I've gotten more than a few emails from friends tired of the SAME OLD queeny gay team sterotype. It's so cliche. TAR, Survivor, Big Brother they all use the same lame 1990s sterotype...yeah we saw the Birdcage, thanks. Don't get me wrong John and Scott may be beautiful people on the inside but DAMN show us something different and interesting TAR. These two had the engergy of a cucumber. Yeah there was Chip and Reichen but we all know they were just created by some hollywood agent to jumpstarts Reichen's career. TAR is loosing the REAL in REALITY. Show us a strong masculine gay team PLEASE.

• RE: Amazing FARCE,ElroyJetson, 12:46 PM, 03-02-06
  • RE: Amazing FARCE,frogman, 02:04 PM, 03-02-06
• RE: Amazing FARCE,Lisa0116, 03:43 PM, 03-02-06
• RE: Amazing FARCE,Earl Colby Pottinger, 05:51 PM, 03-02-06
• RE: Amazing FARCE,Rhyn, 07:29 AM, 03-03-06
  • RE: Amazing FARCE,Tahj, 11:21 AM, 03-03-06
    • RE: Amazing FARCE,frogman, 10:43 AM, 03-05-06
      • RE: Amazing FARCE,Earl Colby Pottinger, 04:37 PM, 03-05-06
      • RE: Amazing FARCE,Lisa0116, 02:19 PM, 03-06-06
      • RE: Amazing FARCE,Rhyn, 02:11 PM, 03-08-06
• RE: Amazing FARCE,Lasann, 11:09 AM, 03-05-06
• RE: Amazing FARCE,Earl Colby Pottinger, 04:33 PM, 03-05-06
  • RE: Amazing FARCE,Estee, 05:22 PM, 03-05-06
  • RE: Amazing FARCE,frogman, 10:53 AM, 03-08-06
    • RE: Amazing FARCE,Tahj, 11:09 AM, 03-08-06
  • RE: Amazing FARCE,LibraRising, 03:00 PM, 03-08-06
• RE: Amazing FARCE,NoParole, 01:18 PM, 03-06-06
  • RE: Amazing FARCE,donquiote666, 01:29 PM, 03-08-06
    • RE: Amazing FARCE,Lisa0116, 04:49 PM, 03-08-06

You got a problem with queeny gay guys hmmmmm?

>You got a problem with queeny
>gay guys hmmmmm?

Only the fact that all these shows cast that one type. I as a viewer would like to see a more competitive gay team. It's the same scenario from one show to the next and it would be refreshing to see a more masculine and athletic type, not to mention probably very helpful to a lot of gay teens struggling with the issue.

Not to disagree with you or anything, but I used to live in a "Queen" house (they called me the "fish"), and most of the gay men I know act like that. I don't even find it offensive. I have a relative that is SO like that.

LAST EDITED ON 03-02-06 AT 05:56 PM (EST)

Well, I have to disagree with you and your friends. I never got the impression that Scott was gay, and I don't remember any relationship other than being friends being mentioned.

John may be gay, he sure does act like the sterotype like you said. On the other hand he just may a big snivling (sp?) coward, he also act like that type of person.

And team Cha-Cha showed a pair gays who were both queens in every sense of the word and they still did very good in the race itself and had more fun doing it than half the players in all the TARs I have seen (which is about all of them).

I agree with the first response: sounds like you might have a problem with some gay men. I'd say it could even be called flat-out discrimination, saying they aren't strong.

There have been many strong, gay teams on TAR, and some of them were "queeny" and some were not. Not recalling them can only be the product of selective memory, particularly when HALF the team you described fall into the "not queeny" category, but whatever.

LAST EDITED ON 03-03-06 AT 01:42 PM (EST)

I think, frogman, your comments say more about you, perhaps, than it does about the shows you're bashing. I can remember a time when including gays in anything on TV was unthinkable, and I wouldn't be surprised if you were complaining about that. Now that they are there, you find them unacceptable.

Moves courtesy of Syren

Boy you guys need to work on your theorys because I am gay. These shows are the what is unacceptable because they cast one type of gay character and it really does more harm than good for most gay people in the heartland. It is not a true representation of the diversity found on the gay community. I and a lot of others find it insulting.

The fact you are gay does not count. We did not say you have something about gays. We said you have something about queeny gays.

I (personally) think that the queeny flashy gays are more likely to want to be on TV and therefore, they are the ones that apply. Maybe there isn't as much diversity in the gay applicants as there could be.

Boy you guys need to work on your theorys because I am gay.

There's a lot of self-loathing in certain communities. If you don't have an open mind about "queeny" gays, we don't automatically assume that you are straight. And because you are gay doesn't mean you have to "support" their depiction on a reality show.

However, as a women, I don't like certain women who "live for their kids" or "defer to their man" yet they are all over my favortie shows. I also don't like women who are depicted as militant feminists who bash men at every turn. These women are part of a community that, by birth, I am a member of, and it's okay that we are all so different.

I am also a member of the college student community. I am not a party-all-night plagairist with crabs who sleeps with my best friend's boyfriend, but that girl, I'm sure, is present on every college campus.

I don't care if people associate college students with that person. Or women in general with the types descrivbed aboce. I really don't. I don't feel any identitiy every time a someone from one of my communities appears on TV. They are individuals, and they don't have to be what I envision. Your comments, I think, are more anti-gay than a lot of things I have seen attacked on these boards as anti-gay. You are eliminating a whole segment of the population because they aren't the "kind" of gay person that you prefer to be shown. And no matter what your orientation, it's incredibly narrow-minded thinking, that.

I may be wise to avoid this issue but,

when the Cosby show tried to show the "successful black family" it got criticism for being unrealistic. It was, on the other hand very successful.

I see your point frogman, and while I too would like to see the other side of gay men, the point to me is more that those two were not physically or mentally able to compete from the start. So what was the point of the casting? Now that is a topic we could debate.

I don't care what the racers are politically, sexually, racially, ethnically, I just think they should be able to at least be competent.

Well, unlike you I never seen a need to track who the gay teams were in the past but I know your claims do not match the teams shown in TAR. Using Google and CBS sites I get:

TAR 1:
Are you claiming the gay team (Team Guido) of TAR 1 were queeny?

TAR2:
Team Cha-Cha, gay, queeny, and one of the most fun loving teams to ever be seen on TAR. If this is the type of gay team you are against being shown you must want all gays to live depressing lives.

TAR3:
Straight father, gay son. No queeny actions that I remember.

TAR4:
Now Reichen & Chip won this race. They were gay. They were married. They sure were not queeny.

TAR5:
No gays here that I can find unless you think Charla & Mirna had a thing going between them?

TAR6:
Gay couple? What gay couple? Adam does not count as even he does not know what he is, besides I am sure that Rebecca was female

TAR 7:
Lynn & Alex, more bitches than queens but they are the type you are against being shown.

TAR 8:
Does not apply.

TAR 9:
What gay team. Nowhere was Scott shown to be gay or John's partner.

What only one show out of 9 matches your claims. Maybe you have a chip on your shoulder?

Earl Colby Pottinger

PS. Did I miss any gay teams?

PS. Did I miss any gay teams?

Either Tian or Jaree -- I think Jaree, but it's been a while -- but not both. We've never had a dating or married lesbian couple, much less friends like Danny & Oswald.

I would easily say all those teams have one or both persons who fit the sterotype. The exception is Chip/Reichen but they were actors cast as a couple. It was all made up. I appreciated their appearance but they never applied for the race. Look I'm not simply talking about TAR. BB and Survivor do the same or worse. If you add Jack on Will/Grace and other shows as well it's always the same. I certainly do have a chip on my shoulder after all these years of the same sterotype. There is just no diversity. These two were just the worst ever and if I were Jerry Bruckheimer I would fire someone at casting and ask for a refund of 1/12th of the casting fee because that team failed on every level. sorry but they did.

And now it gets even more interesting. So what concrete proof have you to support these allegations, hmmmm? I can't wait to read it.

Moves courtesy of Syren

You missed two from Season 3. The "Oh, brothers" and Aaron/Arianne. I wouldn't classify either Ken or Aaron as over-the-top.

I finally had my cable turned on. Yay!

I guess you have to look at why "queenies" are cast in the first place, and you've already kind of hit on it. Looking at The Bird Cage, Archie Bunker, and so on... Just like the queenies, they're stereo-types (according to OUR social standards), and Robin Williams can make ANY social group look funny as sh_t, which makes for more entertaining TV. And not to say the TAR competitors represent the majority, they're just one particular type of person who viewers may perceive (with appropriate editing)as so socially different, that they're funny, or digusting... entertaining. With TV, it's all about ratings... "Go out and get me as many disfunctional people (freaks) as you can find, exploit them, record it, and let's make a show". It could be anybody... gays, straights, bi's, any race, crede, or color, all they want are the odd-balls to make us watch and say "oh my god (I can say god 'cause I'm not in school, nor am I a government worker.. anymore), look at that". So, don't take any these shows personally, they're just there for our entertainment.

you are forgeting about Eric & Jeremy -- these boys are gay as can be -- all the talk of sex with women is a cover -- they are in love with eachother -- so obvious

Eric and Jeremy-The Ambiguously Gay Duo.....too funny!!!