characters on our major soaps and to be honest whilst the media hype up the fact that two men will be seen kissing on prime time TV actually it is no more hyped up than perhaps say a major hetrosexual affair storyline on the same soap. In this respect I think the UK have a better handle on it, it isn't always used as a plot device.

Whilst I agree that it doesn't necessarily mean that they shouldn't attempt to write GLBT relationships into prime time shows in the US I wonder if - and this applies to CSI:NY PTB - they would end up perhaps ostracising people who at the moment are happy to watch a show where they under represented rather then represented in a less then positive light.

On a side note, Grey's Anatomy is doing pretty poorly there too. All that bed hopping and not one GLB or T relationship depicted apart for the patients of the week, where actually there writers do manage to make sure they aren't always depicted as victims of their sexual/ lifestyle orientation.

 

[origin-nknwn]

This may just be my black and living in the south...can we get all kinds of diversity on television. Most shows I have seen from other countries while at home, or even while I was in other countries seem to be way less ethnically diverse than I would like (I just graduated with a journalism degree, so I have been traveling a lot)...even within all three CSI franchises they have exactly two people that are minorities returning for next season, Hill Harper and Adam Rodriguez. 14 white cast (main)members...even with one leaving at the beginning of the season...Bigotry is bigotry...that's all I'm going to say about that.

I'd not only like to see some ethnic diversity on the TV - disability diversity wouldn't be bad thing either. And what is shameful about this in CSI:NY's case is, they've actually gone backward from S1...

And some things that I'd like to cram into the brains of the writing team:

Sick and twisted behaviour =/= mental illness
Being mentally ill should not automatically put someone at the top of a suspect list.
Most mentally ill people - even schizophrenics and psychopaths - do not commit violent felonies.

Criminals really can just be assholes...

 

[dutch_treat]

Surreal_44 said:
If we're talking networking in general, I don't think people are as shy or angry about it as they used to be. What I think the networks fear more than showing homosexuality is that there is a fine line to it. How much is too much? How much of an agenda can the shows push on gay rights without angering people? What can you say about gays that wouldn't upset the gay community?

Yes there is a fine line, but there are already shows like (the already mentioned) 'Will & Grace', 'The L-Word' and 'Big Love', and I'm sure there are more that I don't know about, that all address these issues. And although I don't like them because they solely focuss on the (sexual) lifestyle/preferences of the characters, at least those writers AND networks are not afraid to make them.

JellyBelly said:
US tv networks really do need to tackle this issue. Sure, it may be painful at first but in the long run portraying gay characters in terms of professional, everyday characters will have the greatest impact in terms of overall social development and the breakdown of unacceptable, non humanist prejudices.

Exactly! I would especially like it if the main networks with the most popular shows (eg. CBS, ABC, NBC - CSI's, Lost, Heroes, Grey's, etc.) realize that they can do so much for those neglected and often misundersood sections of the polulation.

I don't know if anyone has seen it, but I loved the episode from 'Desperate Housewives' where Susan first meets her gay neighbours...all the clichés about people's awkwardness came along in like 5 minutes...truly hilarious and a real eye-opener.

Top said:
Before someone tells me CSI: NY is a crime drama and not about relationships, I feel the need to point out: Danny/Lindsay, Stella/Frankie, Mac/Peyton and Flack/Angell. We've seen them all dating/flirting on screen.

Well, even if it wasn't about relationships, they still could put in a gay character (like the idea of Flack's sister) without delving to deep in that person's actual love life.

 

[candygirl1uk]

This is something that I feel very strongly about.


GLBT issues on CSI have been dealt with in such a poor way that its shocking to be honest with you. I'm from the Uk, we have seen gay men as a couple for years... Why are gay men not portrailed as an item in CSI NY or Las Vegas.

I think its very important to have all sorts of characters regardless of their sexuality or gender on our tv shows...

On CSI its ok though to have subtexual eye glances and flrting and thats it, but nothing else??? Not that I'm asking to see everything, just that certain characters ie Nick and Greg , and Danny and Flack are gay/Bisexual and are together...

Yes Torchwood has been compaired with CSI... I can say that if CSI was made in England then the probability of them two couples being gay or bisexual and in a relationship would be grater.

It must be an American audience thing... But gay characters are ok though in a comedy show, but heavens alive in a drama!?

I mean regardless if your gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, asexual, trans man or transwoman, straight, young, old, black, white, brown, blue, purple.... we're all human beings and it needs to be reflected on the television shows we watch...

For some people this is the only way they actuarly get any contact with lets say a transgendered person... Or a pansexual woman....

See what im saying... No im not making this statement political, but if all CSI had only white or black or hispanic people (for example) then would it be a political stance then?

I think it would...

Extra- Top, yes this might be a crime drama show, but a drama show neverthe less if a person wanted science go check out the real CSI stuff, this is a drama show...

 

[Faylinn]

I think a lot of the problem is that we sometimes go, 'Well, if it can't be done well, they shouldn't bother'--but if they never do it at all, how can they ever do it well, you know? I wouldn't want a character's entire focus to be on their sexuality, but that's the kind of thing that should be dealt with rather than just avoided. Nobody wants to see Danny and Lindsay's entire existence on the show centered around them dating, and it amounts to the same thing--it's possible to do it right, but someone's got to actually do it. Homosexuality shouldn't be treated like a novelty, but right now it kind of is on television.

It might be a fine line, but networks need to start walking it.

Elsie said:

Starting small, would it really kill them to have, say, a male suspect whose alibi for a crime was that he was out for dinner with his boyfriend? Something simple like that, which is entirely believable and likely and has no bearing on the case. They don't need to do any grand gestures, or even recurring or regular gay characters, I'd be happy for them to start small and work from there.

That works for me. Theoretically, odds are rather in the favor of them working with someone who isn't heterosexual, but if they made more references about 'normal' gay people, it would be a start.

stormymac said:

In "The Ride-in", one of the suspects was a woman who wanted revenge on the victim because he had conned her out of her life savings. When they interviewed her she said that her girlfriend had left her because of the scheme. It was just one line and it wasn't treated like anything special.

I didn't remember that, thanks for reminding me! I only watched that episode once, I think. That's the kind of thing they should have more of. They toss off comments about boyfriends and girlfriends and husbands and wives and all that on a regular basis, but with all of the cases they work, they come across so few people who aren't straight? *le sigh*

origin-nknwn said:

I'd not only like to see some ethnic diversity on the TV - disability diversity wouldn't be bad thing either. And what is shameful about this in CSI:NY's case is, they've actually gone backward from S1...

What the hell happened to Dr Giles, man? I liked him--not to mention that I loved his voice.

dutch_treat said:

Flack or Hawkes (the two most plausible ones imo)

Honestly, I think Adam would be the most plausible bisexual character. Not because I like him, just because it seems believable for him since 1) we don't know much about him and it could be easily revealed and not seem off, 2) he seems like a young, open-minded man who is perhaps 'up' on the kinds of issues young people talk about, and 3) c'mon, he asked if Mac wanted to be a man or a woman in Second Life--the dude has totally experimented.

I wouldn't object to finding out Hawkes and Adam had been going at it in the broom closet for the last season, because we know little about these characters' romantic lives other than that both have dated women in the past.

Oh Top, thank you for that image!

Is there a thread for them on the Shipper board?... If not someone might have to start one now.

Nerdy and Hot! WOOF!

That's my pet ship. If people other than me would actually have something to say, I might just have to open a thread. :lol:

But I digress...

Overall, I think the difficulty of presenting GLBT individuals well and accurately shouldn't prevent them from doing it at all.

 

[PalmettoHunna]

I think it's plausible for just about anyone to be homosexual on the show (maybe except Stella, the whole RSRD thing) but yeah if they would just mention it in passing...or even have someone going on a date and someone ask if it's with a guy or girl simple enough...does not have to be a big spectacle.

 

[xfcanadian]

I think honestly that it is more down to the United States being a 'young' and 'developing' country than it is the actual implication of religion.

but canada is younger than the US, and we don't have the same social attitudes. It isn't so much about being religious as it is the way religion is practiced. The US is very prudish about sex, and that plays a big part in it too. Just look at American Idol. There were several gay contestants on this year, however they are pretty much forced to stay in the closet, they are not allowed to say they are gay, due to a morality clause. Also, the fans online for the most part just ripped them to pieces, because they weren't 'christian' enough for AI. I follow the show online closely, and people just freaked out when they saw Danny. Not all americans are like this, but there is a whole portion of fundies, that are insane...and they have big control over the media. Like the ones who burn Harry potter books.

Also, i find the writing in American network tv very bad. The way the characters are done, and storylines are all the same....they rarely venture outside that box. That is why all the gay characters are all so cliche, because most of the characters are done that way. I think one of the best shows featuring a gay couple was Six Feet Under. But this wasn't on network tv, so it was more accepted. So it can be done, and it can be popular in the US...but whenever network tv tries it, those stupid parent groups complain. It isn't like this in Canada...we show all sorts of stuff on our network tv...nudity, swearing, sex, gay sex all the time. No one cares :lol:.

Two shows that i can think of right now that has great representation of the LBGT community that comes out of Canada are Degrassi and Robson Arms. They have gay characters, and are more real life like. We also have a show about a muslim community, which i don't think would catch on in the US :lol:

 

[origin-nknwn]

I think honestly that it is more down to the United States being a 'young' and 'developing' country than it is the actual implication of religion.

but canada is younger than the US, and we don't have the same social attitudes. It isn't so much about being religious as it is the way religion is practiced. The US is very prudish about sex, and that plays a big part in it too. Just look at American Idol. There were several gay contestants on this year, however they are pretty much forced to stay in the closet, they are not allowed to say they are gay, due to a morality clause. Also, the fans online for the most part just ripped them to pieces, because they weren't 'christian' enough for AI. I follow the show online closely, and people just freaked out when they saw Danny. Not all americans are like this, but there is a whole portion of fundies, that are insane...and they have big control over the media. Like the ones who burn Harry potter books.

TBH, it's not just one thing. Every country has a combination of religious, social, political and economic factors that shape the value system. The pervasive influence of religion in American society can largely be blamed on capitalism. Society's poorest and most disenchanted are always the easiest marks when it comes to fundamentalist ideas. Take the U.S. healthcare system for example. When you are poor and can't afford health insurance, what else is there to do but pray you don't get sick and be thankful for every day that prayer is answered? And then, when that fundamentalist priest tells you that God says 'fags are bad', to agree with him? I'm not saying it's right, just that I see why. Canadians and Brits (despite being Irish, I currently live in the UK) thankfully do not have to live with such fears, which is why I suspect that both are far more secular and less influenced by religion.

Also, i find the writing in American network tv very bad. The way the characters are done, and storylines are all the same....they rarely venture outside that box.

A lot of American shows use extremely stereotypical views of large sections of society. The fact that gays are almost always used for comedic value is just frustrating.

Another one from CSI:NY that really annoyed me was Raising Shane - they could have used any character to have been the person who testified in the original case and thus ended up being the target. I thought using Hawkes just played into every negative race stereotype possible.

It isn't like this in Canada...we show all sorts of stuff on our network tv...nudity, swearing, sex, gay sex all the time. No one cares :lol:.

I was in Vancouver a few months ago or so and I was amused by the times of day they show some of these things...

 

[miss_blue]

I actually liked in Trapped the killer, who was lesbian. Her sexuality wasn't the reason for murder. I think that was handled pretty well.

I think that CBS is just happy to stay in a comfort zone. Having a gay cast member will definitely start problems, and I think they want to live peacefully an quietly without hudreds of people being on their backs for whatnot. But if the writers do it, they must take a long time to think and do it properly.

 

[Kimmychu]

What are your thoughts about GLBT representation--or the lack thereof--on CSI:NY?

Incredibly disappointing. Then again, all three CSI shows have been disappointing in this particular department, and they don't even have the excuse of the shows being broadcast shows for the lack of GLBT representation. As other posters in this thread have mentioned, there are broadcast shows that feature gay people.

For example, Law & Order. Even way back in its hey day (and boy, was that a long time), there were moments of positive GLBT representation. The one I remember best was when Benjamin Brett's character, Curtis, and his partner, Briscoe, went to a restaurant to interview a waiter there, a young man.

After answering the questions, the waiter smiles at Curtis and asks him out for drinks/a meal. Instead of being offended (as people would typically expect), Curtis smiles politely in return and tells the waiter he's already married. Briscoe, listening to the conversation, is all amused smiles and says in good nature to Curtis, "C'mon, why don't you give him a chance?" The scene ends on a positive note with Curtis smirking at his partner and Briscoe snickering.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, took place on the show during the 1990s.

So, TPTB? If Law & Order had the guts to do it even then and do it with class, you have no excuse whatsoever to not do it today.

As for the lack of GLBT representation being solely the writers' fault, I do not agree with that. The viewers have a great deal to do with the situation. After all, to TPTB, what matters most to them is ratings. The higher the ratings, the more money they get. And in order to get ratings, they need as many viewers as possible.

I really hate to say it, but it's the truth: While there are some people who are supportive of gay rights and are tolerant and accepting of gay people, there are just as many who don't, probably even more so. Should TPTB decide to go for a gay character, particularly someone on the main cast, TPTB surely knows of the nasty backlash they'll receive from intolerant/homophobic viewers. For example of nasty backlash, just look at the Cheers&Jeers section of TVGuide's website after the Danny/Rikki scene happened on the show, at the jeers calling Danny all kinds of names. I don't even wanna know what the letters sent to CBS were like. And that was just for Danny being in a scene for a few minutes with another woman who wasn't Lindsay. Imagine the backlash if a main character is outed as gay! TPTB won't just get hatemail from fangirls whose fantasies are crushed forever, they'll get negative feedback of outrage from homophobes, conservative folk, blarblarblar.

Yeah. Viewers have a LOT to do with the situation. I believe if there was much more tolerance and acceptance by the public of GLBT issues and rights, the writers won't think twice about writing homosexual characters and homosexual relationships, and positively too.

 

[dutch_treat]

Fay said:
Honestly, I think Adam would be the most plausible bisexual character. Not because I like him, just because it seems believable for him since 1) we don't know much about him and it could be easily revealed and not seem off, 2) he seems like a young, open-minded man who is perhaps 'up' on the kinds of issues young people talk about, and 3) c'mon, he asked if Mac wanted to be a man or a woman in Second Life--the dude has totally experimented.

LOL, yeah Adam would be quite plausible, I just fear that in his case they (if they ever consider this) would turn him in to the 'gay for the funny situations', where it would imo be a better idea to perhaps link his sexuality to what little we know about his home situation...there were dad issues after all.

xfcanadian said:
It isn't like this in Canada...we show all sorts of stuff on our network tv...nudity, swearing, sex, gay sex all the time. No one cares :lol:.

Same in the Netherlands, I wouldn't go as far as to say no one cares, but those who do care simply don't watch...there are even shows on a public network where all kinds of drugs are used (as a test of course) to make people aware of the effect.

Kimmychu said:
As for the lack of GLBT representation being solely the writers' fault, I do not agree with that. The viewers have a great deal to do with the situation. After all, to TPTB, what matters most to them is ratings. The higher the ratings, the more money they get. And in order to get ratings, they need as many viewers as possible.
---
Viewers have a LOT to do with the situation. I believe if there was much more tolerance and acceptance by the public of GLBT issues and rights, the writers won't think twice about writing homosexual characters and homosexual relationships, and positively too.

Of course there are two sides to the coin, but if we ever want things to change someone has to take the first step and in this case I think that has to be the writers/producers/networks who have the ability to reach so many people at once.

I hadn't even really considered they money issue yet, but now that you've pointed it out I find it even more appalling. They don't only bow down for intolerance, but they do it because it'll cost them; which is strange because as far as I can tell all these open-minded shows make lots and lots of money too - not living in the US makes it hard to get a good insight in how the TV-world over there works.

I know you can not suddenly change people's beliefs or their points of view, so they should probably not introduce a GLBT main (recurring) character immediately, but starting with something like that L&O example you gave should be acceptable. They can await the reactions and gradually extend with introducing more and more people with all kinds of life styles and sexual preferences.

Especially a show like CSI:NY can provide great opportunities to take this first leap. NYC (although the show does have a hard time showing that) is already world-wide considered as a melting pot of all kinds of people and I guess it won't be as 'shocking' to those with more conservative beliefs that there are even GLBT's living there.

Imagine the backlash if a main character is outed as gay! TPTB won't just get hatemail from fangirls whose fantasies are crushed forever, they'll get negative feedback of outrage from homophobes, conservative folk, blarblarblar.

These kind of situations always provoke reactions. I don't think the reactions to the D/L/R situation can be totally compared to what will happen if one of the main characters comes out of the (broom)closet, but of course they will get the most ugly of reactions imaginable. I just don't think that should prevent them from taking a stand.

I'm sure there has been long and hard talks about whether they should have let Danny sleep with Rikki or not and there will be even longer and harder talks about introducing a gay character...I just hope the outcome will be positive.

 

[Seren_y_Gogledd]

While I think there should be a much more positive portrayal of GLBT characters on CSI:NY, I hope they don't just 'out' a main character and have them be the 'token gay'.

I can think of only two incidents in the whole franchise (correct me if there are any Miami ones, I don't watch it) where a character wasn't 100% heterosexual and yet was neither the killer nor the victim.

- LV "Iced": Suspect was cleared because he could prove he was with his boyfriend out of state when the murder happened.
- NY "Heroes": The owner of the car was suspected of Aiden's murder, it was stolen but he didn't report it because he was married and seeing a male prostitute. He wasn't the killer but his involvement with the prostitute made his lifestyle appear 'seedy'.

 

[miss_blue]

Dumb person over here! What does GLBT stand for?

I think that the writers of NY will not go to the point of having one of the main characters being gay simply because they simply don't have the balls to do it. Homosexuality is still a tabu subject nowadays, but I am firmly convinced that in the next 5years it will not be an issue anymore.Media can help with that and they should encourage tolerance for gay people,it will speed up the process.

 

[dutch_treat]

^
G - Gay
L - Lesbian
B - Bi-sexual
T - Trans-sexual/gender