Thoughts 1.3, 3.2 & 4.3: Include, Don't Exclude

[verasteine]

I watched Torchwood series 1 and 2 out of order. I started on Torchwood series 2, and after enjoying that immensely, I went on to buy series 1 on DVD and watched that. And one night, late, I got to episode 12, and I had an epiphany. Please bear with me. Because this was not the sort of epiphany that I pride myself on, nor one that should come as a

Comments

[smirnoffmule]

I think myself there is a time for it to not matter and a time to talk about it; when I see queer people on the TV, I do appreciate if their experience appears to be authentic and something I can relate to. I agree Eastenders is not the pinnacle of such a standard, but that's why dealing more overtly with Ianto's sexuality in CoE didn't bother me. It's been NBD for two series, so it really isn't what defines this character; if it were never an issue for him in the wider world at all, that, for me, would be kind of like trying to have cake and eat it. Like... having a character who's a POC and never once acknowledging his/her cultural background, which yeah, shouldn't influence how you view the character, but at the same time it is an important part of his/her identity and where they come from. Forgetting that your POC character is actually not just a white person with dark skin. And similarly forgetting your queers actually aren't just straight people with straight people concerns and straight people issues; there is another layer

[verasteine]

Oh, I agree with you. I'd like a story that is about as much about "the gay" as a story about a woman would be about being female, or a story about a black person is about being black. Because it does make differences, and yes, Ianto is a prime example of how it's handled well. His sexuality doesn't define him or his life, but they do alter his experiences. And showing those alterations opens those on the outside (loosely phrased) up to seeing the world through his eyes. In short, the medium used well.

I'm a bit embarrassed that my thinky thoughts concern Eastenders. :)

[thaddeusfavour]

Like... having a character who's a POC and never once acknowledging his/her cultural background, which yeah, shouldn't influence how you view the character, but at the same time it is an important part of his/her identity and where they come from.

I was thinking that too, but kind of shorthanded it with "acceptance". Accepting someone for who they are, of which race/sexuality/gender/etc. is a part of them, but doesn't make them better or worse in any way.

For instance the whole "my gay friend" thing. No, they're your friend, they happen to be gay. It's part of who they are but shouldn't be stuck on all your interactions with them like a label on a can of peas beans. (Had to be beans!)

Someone years ago once said to me, "I don't see color when I look at a person." Now, I know what they meant, but I think ignoring part of who someone is, isn't the way to go. Just, refrain from making value judgments based on those criteria.

[godofstrife]

This is what I loved about Torchwood. Nothing felt singled out or ignored. I never got the feeling that it was trying to excuse, explain, or emphasize sexual orientation. That's what made it special. Torchwood was the first programme I watched that featured GLBT content, thus it is an important part of my growing up and view of society and my place in it. The show itself, however, is merely the base for this, being in this fandom makes me more aware of myself, the people around me and society as a whole than any discussion in ethic class ever did.

[verasteine]

You and me both. Because fandom allows me to connect with like-minded people, so that a discussion always turns into learning, and I love that so hard because I don't learn well in institutional settings. And you don't get taught respect in ethics class. And respect should be the basis of all things.

[wynkat1313]

Thank you for this. Discussions like this, the fact that they exist at all, that we do dig and poke at what we think and why we think what we think are so very important in life, and are part of what I love about fandom

[verasteine]

I get what you're trying to say :).

I think questioning what you do and why you do it is an important thing, and other people's words make me think, wonder how it applies to myself. We look at things through the filter of our own experiences, but only in trying to understand the filters of others can we understand humanity. And now I sound really lofty. Forgive me. In short, you're welcome. Glad I can make you think.

[wynkat1313]

Thanks :) nice to know it did not come out as gibberishy as I feared it did.

Lofty is okay (by me at least), sometimes that's where this conversations should go. Part of why I think I get tongue tied is that this is all about understanding humanity and helping all of us better appreciate the stew that we are. We are all different bits and pieces of ideas and needs and views and that to me is what is glorious. We need that diversity, but we also need to not be afraid of both the differences and similarities in each person. I suspect one of my goals in life is to help people be less afraid of each other, which is why I adore Torchwood and any show that can say "this is just who we are, now can we go have fun and catch this alien please?"

Of course running of and discovering I was clergy kind of opened my head wide to a whole universe of lofty ideas :) funny how spiritual work will do that.

[verasteine]

It's the great thing about Torchwood, how the personal issues take a back seat and are somehow magnified through it.

My lofti-ness comes from law school, where I learned the vocabulary to express the grand schemes and thoughts in my brain. And if we don't strive to improve, what's the point of all of it? Which ever way we go about doing it, spiritually or otherwise, I do really love the ideal of always bettering yourself.

[verasteine]

It's poor writing, and I dislike that, but it's so easy and insidious a trap to fall into. It took me a long time to figure out what bothered me, but really, you can see it across the board, and it's disturbing how much television is made for white, straight, christian people, whether you fit into that group yourself or not.

I think there's a presumptuousness in straight, white, christian authors trying to tell the rest of the universe the story of someone who's not that, whether it's gay or ethnicity. All of us are more than one facet, like you say.

[phaetonschariot]

Our national soap opera here currently has a character who is asexual. I love it. Gays are getting more screentime, which is fantastic, but you almost never see asexuality acknowledged on tv. He had at one point been in a relationship with quite a sweet girl but was really uncomfortable when she wanted to take it further, and not quite sure why. Eventually he figured out he just had no interest in sex, and they stayed together for a bit but eventually broke up and she got with someone else. (As people in soap operas do.) He's still hanging around on the show, having his friends and his job. I don't know the details of the current storylines anymore, I rarely watch, but I think at one point the ex-girlfriend was being a surrogate for some friends, got pregnant with triplets, the friends decided they couldn't handle it, so Gerald and her were going to raise the kids together. Not sure how that all worked out. But apart from when he was first figuring himself out, there's been very little focusing on him being asexual. He just is. And it

[verasteine]

This prompts me to ask you where you live :).

But, you know, this is really cool. I do feel we're getting there, but it's so easy for writers to write something (a gay character, a black character) and reducing that to one sole facet and its consequences. Asexuality is another underrepresented aspect that doesn't need to domineer storylines, and especially in a soap opera it's commendable to the authors, because that must make life hard for the writers!

[phaetonschariot]

New Zealand! Where prostitution and gay marriage are both legal.

Though personally my favourite thing about when they made.... one of them.... I think it was civil unions, legal, there was one MP who voted for it who said that in his religion (some variety of Muslim beliefs) it was considered wrong and a sin, but that's a minority religion here and he believes in separation of church and state so he voted for it anyway. And it's a little bit sad that I still remember him saying that years later and being happy about it, coz it's the whole... congratulating people for being decent to each other, when ideally it should be the norm. But it's a start, at least.

[verasteine]

Ah, the other side of the globe! We have legal gay marriage and legal prostitution, too. I'll raise you legal marihuana, though :).

That's, by the way, one fantastic parliamentarian. That would stick with me, too. We'll change the world, one parliamentarian at the time...