05/29/2008
Lauren Hutton: Sex and the City Women Based on Gay Sluts
Former model Lauren Hutton was the guest on the Today show for some reason, and Kathie Lee Gifford asked her about Sex and the City. She had plenty to say about it, even though she's never seen it.
Said Hutton: "It's written by guys, who happen to be gay, who are sluts. That's what I think. Let's face it most men are sluts. That's what testosterone is supposed to do. As a hunter, if you stayed alive after 30, nature wanted your genes out there. Women were just trying to get the best sperm to make a masterpiece...You have a bunch a guys who are sluts, writing for women and telling them they are supposed to act like this."
Sounds like she downed a Bloody Mary (or two) before she got to the studio.
I've clipped the segment, AFTER THE JUMP...
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 5:19 PM EST by Andy in Film, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
I don't find it insulting. Am I supposed to?
Sounds kinda true. Men are all about sex - gay or straight
whatever
Posted by: MARCO | May 29, 2008 5:29:10 PM
Actually, according to press information, after the first two seasons, all the writers for Sex in the City have been female--slutty and otherwise--including those who wrote for this film. Talk about perpetuating your stereotypes. I don't know whom should be most offended: gay men, men in general, or women? This is exactly why models, when working, are seldom heard. Mixing modeling and evolutionary theory can be a dangerous thing!
Posted by: Mike | May 29, 2008 5:32:54 PM
They have had women writers for the show-- but men still wrote for the show. In fact, Michael Patrick King wrote the movie.
On another note, even if it were a gay slut propaganda piece, what does it mean that so many women took to the message so thoroughly?
Posted by: Jeff | May 29, 2008 5:35:53 PM
The gap-toothed dyke is right.
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | May 29, 2008 5:42:43 PM
She doesn't sound wrong...
Posted by: Michael W. | May 29, 2008 5:43:13 PM
Candace Bushnell was the original author and like Mike said, many of the writers have been female.
Is Lauren Hutton a born againer? I am wondering because what she said is word for word the talking point born againers use to malign sex in the city.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | May 29, 2008 5:43:23 PM
Aren't the 4 main characters of Sex and the City in monogamous relationships now?
Posted by: crispy | May 29, 2008 5:51:53 PM
From the Simspons episode
Half Descent proposal:
Patty, Selma, and Marge are watching tv.
Selma: Let's catch the tail end to "Nookie in New York."
Marge: "Nookie in New York?"
Selma: "It's a cable show about four women who talk like gay men."
Posted by: Bud Deegan | May 29, 2008 5:56:59 PM
Blah, blah, blah. The Simpson's made reference to this a long time ago when the show was described as (I paraphrase) "single women acting like gay men." SLUT PRIDE!
Posted by: DCWilliams | May 29, 2008 5:59:10 PM
oooh, Get her! Meow.
Posted by: davefromtampa | May 29, 2008 6:08:13 PM
Exactly... that's been a rumor for years now, that the show was actually supposed to be about the lives of four gay guys.
Although I liked Brian from Family Guy watching it with two gay guys and asking, "Sooo it's a show about three hookers and their mom?" Good stuff!
Posted by: JohnOB | May 29, 2008 6:13:03 PM
She hasn't been the same since the accident.
Posted by: anon | May 29, 2008 6:22:17 PM
i love lauren hutton - she's so fucking cool and hip, and not afraid to say it!
yes, guys are sluts (anyone been on craigslist?) and while women are also, its obvious that men are obsessed - and gay men more so because they are easy to get for a quickie. girls love SATC because they live vicariously through their gays - we do what they wish they could!
what's more interesting is her comment about men over their 30s - it makes sense - i got a lot more sexual after turning 30 - but I don't know if it gets even better after 40 or if it starts to peter out... either way, happy to be aging here (hows that for the subversion of a gay stereotype?). of course Im running to the gym like never before, so maybe not ;)
Posted by: echovic | May 29, 2008 6:23:24 PM
How can she make a rash generalization about the TV show or the movie after she clearly states, "I've never seen the show." That's like me telling women that giving birth is no big deal, suck it up and get on with it. How can I say that? I've never given birth.....
What a completely idiotic answer to an isipid question.....Kathie Lee, go back to your perfect children and quit lowering the bar of morning television.....
Posted by: Steven | May 29, 2008 6:27:31 PM
I agree, Steven- why is she commenting about a show she's never seen, echoing rightwing talking-points? Bizarre.
And as for all you guys saying all gay men are promiscuous, insatiable sluts- speak for yourselves. I truly can't stand the cartoon gays who constantly espouse this as if it were their own wisdom, some cosmic truth. Probably to defend their own promiscuity and bad choices.
No, we're not all insatiable, cheating, promiscuous sluts. Deal with your own issues, don't make sweeping generalizations about gay people. Unhelpful, reductive, and dumb.
Posted by: arunz | May 29, 2008 6:38:52 PM
speaking as a former gay slut and having watched sex and the city, i can only say that miss hutton is right on the money... it sure beats charles darwin's theories....
Posted by: the queen | May 29, 2008 6:45:21 PM
Um..."we're not all insatiable, cheating, promiscuous, sluts." Weren't you just admonishing us "cartoon gays" about making sweeping generalizations Arunz? Not all sluts cheat and not all self-righteous, priggish queers are faithful. Reality check: gay men are usually more sexually active than their straight counter parts read any study on sexual mores and that is what you will find. But thanks for the sermonizing...
Posted by: DCWilliams | May 29, 2008 7:15:18 PM
She's become a bitter old cunt. Too bad she's not getting it hit anymore....she's grumpier than shit!
Posted by: Tex... | May 29, 2008 7:27:58 PM
As others said women write this show. The only man is Michael Patrick King. Not many gay men like talking about women's periods and menopause and visits to the gyno.
I also disagree that people who have lots of sex are sluts, enjoying sex isn't a bad thing, it only gets serious when you use it to avoid intimacy.
Lauren needs to address why she is so uncomfortable about others enjoying their sexuality, gay or straight, male or female. Maybe she has never had an orgasm and she is angry about it.
Posted by: Brent | May 29, 2008 7:30:05 PM
hallelujah dcwilliams - and to add - why do people think that being promiscuous is a bad thing? its a choice, and many gay men choose it and many do not - the moralizing is so tired! as long as you're safe, physically and emotionally, you'll do great - in a monogamous relationship or while being a slut. And both can be damaging, btw. Give it up arunz and get laid a litte (and stop equating promiscuity with bad choices, or mom and I will send you to stay at the Phelp's)!
ps props to THE QUEEN for keeping it real...
Posted by: echovic | May 29, 2008 7:32:04 PM
being "Sluty" is a made up concept
being promiscuous is a very common and natural thing for a lot of animals... especially the Human Ape and in particular the male Human Ape.
Not everybody has such desires (myself included), but I certainly understand it's nature and will never judge someone for such desires or acts.
Posted by: MARCO | May 29, 2008 8:02:06 PM
Not only is Mike right in pointing out that the show had female writers, but with the exception of the Samantha character which liked to sleep around, the other characters were pretty much just dating one guy at a time and trying to find the Mr. Right. We all do that, so I guess according to Hutton's model brain, we're all sluts for going through the normal process of trying to find a partner.
Posted by: Matty | May 29, 2008 8:12:54 PM
this Fall on Bravo - "Model Science". in Episode 1, "top model" Lauren Hutton explains evolutionary theory in light of current gender roles and mores, with special guest appearances by Manolo Blahnik, Patricia Field and the always popular "gay sluts."
Posted by: resurrect | May 29, 2008 10:44:13 PM
SatC is a show about women getting in touch with their pussies. (Ew! How hard can it be?) Is it any surprise that some gay men love it so much? Is it any surprise that gay men have written a lot of it? The women are proxies for gay neuroses and are caricatures for women's neuroses. Is it any surprise that I couldn't give a shit? Not even a tiny turd? Why is it that people get mad when someone, like Lauren, speaks the truth?
Posted by: John Beene | May 29, 2008 10:46:07 PM
"a bunch of guys WHO HAPPEN TO BE gay" isn't that one of the most interesting phrases - "happen to be"? as if being gay was as flip a decision as choosing paper or plastic at the grocery checkout.
as clueless as her smile is toothless. get a brain, babe!
Posted by: resurrect | May 29, 2008 10:47:35 PM
I like that she is described as a "top model". What year is this?
1985? I worked with her once years ago. She was bitchy then.
She, apparently, is still bitchy now. If one doesn't have an informed opinion about something - as in having actually watched the show - then keep quiet.
Posted by: gr8guyca | May 29, 2008 11:52:51 PM
As much of a hoot as I'm sure Lauren is, and as much fun as I'm sure she would be to get drunk with, she is one looney gap-toothed bird I'd love to slap (along with Kathie Lee Gifford).
As someone who's had to struggle with past sexual abuse and also someone hunted for being "too pretty" all my short life, I don't find sex all that much fun, not that it's stopped me from being a whore, selling and degrading myself at times before, was from my past issues, certainly not from my testosterone.
It might be true for some guys, but I for one would rather go shopping.
Posted by: Chad | May 30, 2008 12:06:24 AM
When did Kathie Lee Gifford start hosting the Today Show? Was this "has-been" week?
Posted by: Patrick | May 30, 2008 12:42:20 AM
I'm amazed. No one cares if you lead a "slut life" or not, but for her to say these things smacks of gay stereotypism and an odd skew on life. Models have never been noted for their intelligence, and despite several film successes (sic), she remains a wannabe. Living in northern New Mexico has given her an 'oh, I'm so in tune, I'm so natural, I'm so holistic' attitude that rings false in her mouth. She sucks off the system and simply sounds bitter that she isn't being cast anymore as a sex object.
Posted by: Leducdor | May 30, 2008 3:51:18 AM
as it pertains to male sexuality in GENERAL, what ms. hutton says is nothing but the truth. she is not adressing gay-male sexuality in particular. nothing that she said could be construed as anti-gay by anyone, other than the most anal-retentive queer whose lips are puckered tighter than a chicken's butthole.
understanding and acknowledging the basic anthropological sex drives of men and women flies in the face of the "sanctity of marriage" bullshit that the right-wing fundies use against us. we should fight them on every level and in every forum.
serious up sissies.
Posted by: nic | May 30, 2008 6:23:12 AM
Um, she's kind of right, generally speaking.
Posted by: David T | May 30, 2008 8:22:18 AM
It's bad science. The idea that males are promiscuous because sperm are cheap and females are choosey because eggs are expensive -- also called the Bateman Principle (though not, sadly, after my personal hunk Jason Bateman; the Bateman in question is A.J. Bateman from the late '40s) -- is a fallacy based on fruit fly studies.
Science actually suggests that females are just as promiscuous as males. In most species, the more varied a female's sexual conquests, the better chance she has of fertilization. (And if you're a species that lays clutches of eggs, you'll assure that more of your eggs are fertilized the more you bonk.)
This "men like sex" thing is confirmation bias masquerading as fact. We all like sex. Let's move on.
Posted by: Mike B. | May 30, 2008 9:21:48 AM
Methinks thou all protest too much. :-)
Posted by: johnny | May 30, 2008 9:22:14 AM
The Bateman principle might be bad science, but I like to think that double-blind placebo-controlled studies aren't the only path to knowledge. My informal, experiential data collected over the past 20 years, involving what I'm certain just HAS to be a normative sample of midwestern gay men, suggests that men are, indeed, slutty. I do acknowledge a selection bias, as well as a dearth of data addressing straight men and females.
Kidding aside, I really do think that women are just as slutty as men. It's just still not cool for them to own that. That's why SatC was so popular... and why the "happy slut" theme will continue to be successful.
Posted by: The Milkman | May 30, 2008 9:51:29 AM
Men (gay & straight) have had too much influence in creating women's images in theater, literature, film & TV. When men talk about the "vindictive bitch", I ask them who created the saying, "A woman scorned..." & who created all the female characters in the Bible, and most other modern religious beliefs?.
Men do dominate in the creation of women's images in all media. Unfortunately, too many women try to emulate those images in real life. Be yourselves, women...let us "queens" enjoy playing bitches.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | May 30, 2008 9:57:40 AM
Bill Maher and a number of other comedians and commentators over the years opined that the lives of the women on Sex and The City were really the lives of Gay Men. AND, these comments were being made WHILE the Sex and The City series was still on the air.
I'm sure Laruen Hutton makes for a much more TV Friendly image than Bill Maher on morning TV.
Posted by: Peter Everhard | May 30, 2008 11:18:37 AM
MIKE B.,
"The idea that males are promiscuous because sperm are cheap and females are choosey because eggs are expensive -- also called the Bateman Principle..."
what purpose does it serve to set up your own premise and then demolish it? this is a pitch battle solely within your own brain.
or, was your endeavor just to highlight your carnal lust for mr. bateman? if so, that would only serve to prove ms. hutton's point.
Posted by: nic | May 30, 2008 12:45:54 PM
And here I was thinking that Kim Catrall was using Lauren Hutton as an inspiration for her portrayal of Samantha all these years...
Posted by: Jerry | May 30, 2008 12:54:02 PM
'Gay Sluts'? Isn't that redundant?
Posted by: dkane | May 30, 2008 1:21:12 PM
Speaking of nature wanting your genes out- Ms. Hutton, nature called...
Posted by: Suedehead | May 30, 2008 6:48:37 PM
So does she know that there are whole scientific fields dedicated to studying this? And that she just butchered some people's life work? I mean not that science is the end all be all but I kind of believe it before I'd believe some drunk old hussy.
Posted by: Davis | May 30, 2008 8:21:34 PM
She's right. Gay guys are mostly sluts, but so are straight guys who will even go so far as use violence to rape a woman!
Don't call her a drunk old hussy, she is probably very gay friendly.
Posted by: Ty | May 31, 2008 4:36:09 PM
Slut? I prefer the term stud! ;) (insert horse souunds here)
Posted by: BC | Jun 2, 2008 12:20:54 PM
See, the problem with Miss Lauren is that she has had so many face-lifts, that face-tight skin has cut off circulation to her brain and it's affecting her ability to think before she speaks.
Posted by: mike | Jun 6, 2008 1:47:58 PM
See, the problem with Miss Lauren is that she has had so many face-lifts, that face-tight skin has cut off circulation to her brain and it's affecting her ability to think before she speaks.
Posted by: mike | Jun 6, 2008 1:48:16 PM