‘General Hospital’ Writer on Its New Gay Character: a Follow-Up

On Friday I wrote this:

SamuelGeneral Hospital debuted a new character this week, a gay nurse played by actor Marc Anthony Samuel. To establish his character as gay, his first scenes involved him pulling out a tube of lipstick and offering to touch up a heterosexual woman. Oy.

In fairness to Ron Carlivati, who created the character, I'm reposting a note he left in the comments of the post, which has sparked a very robust back-and-forth discussion.

To Andy Towle and the readers of this blog: My name is Ron Carlivati and I am the Head Writer of General Hospital. I am also an openly gay man. I created the character of Felix Dubois, the "lipstick-wielding gay male nurse," and I am frankly appalled by the intolerance and internalized homophobia expressed in this post and in the majority of its comments. During my career, I have brought no fewer than six gay characters to daytime television: male, female, Black, White, Hispanic…all shapes and sizes. I have written coming out stories, gay bashing stories, gay marriage stories, gay parenting stories and gay love stories. I wrote the first love scene between two gay men that ever aired on daytime TV. I won a GLADD award for these stories. What exactly is it about this character that is causing such righteous indignation? The fact that he carries a tube of lipstick in his scrubs? SPOILER ALERT: Felix sells cosmetics to put himself through nursing school. This will be revealed on Monday's show. Not because I think gay men love lipstick, and certainly not to "establish" himself as gay. But even if that were the reason, so what? Does this make him too queeny? Not straight-acting enough? Is that the only type of gay character allowed on TV now? As far as I'm concerned, to be offended by this character is what is offensive. And just FYI, the majority of women (our core audience) I have heard from thus far about Felix have expressed to me how much they like him. The only people who seem to have a problem with him are certain gay men who are apparently afraid of a gay character who might be portrayed as a little bit effeminate. Well, I say shame on you, and shame on Andy Towle, too. Oy, indeed.

Mr. Carlivati also includes a few follow-up responses as the comment thread develops, which you can read there.

There's no question in my mind that Mr. Carlivati should be allowed the chance to develop his character more fully before judgment is passed and I regret if my commentary suggested that it should. My expression of "oy" over what I perceived to be a stereotype may have been hasty, but was also informed by having written this site for 9 years and seeing more than a few damaging caricatures in television and movies along the way.

I've also reported very positively on other soap characters written by Mr. Carlivati. I'm looking forward to seeing how his Felix Dubois character develops and thank him for his remarks and reaction.


  1. Oliver says

    I wasn’t aware that Andy Towle was the arbiter of taste of daytime tv.
    From my experience Andy’s taste is really confined to his mouth.

  2. RAYMAN says

    I think what we sometimes forget when we look at media portrayals of our community is that while many people don’t conform to stereotypes, there are some who do, and they deserve representation just as much as everyone else in the community. We need to stop jumping down throats every time we see something even remotely stereotypical. As long as the characters are well-developed individuals and not one-trick ponies, they deserve their place on television.

    So kudos to Mr. Carlivati for giving us another character to follow, and kudos to Andy for recognizing his snap judgement for what it was, (however grounded in experience it may have been). So nice to see level-headed conversation for a change.

  3. Fu'ad says

    It’s just too bad that this “retraction” appears on Sunday morning (here in California) when only those of us who have nothing better to do will give it its due attention.

    This is Andy’s blog, but so many of us rely on its objectivity and thoroughness that any editorializing is bound to raise hackles. And, of course, there is the problem of Andy being hard to replace – see, for example, the weekend deterioration in quality.

  4. Steve says

    I just watched the two hairdressers from Real Housewives of Atlanta commenting on the show. It was really the Wayans’ brothers “Men on Film” come alive in 2012. Is that okay? Is that who they are or are they enacting who they think they should be? Is he selling lipstick because he likes lipstick or is he selling lipstick because that’s what he believes gay male nurses do? And since he’s a fictional character, is he selling lipstick because the character’s creator believes that that is what the character would do? What will be the fictional character’s motivation?

  5. Frank Butterfield says

    And how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

    Reserve judgment? Sigh…

    If THIS is all we have to worry about, we must be doing mighty fine.

    I think I’m going to start using the phrase: “Gay men sell lipstick and that’s OK.”

  6. Luke says

    The fact that a man (gay or straight) carrying lipstick causes such an uproar showcases how embedded our rigid gender norms and expectations are in society, and how quickly we denigrate anything even remotely “feminine.” Masculinity is not better or more desirable than femininity. As long as we continue to act and react according to the assumption that masculinity (whatever that entails) is better than femininity (whatever that entails, but it apparently includes an attachment to lipstick), gay men will never be treated with dignity in society because, by sheer virtue of being attracted to a person of the same sex, you will be judged as not behaving as a man “should.”

  7. says

    Sounds to me like there’s an Uncle Tom heading the writing staff of “General Hospital”, hell-bent on peddling tired-ass Gay stereotypes to Straight soap viewers. When will f*gsploitationists like Ron Carlivati ever get a damn clue? Gay men, even highly effeminate ones like me, are not all refugees from a drag pageant and we don’t want to be portrayed that way, especially not in a work situation.

  8. Jeff says

    For God’s sake, Andy, the character is a stereotype. You wouldn’t backtrack if this kind of cartoonish trash appeared on a Christian TV show or as a character on Howard Stern. Carlivati doesn’t get a pass for his homophobic stereotyping just because he is gay. On the contrary, it makes his actions all the more disturbing, since it cannot be attributed to ignorance.


    Stereotypes don’t need further representation. They already have enjoyed an excess of representation in the culture. That is why they are stereotypes.

    It’s funny that the apologists of this minstrel theater argue that “there are many different kinds” of gay people. Sure there are. There are also many kinds of straight people. So why don’t we ever see the straight male character playing the effeminate, lipstick-wielding, makeover guru? Why doesn’t Carlivati’s commitment to showing “different kinds” of people extend to that? The answer is simple: he wouldn’t write such a character because in his heart he believes that straight men are men, and it wouldn’t make sense to write them this way. He knows that the audience wouldn’t believe a straight male lipstick artist and wouldn’t want to see such a character anyway. Only a gay man can be written as a “girlfriend.” It is only appropriate to demasculinize a gay character, since they aren’t real men anyway. That is the thinking in Carlivati’s troubled, self-loathing mind. That is why you will never see a straight version of Felix from debased writers like Carlivati.

  9. says

    the reality is that what is important is how the film or program IS ABOUT THE CHARACTER, and not merely the “type” represented.

    what’s more damaging to gay males? a character like this, on a daytime television program targeted toward women who are at home during the day, or the anti-gay gay males who denigrate “effeminate men” and “stereotypical queens” when in the presence of heterosexual males, who (let’s be real here) likely aren’t watching General Hospital?

    just because something is a stereotype, or an archetype, does not mean that it is in any way negative or damaging.

    you don’t get canadians saying “just because i’m canadian doesn’t mean that i like hockey and say “Eh?”!

    why? because there’s no negative stigma attached to either.

    it’s not just “representing the diverse types of gay males” that is important, but how they are treated within the material.

    Alexis Arquette’s character in The Wedding Singer – hilarious, broadly stereotypical yet rooted in an archetypal reality. What’s important? how the character is accepted and loved by the other characters. the joke isn’t on the character or type, it’s with the character.

    Jeremy Piven’s brief cameo as a gay salesperson in Rush Hour 2? awful. why? the joke is “look how gay is” – with no nuance, and no humour inherent to anything the character does or says. it’s just “haha! GAYYY!” for the sake of laughing AT a gay character.

    alas, as we always find out, nuance is lost on most.

    from the tone of the furious (and, as always, anonymous) anti-femme commenters yesterday, it appears that what they want most are TV shows featuring characters that are Closeted, misogynistic, crippled by insecurity about being gay, who can’t shut up about how they hate Those Other Gays.

    GOProud – The Animated Series, perhaps?

    but to be only mildly facetious – maybe there are indeed “gays like them” on TV every day. They just don’t notice it, because (like them…) the characters refuse to identify as gay and stand up to be counted. think on it. you’re seeing gay characters every few seconds on television – they’re just choosing to not let people know that they’re gay. like the Trolls do. 😉

  10. says

    just ONCE i’d love one of these insecure knee-jerk “i hate femmes!” gay commenters to prove their weight in testes by showing, actually showing, who they are and what they’re doing to Show Gay Diversity in their everyday lives.

    you plebes can’t sit here and complain that you’re not being “represented” when your grown-@ss selves utterly refuse to stand up, be counted, and represent yourselves.

  11. Ari R. says

    I think the character will be written well and he seems sweet. Would I rather have a gay gangster or DA? Yes. But that’s just me!

  12. Sean says

    Where are the ebonic-speaking, welfare-receiving black characters on TV? Or the cheap Jew or the drunken Indian? Mr. Carlivati wouldn’t dare write a black character as I described above. The network would shut him down before it even aired, even though black people like that exist and gay, effeminate lipstick-carrying nurses exist too. There are extremes and truths in all minorities but only the gay ones are allowed on TV.

  13. says

    care to articulate, intelligently, how this is an inherently harmful and negative stereotype, Sean?

    just because the straight men in your life pathetically choose to mock and belittle “effeminate gay men” doesn’t mean that their chosen dislike is valid and should be given worth.

    you, in your comment, prove me right – you assume it’s a negative. you compare it welfare dependence. alcoholism. cheapness.

    so, thanks for proving me right.

  14. tyler says

    I don’t get it, all Andy said was Oy and Ron was jumping down his throat!! It was the start of Hanukkah after all…

  15. John says

    and now they’ll make his “life partner” one of the hot, gym crazed doctors because that would be so realistic too…geez, im sorry, OY!

    It might have been much less offensive had they established his side job first and not used it as a sight gag..that’s what’s sad.

  16. Brian says

    I’ve been an “out”, politically active gay man for 36 years and I can’t remember a more clear example of such self-hatred and homophobia within the community as this topic has so painfully revealed.

    I’m sad that so many of the younger, urban gay men who seem to frequent Towleroad have such deep-seated misogyny, a total lack of awareness of their own privilege, and such a desperate need to prove that they are just like every other straight male except. . . . what?

    All of this sturm und drang over a tube of lipstick? The hatred and rejection of all things feminine and trans is revolting and shocking to me. I’ve overlooked the all-too visible racism, classism, ageism, and other shortcomings of Towleroad for a long time because there were things about this blog that I liked and that helped me feel connected to the next generation. My bad.

    There is so much wrongness brought out into the light by this episode that I realize that I was making excuses when I know better. My apologies to all those marginalized groups that receive such bitter bile here on a regular basis. Me, I’m staying out of the cesspit from now on, not that it matters to anyone but me. But I will feel cleaner and more whole. Good luck to the rest of you. You’ll need it.

  17. says

    Brian, if it’s any consolation (and it should be) there is an astonishing breed of new young queer people who are growing up empowered and unafraid of being exactly who they are, stereotyped or not.

    you’ll know them by their refusal to cower in the darkness.

    and thanks, btw, for the work you’ve done to open the doors for my generation and the next. we do appreciate it. that’s why we work to pay it forward.

  18. Lars says

    Thanks, Andy. Ron doesn’t get a free pass just because he’s gay, but on the other hand, it is way WAY premature for us to start condemning this storyline. Not least because, a) it has barely even begun to play out, and b) 90% of haven’t seen it and — frankly — probably never will.

  19. Fu'ad says

    I just know that I don’t appreciate being called a “plebe”, simply because I am willing to add a comment on Towleroad.

    Also, I am reminded about the futility of arguing on the internet.

  20. Markt says

    20 years ago i used to carry lipstick in my bomber-jacket. I was in the first throws of my 22 year partnership cum marriage. It was really fun to kiss with lipstick. Really – you should all try it.

  21. BD says

    He doesn’t get a pass for being gay? He isn’t asking for one. He doesn’t need one. There’s no pass needed for creating a character than every single one of you homos on here knows you know in real life and are friends with. We all have flamboyant gay friends. Some of us are the flamboyant gay friends. Why shouldn’t they entertain us as much as the two hot white abercrombie gays we have started to see on daytime television?

    I love my flaming gay friends.

    Oh, and just to put this in perspective, it’s a character on a soap opera. Hello. It’s a genre where we learn town exists like Genoa Falls or Salem and are full of incredibly gorgeous rich people who have lots of problems. Let’s not get crazy.

    Ron, you just keep doing what you’re doing. The world is always brighter with a few more Felix Dubois type folks in it.

  22. Eric says

    Perhaps the writer should ask himself why he wants to perpetuate the stereotype that women NEED lipstick and makeup to begin with? Oh, right, the sponsors.

  23. PeteP says

    Andy, I’m with you on this one. As the old Head and Shoulders tag line used to say “You never get a second chance to make a first impession.” Are we really supposed to think that this character is less of a silly stereotype because he is a nurse who sells makeup? While it is true that there are many effeminite gay men in the real world, it is also true that effeminite gay characters are way over-represented on televison.

  24. says

    Are effeminate gay characters “over represented” or are many non-effeminate gay characters *accurately* represented by their refusal to identify as “gay” in the programs?

    we get people on here all the time insisting that they don’t need to Come Out. that they don’t need to let people know that they’re gay.

    maybe *your type* is being represented in that very same way in the media. they’re gay. they’re just doing what you do – refusing to be visible about it. 😉

    learn a lesson from the “stereotypical gays” you have such disdain for – live without fear and shame and hiding.

  25. JJ says

    This reminds me of a role I did as a gay man in a play directed by a gay man, written by a gay man, and produced at a gay theatre for a mostly gay audience in San Francisco. The director kept pushing me to be “more” gay. More like Mama Charleston, he would say (the character’s mom). The critic from the B.A.R. (a local gay weekly) was invited to a preview. The director came to me opening night and said he had pushed my character too far into Mama and asked me to dial it back. The critic apparently didn’t like it. Their review: mixed, and they panned my character as a “snap queen stereotype.”

    The moral: being gay doesn’t mean you don’t harbor gay stereotypes. And two, drama is a collaboration. Even if you convince yourself as a writer that your gay nurse who carries lipstick and gives impropmtu makeovers is actually *post* stereotype, the producer and director and audience may not be there with you. They may not have been exposed to the spectrum of groundbreaking gay characters you’ve developed. No, they may simply like this character because he fits their tired old stereotype of the perfect pet gay.

    Now a _straight_ male nurse who carries lipstick and gives makeovers, that would be interesting.

  26. niles says

    He doesn’t take criticism very well does he? After all this time, I think they could have come up with something better than an Avon lady male nurse – like maybe a doctor?

  27. Sparky says

    Jeff, you are VASTLY UNINFORMED about what you speak of. Please stop speaking about this and talking out of your bunghole.

  28. Karen McMahon says

    I just wish Mr.Carlivati would address the outcry of this “surrogacy” storyline with Dante / Lulu / Maxie with such passion. Funny how this post hit such a nerve with him, yet RC will not address the “concerns” of a surrogacy / infertility storyline that is being told in inaccurate fashion. A sensitive topic to the countless women and couples suffering from the inability to have a child or start a family. But yet RC is quoted in SOD this will bring “humor” to the canvas. A bit of a double standard if you ask me.

  29. Art says

    Yes and that is the problem about the stereotypical character is that straight woman love them… I have found myself more then once in the presence of straight woman that spect you to behave like one of the sex and the city gays … An if you don’t, they seem desapointed.

  30. jjose712 says

    I say it last time and i say it again, when you create a character who is an stereotype (no matter how type of stereotype) you need to give him (or her) a full development, and let him become a three dimensional character.
    In soaps that almost never happen. You can take Days storyline, yes they are average guys, but their storyline is cliche after cliche (you know if a gay guy has sex with a girl, it will be a pregnancy storyline for sure).
    So without that development the character is just that, and stereotype only made for jokes.

    And i don’t think Andy has to apologize at all, i hope Ron (who is a decent writer sometimes, Kish has their good moments and they were great characters even when most of their storylines were awful) is right and there’s something more, but the truth is the first scene of the character was like a bad joke

  31. nonapologies says

    The interesting part of the story to me is the fact that there are gay men who are so vested in bigotry against other types of gay men. So, when one of them says, despite being factually wrong about a story line, there is no need to apologize because he or she has decided that they and they alone get to decide what images of gay should be on TV- I can’t say I am surprised by the non-apology. As marriage equality happens, there are looming battles in the gay community that only this underscores.

  32. alan says

    Carlivati brings up something that most people don’t really talk about much: Gay on Gay bashing.

    I never really got bullied by straight people for being gay, if i did, i knew how to handle it.
    The worst bullying i got in school were from my fellow queer classmates. They would say things about me just because i didn’t join in their gay-ass games and groups.
    Things like, “There are three gay people in class today, but one has yet to come out.”
    Fortunately, those guys were disgusting scums so i didn’t care much about what they said.

    It should also be noted, that i don’t remember the character declaring himself gay in that episode. For all we know, he could be a straight person who carry’s his girlfriends lipstick.
    We shouldn’t simply imply things because they follow a sterotype.

  33. nonapologies says

    One other point. I think Andy should apologize, but I don’t think he even understands what that may be the case.

    The fact is that there is a segment of the gay community that feels it has the right to speak for all other gay people and to dictate what is said about gay people.

    I find that deeply offensive. Like the writer of the show said, if there was a gay man out there who had lip stick in his pocket just because he wanted lip stick in his pocket- what would be wrong with that?

    Apparently the concept of a gay man wanting to do that offends a lot of gay men. I think that alone makes the writers decision to have that lipstick there a great idea.

    Whenever the status quo of any dominant group (in this gay a segment of gay men wanting to speak for all other members of the class) is disruptive, that’s a very good thing.

    The fact that Andy was factually wrong is why he should apologize. The fact that people can be wrong,a nd don’t fee they should apologize for being wrong is a sign of arrogance.

  34. says

    Yeah, but Alan, your confused mind votes Republican.

    you bully yourself, you dunce. :) stop being angry that those other gay guys had balls before yours dropped.

  35. johnosahon says

    Andy you are STILL being offensive, why can’t effeminate gay characters be on TV anymore? Why must every effeminate character be labelled as a stereotype? Must every gay character be straight-acting? I 100% agree with the writer, every gay character CANNOT be a white straight-acting closeted character who is trying to come out of the closet.

  36. Audi-owner says

    I for one will not back down on this one. I’m beyond tired of seeing gay men depicted as some sort of “crossover” between a “tranny” and a drag queen.Or if all else fails,make him into this big ol’ flaming queen who makes a catty remark whenever the impulse strikes all the while NOT being capable of holding down a monogamous relationship. I am an out and proud gay man who loves cars and takes enthusiasm in owning an Audi Q7 (I am consistently buying accessories for it and detailing it myself on nice days,even performing certain maintenance jobs to it myself.Atleast those I know I can do with the tools I have.Otherwise any little hiccup and I’ll take my car back to the local Audi dealer for inspection).When people like Ron the dingbat Carlivati and other supposedly “non-self-loathing” gay men in the lamestream media can create a masculine gay male character who has typical male interests (ex: Sports or Cars) and make it so that he is in a relationship with a *man*,is out and proud with a supportive family and all,then maybe I’ll give him a “pass”. I find it hilarious when I see “those type of gays” using such terms like “internalized homophobia” while in actuality,they themselves suffer from IHS (Internalized Homophobia Syndrome). I’m done with this crap because frankly,I’d rather saw off my own foot with a rusty chainsaw than watch any of these daytime soaps. Ron’s pathetic writing would be the perfect example of why I quit watching them years ago.

  37. Audi-owner says

    @ Johnosahon:


    You’re yet another one who doesn’t want to accept that masculinity and being gay commonly co-exist with one another. By the way,I don’t recall anyone saying the dude had to be white and in the closet.You moron! We are saying,why can’t a gay man be masculine while being out at the same time,showing that we are not that pathetic goddamn stereotype that should have long died around 1995. Jesus christ! Some of you homos are pathetic.It’s as if you have this chip on your shoulder with masculine gay men…maybe you do.Not my problem!

  38. says

    of course masculinity and gayness co-exist.

    but if you think hating on “effeminacy” makes you masculine, you’re utterly incorrect.

    gay men who denigrate perceived “effeminacy” are just wimpy boys, begging a bigoted daddy for tolerance.

    hey Audi-Owner, if you’re such a strong masculine empowered Out gay male, surely you can provide the URL to your own page so we can see this amazing example you live as, and the amazing work you do representing Gay Male Diversity.

    Right? surely you’re man enough to not make some cockamamie excuses and run away like an anonymous coward, right?

    I call your bluff.

    let’s see who you are, and who your amazing supportive family are.

    click my name and you’ll see me doing just that. care to try it, sugarpie? ten bucks says you can’t. 😉

  39. says

    curious – how can one be against perceived-gay “stereotypes” while in the next tout their own perceived-male “stereotypes”?

    if stereotypes are bad, then shouldn’t straight guys out there be sayig things like ‘just because i’m staight doesn’t mean i love cars! just because i’m a man doesn’t mean i like sports!” ???

    oh, wait. no. because there’s no negative stigma to those things.

    so let’s see it, Audi_Owner: you and your amazing family.

    no WAY you’re gonna puss out and give some flippant excuse to not make yourself visible…right?


  40. johnosahon says


    You are a bigger fool, i will just replay a word from what you wrote because i am to tired to reply to a fool.

    “Some of you homos are pathetic.It’s as if you have this chip on your shoulder with effeminate gay men…maybe you do.Not my problem!”

  41. Matthew says

    I agree with Little Kiwi that we NEED representations of every type of gay person on TV. I admire the empathy he has for all types of gay people, including the lip-stick wielding ones. :-)

    It does seem, however, that his empathy towards all gay types does not include the “straight-acting” gay. It seems as if he does not consider the “straight acting” gay as a legitimate type of gay, but as a type that deserves pity and scorn for their cowardice in not fully embracing their true identity.

    As a black man, this reminds me of an argument I had with some family members where I was accused of being an “oreo”. Basically, I was “acting white”. Because I was “white acting”, in their eyes I deserved scorn and contempt for not being black enough.

    But what does it mean to “act white”? What does it mean to “act straight”? Do straight people own a set of qualities and behaviors that define them as straight other than their sexual preference? Is the “straight acting” gay man a fallacy?

    If the “straight acting” gay man is a legitimate type of gay, then it seems he is also deserving of our empathy and also deserving of representation. It’s not just Little Kiwi, but the world in general that seems to have trouble with the concept of the “straight acting” gay as legitimate, which is probably why they are under-represented on TV.

    I want to make it clear that I disagree with Ron. While I feel like there needs to be more representation for the “straight acting” gay, I don’t feel it should come at the expense of the stereotypical gay. We need those representations too. They are not mutually exclusive. There is room enough for all of us.

  42. Artie_in_Lauderdale says

    Andy’s original point is well taken. I don’t doubt the writer’s talent at creating a variety of different characters; I question his motivations. Ron Carlivati certainly may have created varied and believable characters in the past. The gay nurse on General Hospital, nevertheless, is the gay equivalent of blackface minstrel shows depicting African-Americans in the early 20th century. So in summary, Ron Carlivati has developed some characters that are fair and one character that he should be ashamed of, unless he takes the character of the gay nurse in a completely different direction, which I doubt. I’m not commenting on Mr. Carlivati’s entire career; I’m commenting on one really stupid, self-loathing move on his part.

  43. Kyle says

    It’s unfair and disingenuous to try to reduce hostility to stereotype to hostility to effeminacy or gender-nonconformity. The people who rush to harangue you about how effeminacy is OK (usually effeminate gay men) often fail to respond to the real problem of equating male homosexuality with non-masculinity. Gender and sexuality are independent of one another. This is a fundamental tenet of queer theory, so it’s bizarre to accuse opponents of gay gendered stereotypes (which conflate gender and sexuality) as somehow anti-queer. There’s no defense for a statement like, “Gay guys know all about women’s shoes fashions.” (Something like that was said in the movie Legally Blonde.) These types of generalizations are promoted constantly by certain gay men who fit stereotypes–and by straight people.

    By conforming to heterosexist expectations, effeminate gay men are the least affected by gendered stereotypes and the least incentivized to dismantle them. So they’re in the privileged position here, which I wish they could be aware of before they lecture masculine gay men for being offended by stereotypes.

    That said, the lipstick-wielding General Hospital character is not necessarily an example of a stereotype. A lot of media targeted towards women have grotesque travesties of gay men though (like the gay guy in Legally Blonde). And another thing: A lot of offensive stereotypes of gay men are also offensive stereotypes of women (as frivolous, campy, inept, etc.). Realizing that, it becomes even harder to defend these stereotypical portrayals.

  44. says

    a “straight-acting gay” is a gay man who resents being gay and tries to find validation in “not being gay”

    a masculine gay man who is comfortable with himself as a gay man would never, EVER, describe himself as straight-acting.

    and if ever had an issue with “masculinity” it certainly would come as a shock to a great many of my friends and lovers.

    newsflash – confident, empowered, “masculine” gay men dont’ denigrate those who may be perceived as “effeminate”

    that’s the domain of the insecure resentful-homosexual coward.

    attempt to understand that, Matthew. You can look real real hard – you’ll never find a single thing i’ve said “against Masculinity” – because i’ve never said it.

    if you’re a confident masculine gay man you’d never describe yourself as “Straight-Acting”

    feel free to read this, MAtthew – it should make things clearer for you.



  45. JM says

    You are condemning this character and writer after one scene — a scene I would bet 90% of the posters here did not even see. (Just as I assume most have not seen Ron Calivati’s other “masculine” gay characters such as the gay cop he created. Maybe this nurse character has an Audi, too. I can’t wait to see the scene of him detailing it wearing his jungle red lipstick.

  46. Stephen says

    I think I am more offended that Towleroad doesn’t get a more pleasant template for its blog in desktop view (iOS view is hideous too btw). I have fine vision but it’s hard to read the content and comments at times, usually have to zoom. Hopefully 2013 brings a new fresh look.

  47. says

    Kyle, any reason that the “i hate femme” gays can never, ever put a face to their comments?

    and if you think gender-nonconformists “have it easier” ?

    hilarious – how’s this: you self-styled “masculine” gay guys step up to be counted.

    i know so many masculine gay men. none, however, ever denigrate “effeminate” gay men, or complain about “gay stereotypes.”

    why? because they’re masculine, confident, empowered and their balls have dropped. a masculine man stands in solidarity with his perceived-effeminate brothers. only a cowardly insecure homosexual attempts to distance himself from them.

  48. says

    curious, too – why do the Closeted Anonymous Commenters seem to be the ones rejecting diversity and duality?

    they seem to be the ones who “reject all things that are considered stereotypical….” but why?

    you can’t drive an off-roader AND enjoy theatre? you can’t be into fashion AND sports?

    of course, this is how trolls think. they confuse “hating effeminacy” with being “masculine” , just like anti-gay conservative males confuse “hating gays” with “being straight”

    and sooner or later both get busted with their ankles in the air shrieking “I”M A SIZE QUEEEN!”



  49. Kyle says

    @LittleKiwi, I never said effeminate gay men are generally privileged. I said they’re privileged when it comes to the effect of gendered stereotypes, while masculine gay men bear the brunt of this disadvantage. That is, when an ignorant straight person (and more than a few ignorant effeminate gay men) says, “No gay men are masculine”, this has an effect on masculine gay men that it doesn’t have on effeminate gay men.

  50. Matthew says

    I think I understand what you are saying about the difference between “straight acting” and masculine, Kiwi. And thank you for the response. I agree. I don’t think the anti-effeminate responses are very helpful at all.

    I wonder about some things though. For instance, I was watching a wonderful interview where Viola Davis spoke about how she initially struggled with whether or not to take on the role of a maid in The Help. She initially imagined the negative reaction she would receive from the black community in general.

    Sometimes, if a minority group feels that they are being represented in one way over and over again, it can lead to discontent, especially if the members of that minority group do not identify with the way they are being represented. I’m wondering if some of the “anti-effeminate” responses her are a manifestation of that discontent, and not just a manifestation of self-loathing closet cases.

    As a “double minority”, I know it can be difficult when you feel like you don’t have any control over how you are being represented. I suppose the solution is to make our own programs that represent us the way we would like- although getting those programs to the majority audience seems like the hard part. Perhaps the solution is just to ignore representations of yourself that you don’t identify with, but it can be hard to do when they are persistent. Then you have to go out and interact with the majority, who then have expectations.

    But thank you again for responding Little Kiwi. I think this is an interesting, though heated, discussion.

  51. Sean says

    Gay stereotypes are the only stereotypes
    TV allows. Look at Ross on The Tonight Show, he’s stricktly there for straight people to laugh at him just for what he is. You couldn’t do that with any other minority group. Those Amos and Andy days
    are over for all other minorities but not for gay people.

  52. says

    for those who need it spelled out:
    it is the use of the term “straight-acting” that perpetuates an idea that gay men cannot be “masculine”

    why? because you’re judging masculinity through some bogus societal perception of heterosexuality.

    if you want people to think that Gay Men Can Be Masculine, you need to stop using the phrase “straight-acting”. all that phrase does is drive home some meaningless drivel about “gay isn’t masculine. if you’re masculine you’re kinda straight”

    no. you’re not.

    one can be visibly, identifiably, and *obviously* gay and still utterly fit what current society deems to be “masculine”

    and if those of you out there and on here want more people to know that “gay men are also masculine” you can utterly play a part in making that happen: adopt some sort of visual iconography onto your oh-so-masculine self that lets people know, even complete strangers, that you’re also GAY.

    straight people see gay people all the time, every day, and may not always know it. if you want those strangers (as it appears posters on here do…) to know that gay men are also masculine, you’d do well to take my advice. find a way to make it pretty darn clear that your brilliantly masculine self is also gay.

    *elegant curtsy*

    that would do a heck of a lot more good than coming online to vent fury and wish that openly gay “effeminate males” would disappear. or something.

  53. says

    “That is, when an ignorant straight person (and more than a few ignorant effeminate gay men) says, “No gay men are masculine”, this has an effect on masculine gay men that it doesn’t have on effeminate gay men.”

    Kyle, articulate that further. What specific effect does it have on “masculine” gay men? What “brunt” are they bearing?

    I’ve never once heard “an effeminate gay person” say “no gay men are masculine” – mainly effeminate gay men tend to be, you know, OUT, and being OUT means you’re actually interacting with tonnes of gay men on a regular basis.
    It’s only ever the closeted types who hold on to some imaginary concept of “the gay scene” who make-up that straw-man argument and expect it to be taken seriously.

    But nice try!

    I’m not sure which “masculine gay men” you’re talking about. I’ve never met a confident masculine gay man who has the sort of worries you’re talking about. They left that nonsense behind when they came out.

  54. Bobby says

    Standing up and applauding Rob Carlivati! The internalized homophobia within our community is disgusting. Hey guys, guess what? Gay men come in all shapes, sizes, demeanors, styles, colors and a plethora of other traits that we should celebrate instead of trying to pick apart.

    You should all be ashamed but then again this is the internet and people seem to think they can do and say whatever they feel like with no consequences.

    Shameful and thank you Mr. Carlivati for all you’ve done for our community.

  55. KMF says


  56. Mary says

    “Are effeminate gay characters “over represented” or are many non-effeminate gay characters *accurately* represented by their refusal to identify as “gay” in the programs?”

    Kiwi has raised a very intereting question here.

    Personally, I think that a lot of the “masculine vs. feminine gays conflict” has to do with whether your goal is to advance gay acceptance generally or validate each member of the gay community individually. If the goal of portraying gays in entertainment is the first (gaining acceptance) then making gay men look more or less like straight men is best. It could be argued that when society views gays as “just like everyone else” THIS is when getting them to accept more feminine men will be easier. Then again, who wants to tell someone that he should go to the end of the line when waiting for justice? It’s a real dilemma.

  57. Ruddigore says

    This is just sloppy writing and doesn’t make logical sense. How many lipstick tubes does Nurse Felix carry around that he would have just the right shade for her? If he thinks that one color is right for every woman he is not going to sell any makeup.

    Can we just bring back gay male nurse Mo-Mo from Nurse Jackie and actually give him something to do?

  58. Nat says

    I don’t really get the flak.

    Soap operas are filled with ludicrous caricatures of human beings. Yes, this character is silly and stereotypical, but that’s been true of almost every major female character in soap operas for the past sixty years or so.

    And picking on the content of soap operas is sort of like picking on a mildly racist 90-year old great-uncle. Is there really that much point? Both are going to be on their way out, soon enough.

  59. Ben says

    The funniest comments here are the ones that say that it is “homophobic” to object to gay stereotyping. These poor deluded souls have so absorbed the stereotype that to them being effeminate is the same thing as being gay and objecting to portrayals of the former is homophobia. I can’t think of a better illustration of the damaging impact of stereotypes. To those commenters, while some gay men are effeminate, being gay and being effeminate are 2 different phenomena. You might disagree about whether Carlivati’s writing is good or bad, but it isn’t homophobia to object to a gay stereotype.

  60. says

    Ben, you’re full of s**t. :-)

    Thanks for sharing.

    Nobody here, in any way, stated a belief that being effeminate is the same as being gay.

    Trolls and their strawmen. The only men that they can ever get.

  61. Timothy says

    I think the character is offensive. I am really surprised that a gay writer would agree to be a part of this.

    Effeminate gay men do exist, and I have no problem with that. But why do writers like Mr. Carlivati only show gay men as effeminate? It is interesting that Mr. Carlivati did not think to assign lipstick duty to a straight character. That does seem to me to be discriminatory stereotyping. It is very disturbing that network TV would pay a gay writer to produce discriminatory material.

  62. says

    How is it, specifically, “discriminatory”, Timothy?

    This “type” of gay man exists. How is it “discriminatory” to show that?

    Attempt to use specifics. It’ll be fun to watch you fail.

    “But why do writers like Mr. Carlivati only show gay men as effeminate?”
    Specifics, please: which specific writers and which specific characters?

    you can’t name any “non-effeminate” characters in entertainment?

    do you consider yourself “masculine”? if so, based on what criteria?


    and what specifically makes this “discriminatory”?

  63. says

    no butter on mine. i’m an effeminate stereotypical gay and i’m watching my figure.

    just kidding. i’m stoned and eat whatever i want because i’m a stereotypical Canadian.

  64. says

    i think what we’re seeing from the insecure boys who are freaking out is sort of akin to getting one rude comment said to you in a social situation.

    you had a great night. everything went well. you looked awesome. everyone complimented you. except for one person who made one rude remark. and because of that one rude remark you freaked out and your mood changed and you obsessed over that one rude remark and forgot all the other good stuff that went down.

    that’s what this seems like. a character that represents (let’s be honest) the Type of Gay Man that the complainers in here were conditioned to “not be like” is on a show. And it scares you. And so you scream “why are we always being shown as effeminate/!?!” when you, and we, are NOT.

    it’s just that that’s the “type” that reminds you of the insults and mockery dished out by the straight bigots in your life whom you’ve not yet stood up to. so it takes up a lot of room in your mind.

    it’s not that “most” portrayals are effeminate. because they’re not. it’s that that’s the one portrayal you still have an insecure knee-jerk aversion to.

  65. Gry says

    It’s just bad writing, regardless of the character’s orientation.

    I mean, if he moonlighted as a carpenter, would he have a tool belt in at the hospital during the day?

    Maybe he likes to bake, so he always has a muffin in his pocket?

    It’s tupid character shorthand. Period.

  66. nonapologies says

    Some of the comments by the anti-gay bigots here who happen to be gay are amusing when it comes to writing.

    Take GRY comments. Its totally idiotic.

    Yes GRY, carrying around the supplies from selling makeup is exactly like carrying around a freankin’ toolbox.

    I mean- are you even try to not see like a rationalizing bigot who is blaming it on the writing?

  67. Hector says

    I’m pretty fem myself but I really don’t appreciate TV writers pushing discredited stereotypes of gay people. Sure there are some of us who are more on the fem side, but it is just wrong to make this part and parcel of being gay. It really isn’t. Ron Carlivati has done a disservice to the gay community. The issue isn’t that being fem is wrong. The issue is that commercial TV is pushing the bigoted idea that to be gay is to be fem. I hope Ron gives this some more thought and portrays Felix as an ordinary man, not super masculine and not feminine.

  68. Deee! says

    It’s one thing to be effeminate. It’s another to carry lipstick IN YOUR SCRUBS and offer to do someone’s makeup on the job. I can’t even carry my phone in my pocket on the job…and I work at Subway! For one thing, being effeminate is not innately gay, because there are effeminate straight guys. So acting like not being femme is denying who you are as a gay man is hogwash. Secondly, that whole thing about selling lipstick is so inane I can bet a benjy it was added on after the backlash the writers received. I’m all in favor of writing realistic characters, but being gay and owning lipstick are as far removed as being black and owning a gun. I should know because I’m both and own neither. It is a stereotype, plain and simple, and probably done either to portray the “safe” representation of gay men (nothing too manly), or to placate the women who would resent the character if he were “the epitome of manly goodness” and gay as well. And now I’m done ranting. Night, folks, I have finals in the morning…

  69. Jarrett says

    So…should I be ashamed of myself because I am a gay man who works as a makeup artist?? Am I reinforcing a ‘stereotype’ by doing this type of work?? If l am a gay man and work as a hair stylist, or interior designer, or a florist, am l to be ashamed?? The ‘Oy’ goes to you Andy, for your internalized homophobia. It’s bad enough that effeminate gay men carry the burden of anti-gay hate…but when it comes from people in our culture…it becomes even more shameful and pathetic.

  70. jamal49 says

    @LUKE Your comments are spot-on. I saw this episode and all I thought was “oh, he happens to have some lipstick on him”. I didn’t think he was “femme” or not “butch” or stereotypical or anything. Maybe I’m slow and thick in the head, but the scene or the moment didn’t register as something that would set off my rather sensitive “bigotometer”.

    It is amazing how “knee-jerk” we all have become.

    Not to mention that knee-jerk reactions make it very difficult to apply lipstick correctly.

  71. Deee! says

    Oh yeah, all you guys supporting this as a positive depiction and forgetting that this was not made for a solely homosexual audience, NEVER complain when an ignorant straight person calls you a sissy or treats you like a society woman because you’re gay. Homosexual attraction is the only prerequisite for homosexuality, everything else is an add-on. So whether you play on the football team or sing soprano in choir, you are no less of a homo than the next one. Masculine gay men are not betraying anyone or jonesing for straightness, and refusing to accept that as the truth is no different or better than homophobia. And I’ll just say this: who has ever visited a hospital and bought makeup? And if you were in the hospital for what I can only assume was a health issue, would you be in the mood to have someone peddle you makeup? And nurses aren’t even allowed to carry such trivialities on the job. Anyone defending this is just trying to justify being effeminate to themselves. Hell, I never said it was wrong. It just isn’t the only way to be gay.

  72. Mark says

    Wait, “General Hospital” has writers? I was pretty sure the stories were hammered out by monkey typists Swedish, then translated into English before being put into a shredder and the random pieces became scripts.

  73. Matthew says

    I think characters like this lip-stick wielding nurse are necessary because they represent a type of gay person, and any humanistic representation is a good thing.

    But it is clear that there are quite a few gay men who feel like this type of gay is the only type of gay that gets represented consistently in the mainstream media. I feel like this is a legitimate concern, but I don’t think the solution is to eliminate all representation of effeminate gay men on TV.

    The solution is to get more representation of masculine gay men in the mainstream media. The key word here is MAINSTREAM media. Little Kiwi is correct when he says there are a lot of portrayals of regular masculine gay men out there, but most of these are made by and for a gay audience.

    I think the reason why this lip-stick wielding nurse has caused so much discontent is because this character is yet another in a long line of effeminate gay characters being sold to a mainstream (or straight) audience.

    It used to be that gays in the mainstream media were both effeminate and villains. Thankfully, we have gotten to the point where we can say we have eliminated the villain part. Things are getting better, and while I would not say that masculine representations of gay men in the mainstream media are at the same level as effeminate gay representation, I think we will eventually get there.

  74. BWR says

    My biggest problem is most effeminate gay characters are always the joke on a show. Played for laughs and one dimensional. With the exception of Emmet in QAF who was a beautiful character played by a very beautiful man, Peter Paige. If this character can have some depth like Emmet and not be played for laughs then I have no issue with him.

    For whatever reason Carlivati’s other masculine gay characters where a lot more serious and were never really played for laughs.

    The other issue I have with GH is most of the heterosexual male characters are often violent and Misogynistic. Not a great representation of heterosexual men.

  75. James says

    If this character was white I would have no problem with it.The fact is the only image of black gay men you ever get to see they are drag queens and fem.

  76. says

    the hilarious thing is the idiots complaining about this suffer from the same selective amnesia as the anti-gay bible-thumping Christians.

    yes, not all gay people are like this character. but this character is like this character.

    this one portrayal does not mean “all gay men carry lipstick” just as the gay characters from, say, Six Feet Under, don’t mean that all gay characters are just like those fellas.

    understand me, sugarpies?

    it’s worth noting that all the commenters freakin’ the heck out on here are making the stupidest non-arguments ever.

    “omigod! this character is carrying lipstick! that means that this character is saying that ALL GAY MEN DO THIS!”

    No, it’s not. So kindly chill the f**k out.

    and while you’re at it, Come Out.

  77. Christian Q says

    Although I do love this blog, and check it quite frequently. I agree with the writer. I’m sick of queeny guys or dandy’s getting the shaft (no pun here although its tempting) by other gay men. It seems to me that you are trying to protect mainstream America from this image of feminine men. I suppose in the 80s this character may have seemed stereotypical in some sense, but I for one and glad to see it. Guess what, not every homosexual is super styled, buffed, and masculine. Kudos to General Hospital… Though, I stopped watching that, years ago.

  78. says

    does anyone else find it rather deliciously ironic that the naysayers on here are complaining about …uh…..”gay stereotypes” and are demanding, as their solution, to have gay characters that embody prototypically …uh..”man” stereotypes?

    “stereotypes are bad! they make us look bad! i wish there was a gay character that did manly-man things like drink beer and play football!”

    honeybuns, you’re still dealing in stereotypes…..

    but i get it. one set of stereotypes makes you feel comfortable and one set makes you uncomfortable. but you can’t sit here decrying “stereotypes” in a non-discerning manner whilst then demanding that other stereotypes be featured instead.

  79. says

    when was the last time you heard some straight dude say “just because i’m straight doesn’t mean that i have to like sports and ted nugent and guns, ok??!! you know, some of us straight guys also like theatre, and the arts and are cultured, and I’m so sick of the media always telling me that i’m supposed to be interested in cars and deep fried foods!”


  80. jomicur says

    Carlivati put his finger on the problem himself, in his comment about how many women like the character: This is still one more gay character designed to fit straight preconceptions about gay men.

    We’ve had more than enough such characters, Mr. Carlivati, and if you don’t understand why it’s problematic, you’re not fit to be pontificating on the issue. The fact that some of those characters were created by gay men, and in some cases even played by gay men, doesn’t make the situation better, it makes it worse. Remember: Stepin Fechit was really black.

  81. Trent Clegg says

    Mr. Carlivati, I LOVE what you’re doing with GH! And I’m excited to see where this new character goes. Thank you, thank you, thank you for keeping the ABC soaps alive and giving them a fighting chance at surviving!

  82. says

    Jomicur, you need to man the f**k up and stop living each day worrying about what The Straight People are thinking. seriously.

    your comparison to stepin fetchit proves me right – attempt to articulate how this portrayal is in any way inherently negative.

    helpful hint – just because you have straight idiots in your life who mock and belittle gay men like this character doesn’t mean their prejudices are justified 😉

    and yet again, still waiting for one of “this is a bad stereotype!!!” commenters to put a face to their comments.

    it’s always those who refuse to stand up to be counted who complain the most about “representation” of gays…..

  83. Bill says

    At best, this is lazy character writing and Carlivati knows it.

    His defensiveness in his reply to Andy reveals that quite clearly.

    Instead of taking in the criticism offered, Carlivati chooses to blame the gay people who had a bad reaction to his character, rather than LOOK at that reaction and ask himself why.

    Carlivati’s response on this web site reveals a man whose ego was hurt and who decided to scold those who hurt his ego rather than listen to what they were criticizing.

    Daytime TV is just FULL of drama queens, huh, Carlivati?

  84. says

    @LittleKiwi Which commenter asked for a portrayal of a gay man as a masculine stereotype? You noticed this, huh? (Masculinity is not itself a stereotype any more than homosexuality is itself a stereotype. They’re both real, identifiable phenomena.)

    Why don’t you respond to self-avowed effeminate guys (specifically, Hector and Stuffed Animal) who object to the General Hospital character and to gay stereotyping? Stuffed Animal objects to the stereotyping of specifically effeminate gay men as “refugees from a drag pageant”; and Hector apparently objects to the misrepresentation of his effeminacy as intrinsic to his sexuality.

    You’re assuming critics identify as masculine, and you’re assuming they’re motivated by animosity towards effeminate men. It seems like you still have a bone to pick in some erstwhile argument.

    I highly recommend a study titled “Reported Effects of Masculine Ideals on Gay Men” freely available in full on PubMed (link in my name). It does a better job explaining what motivates masculinity-idealizing gay men. (Ten percent of the sample believe “being gay negates one’s masculinity”, to corroborate my more-than-incidental run-ins with effeminate gay men who believe that no gay men are masculine.)

  85. mike/ says

    it’s interesting that this is coming up on a Scottish soap also – River City. exact same discussion about Robby, one of the long running main characters, who people, mostly gays, are having the same response to. what’s more interesting is that Robbie is married to Will who is a very masculine police detective!

    the discussion is clouded as to what people are thinking about how Will could love and marry Robbie! that part is being avoided.

    for my part i say, ‘get over it!’ once you do, you will realize that there really was nothing to get over. it’s all your own fear…

  86. Patrick says

    “Not because I think gay men love lipstick, and certainly not to “establish” himself as gay. But even if that were the reason, so what?”

    But Mr. Carlivati, you are being disingenuous here. Of course it was to establish that the character was gay. I see nothing wrong with that, myself, but let’s at least be completely honest here.

    I actually started watching General Hospital several days ago after a 20 year absence, and I had the tv on in the background while I was working last week and hadn’t been watching the episode closely when I first turned and saw the new character. Not having heard any dialogue…I looked at him and said to myself, “oh, he’s gay”. I am now quite surprised that my gaydar can actually detect the homosexuality of a fictional character in just five seconds of only looking at him on tv. Good work.

  87. says

    I call your bluff, Kyle.

    totally call your bluff.

    why on earth would an, uh, “effeminate gay male” say that “no gay men are masculine”? effeminate gay men tend not to be Closeted, and thus live and interact with other gay men on an almost-daily basis. Thus, they’d be around them. All the time.

    But nice try, strawman jones 😀

    Stuffed Animal is an insecure ninny who believes non-Christians go to hell and gets angry at self-identifying Queer people who use the word Queer. longstoryshort – he’s about as empowered as a gay man as Marcus Bachmann.

    how about you link us to your own page so we can see who you are? 😀

  88. Dan says

    What’s bad is he made the character black. The black gay community has a hard time coming out because all the stereotypes in mainstream media are that black gay = black femme stereotype. It would have been groundbreaking to make the character a masculine gay black man instead. Name the mainstream masculine gay black men on network (not cable) tv. Where are they? The black community needs to be shown that being gay doesn’t mean you can’t be masculine.

  89. Karen says

    Felix is fun. So what if he is a bit eccentric. If you were a GH fan you would have known the min he said “co-co” that it was a plot point. Shame on you for jumping to stereotype.
    Even if it hadn’d been a plot point: I wish more men carried lipstick in their scrubs and weren’t afraid to use it.

    Out, proud, and glad to see a man who knows how to wield a liptsick on daytime.

  90. says

    1) I am huge fan of Carlivati’s work on GH. I’ve started watching regularly again after almost 10 years. 2)I have not yet seen the episode introducing Felix. 3) I am a huge homogaysexual. All of that being said, from what I am hearing about the introduction with the lipstick blah blah blah the problem is not his behavior but the way in which he was introduced. Homegurl could have a sack of glitter and a bag of dicks on her for all I care but it’s the helping the co worker with the lipstick that is the problem. Sounds to me like Felix is immediately introduced as a helper, a sidekick, a second fiddle to a straight woman. Too often gay men are portrayed on TV and in film geared towards straight people, (particularly women – Carlivati’s beloved ‘core audience’) as the hair dresser, the wedding planner, the cosmetician. It does smack a bit of minstrelsy. Would it have been impossible to introduce the character who WORKS IN A HOSPITAL by having him SAVE A LIFE? Or heavens to betsy by flirting with another male co -worker? No he has to be introduced in a fairly neutered and non threatening manner to ease the legions of daytime viewers still pining away for the Queer Eye team. These images and roles are insidious. They creep into the mainstream and solidify as the idea of gay men as always the bride helper and never the bride. I would applaud Carlivati’s efforts if this were 2000 but in 2012 I expect a bit more. I’m watching you Mz C!

  91. says

    “No he has to be introduced in a fairly neutered and non threatening manner to ease the legions of daytime viewers still pining away for the Queer Eye team.”

    What I find most interesting about that comment of yours is how it parallels the comments made by some (most? all?) of the angry-naysayers on here….

    ….they seem to feel it would be better if this, and probably ALL, gay characters were introduced or depicted…in way that would be appealing to heterosexual anti-gay males.

    is that not a neutering as well? to portray gays in a way that…what, exactly? caters to how a woman feels about gay men? how an anti-gay misogynistic man feels about gay men?

    “make him gay, but not a f@g” seems to be what some folks want. which is odd.

    so, when gay characters are introduced to a target demographic, what’s really the best way to please everyone?

    can everyone even be pleased?

  92. says

    Nope they can’t. Again, for my money he can be a big ‘ol, fag, queen, nelly, mary etc that is A OK. I take no issue with gay men being portrayed as effeminate or campy. It’s a bigger issue of what his function is in terms of the action of the storyline. Is he there to serve the straight folks or is he there to be an equal with a story line that includes romance, danger and excitement like all of the other characters on a soap? If his sole function is to put lipstick on girls and be witty… I have no use for it.

  93. says

    well, then it’s too soon to say.

    a few days ago i was riding the subway and helped a woman by carrying her baby, in its big-ass stroller, down the subway stairs. she thanked me, and said “i bet your girlfriend just loves you.”

    i replied ” boyfriend, actually. and yes, he does.”

    we both smiled.

    now, i’m not there just to serve straight single mothers as they make their way through the subway systems alone 😉

    but i do know what you mean. it’s like the film, GHOST – what did Whoopi’s character do besides help two white people with their issues?

    no life of her own. we didn’t get into her life. she existed to reunite two white souls.

    that said, from what i’ve seen of this so far – he’s not particularly “effeminate” per se…. classically gay, one may conclude, but not actually specifically “feminine”….unless we’re calling compassion and grace and kindness to be specifically feminine qualities…

  94. Bart says

    Save us all from the political correctnesss police. The character causing this uproar is brand new with all of about a half hour of screen time. We know very little about him. The plotline he is involved with concerns an AIDS fundraiser, which he has expressed a deep commitment to, something I think everyone here would agree is laudatory. The whole lipstick/cosmetic sales is a plot devide (soaps do work in short hand at time) to lead them to return one of the great over the top characters (female) who is a cosmetic mogul to the canvas. Yes, this time Ron created a slightly fey character — on One Life to Live he created a macho policeman whose emerging from the closet was a great story (and played by an out actor yet). Funny, during that story I don’t remember anyone here complaining about the stereotypical angry protesting homophobe (played by the wonderful Jackie Hoffman).

  95. Bobbie says

    I don’t like the gay characters … so much so, I’m close to ending my days watching General Hospital, after watching it for 30 years. And all the other women I know who watch it faithfully agree. Take the homosex. off the show!