Why are Queer boys cast in “straight” roles?
Hola. ¿Qué tal? I’ve been monitoring the telenovela ¿Quién Mató a Patricia Soler? (QMAPS) on MundoFox by RTI Producciones for Canal RCN Bogotá. QMAPS, set in beautiful Bogotá, Colombia is the telenovela with the conservative drab-dull colour scheme of black, coffin-gray and white. Just because the title of the novela is (translation): “Who Killed Patricia Soler” doesn’t mean everybody has to wear funeral clothes/colours. But they are the conservative colours that the sheeple have been told by their television to wear these days as moda/fashion/fad. It’s one of the first things I noticed about this telenovela was their fear of colours. Black, coffin-gray and white make for a very uninteresting-looking screen/set using all drab colours. (It that why it got moved from 9pm to 11pm?) But lately, perhaps they tired of the dull funeral colours because now I’m seeing some more pretty colours. Not many, but some. With one of the main characters, Sebastián (played by Miguel de Miguel desde España), I never see him in anything but drab coffin-gray and white. He wears a white shirt, a coffin-gray suit and coffin-gray tie. Su oficina/His office colours are black and coffin-gray. This is also the telenovela with three actors who were in Yo soy Betty, la fea: Doña Marcela, Don Mario and Dr Sánchez (el abogodo for Betty y Nicolás). While writing this I saw a very unrealistic restaurant scene in QMAPS. Everyone within camera view in this restaurante had on black or coffin-gray (or both) clothing. Now that’s getting a bit extreme, don’t you think?
For awhile now, my very reliable gaydar has told me there are at least a couple of Queer boys in the cast, but I’ve been annoyed to see them making out with una hembra (a female). It doesn’t look right. From what I’ve seen all of the roles cast are heterosexual. ¿Por qué?/Why? I wondered why that was because it doesn’t reflect society.
We’ve been told repeatedly by some delusional and wishful-thinking GLBTQ conservative idiots in San Francisco that, “gay is now mainstream.” Well if that were the case (which it isn’t), I’d see gay couples, gay couples kissing, gay couples holding hands, gay couples embracing, gay couples making out and gay couples pretending to have sex regularly on my television. But what I see on my television regularly is heterosexual, heteronormative programming all the time. I constantly see “straights” sucking face, making out and embracing and giving the appearance that they are about to fuck, and then the camera moves away. I don’t see gay couples on my television. So don’t tell me that “gay is mainstream” because that is bullshit wishful-thinking. And even when it’s noticias/news about GLBTQs, the corporate media networks feel they must show las lesbianas/lesbians embracing or kissing—because the corporate networks consider las lesbianas “safer” for their bigoted/prudish audience—instead of showing gay guys kissing and embracing. On a corporate site recently I did see one picture of two guys supposedly kissing. I say supposedly because I had to examine the picture closely to see what they were doing. After examining the picture I thought: Well that’s a new approach bigoted/prejudiced corporate media. In their attempt to sanitise the picture of the two gay guys kissing they showed the two guys but one guy was kissing near the ear of the other guy. All the way back at his ear. And the guy being kissed had his left hand holding the other guy’s head. He was not kissing him on the lips or anywhere on his face. No, you can’t have that. What will our prejudiced, bigoted and hateful readers/viewers think? So of course that’s the picture they chose to use. Nice and sanitised. We’re also told that “gays can now live anywhere.” HA! Where do people get this shit from? What delusion-inducing drugs are these people on who say this stuff? I learned sometime ago that the conservatives who have long-hated gay areas and wanted to make them “straight” and white always repeat the “gays can live anywhere” lie. Well, gay people might be able to live anywhere (and that’s very questionable) if we live in that unhealthy fucking closet. I would point out that physical violence against GLBTQs because of their sexual orientation happens daily somewhere, so don’t come at me with that “gays can live anywhere” bullshit. (Related: EXPERT: ‘Desperate Anger’ Is Driving The Rise In Anti-Gay Hatred).
The Gay Rights’ Movement fought decades for me to go back in the closet and be “discreet,” “straight-acting” and “straight-looking.”
I would also point out that if “gays could live anywhere” they wouldn’t be going back in the closet and living in the closet in San Francisco of all places! (the former Gay Mecca) and in Manhattan (as two examples). They wouldn’t be sanitising themselves by removing their bling/earrings/rad earplugs and rad-alternative hairstyles and trying to look cookie-cutter “mainstream”, macho “straight,” and calling themselves “discreet” and “down-low” and “straight-acting” and other fucked-up-in-the-head gay shame/heteronormative ways of thinking. GLBTQs seem to be having a major identity crisis. They don’t seem to know who the fuck they are. Today, they seem to be trying to be as mainstream, corporate and sheeple as possible and completely divorcing themselves from their radical history, as if ashamed of it. (Related: The “Discreet” Gay Guys in New York City). I used to see lots of Rainbow Flags flying from home and apartment windows and on bumper stickers in San Francisco’s Castro/Upper Market area during the Gay Mecca days. But today in the New Conservative Techie San Francisco? It’s rare to see Rainbow Flags at all other than on the outside of some gay bars. So if “gays could live anywhere,” gays wouldn’t be putting the Rainbow Flag back in the closet and trying to “assimilate” by being heteronormative around (bigoted?) “straights” who like taking over gay areas and turning them into sanitised, prudish, “family-friendly” (Translation: “straight” and white with lots of screaming children in condominium-sized strollers clogging up the sidewalks) conservative places (think: Walnut Creek, California) with the help of conservative GLBTQs.
So why are Queer boys cast in “straight” roles? Why don’t they cast Queer boys in gay roles? Or do they think the viewers or advertisers can’t deal with seeing gay couples making out and embracing, and pretending to have sex before the camera moves away, like they do with “straight” scenes? But I thought that “gays are now mainstream,” no? Not at all. There is still lots of institutionalised/establishment prejudice and bigotry in society which doesn’t at all get erased or legislatively removed by court orders, laws written or referendums. And from what I’ve read, same-gender marriage (for example) is way down on the list of importance to most people. And even in places where same-gender marriage is legal there’s still a lot of resentment and resistance to it especially in the US of Hypocrisy/Los Estados Unidos. GLBTQs should have the same rights as “straights,” but that doesn’t mean we have to mirror them as so many GLBTQs are doing in their desperate desire to be accepted by those precious “straights” (as if their opinion matters about and above anything). I’m not too hot on same-gender marriage to begin with. I oppose the conservative “Institution of Marriage”TM for anyone because it’s nothing but a legal contract. I remember Lily Tomlin saying that she had hoped that gay people could come up with something a little bit better than marriage and trying to emulate and be like “straight” people. Right-on, Lily! And then you have the fucked-up US public, get this: US public: Gay legal rights are good but gays kissing is bad. (WTF?) “The national study, which polled more than 1000 USans, found that heterosexuals approve more of legal protections for gay people than they do gays kissing in public.” [roll eyes] Well who gives a fuck what they think? And of course if you asked the same people about heterosexual besos, they would say heterosexual besos/kissing is perfectly fine and acceptable in public. Fucking hypocrites.
Some “straight” actors have played gay roles such as Julián Arango who played Don Hugo Lombardi in Fernando Gaitán’s masterpiece Yo soy Betty, la fea. Don Hugo’s boyfriend in BLF was/is also “straight” in real life. Then Jorge Enrique Abello (who superbly played Don Armando in YSBLF) and Patrick Delmas (who played Don Michell Doinel in YSBLF) went on to later be cast in roles as a gay couple in a telenovela. Both JEA and Delmas are “straight.” But we don’t see any besos or make-out scenes when “straight” actors are playing gay characters. But when Queer boys play “straight” characters we see make-out scenes. It turns me off because it doesn’t look right or realistic. I see a Queer boy making out with a female and I think WTF? He’s forced to make out with una hembra/a female per the role he’s cast in. I know I can’t be the only person to pick up on this. I’ve been watching the telenovela Rebelde on UniMás that cantante/singer y actor Christian Chávez was in. He later came out as a Queer boy after that, but in that telenovela he had to show affection to las chicas (per the script) and to me he looked uncomfortable doing so. He looked a bit put-off by it and it didn’t look natural for him and understandably so because he’s gay and has no interest in making out with las muchachas. There are many gay actors—even though they may still be in that unhealthy closet with their gay shame—so why not cast gay actors in gay roles and “straight” actors in “straight” roles? Or would that cause Queer actors to be out of work entirely because of a lack of gay roles and especially a lack of roles for and showing gay couples? But I thought that “gay is now mainstream?” [roll eyes] Chau.—el barrio rosa