Gay Characters in Prime Time Television: the Gay Angel

Home , Acafellas, Blake Carrington, Carrington family, Furt, I Refuse to Lose, Jodie Dallas

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments……………………………………………………...... iii

Thesis Abstract…………………………………………………………………... iv

Introduction……………………………………………………………………… 1

Chapter One……………………………………………………………………… 10

Chapter Two……………………………………………………………………… 41

Chapter Three…………………………………………………………………….. 76

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………... 112

Bibliography……………………………………………………………………… 119

Acknowledgments

Dr. Anne Lombard, I am truly honored to have had the opportunity to work with you as my thesis chair. Your support and friendship over the years have been invaluable to me.

Dr. Jill Watts, you inspired my pursuit of history. Your guidance throughout my years as an undergraduate and graduate student helped make this thesis possible.

Thank you for your continued support as a committee member. I am forever grateful to you.

Dr. Katherine Hijar, thank you for allowing me the privilege of having you as a committee member. Your interest and insight at the beginning stages of my thesis helped me focus my research on television, and your continued efforts and suggestions added to the strength my thesis.

Christine Parr, thank you for your encouragement to continue on with my education and the hours you spent reading and re-reading my thesis drafts. I appreciate all your efforts.

Gary and Denise Hill, thank you for everything that you have done for me.

You both are truly exceptional parents.

To all of my fellow graduate students, I have greatly enjoyed all of our years together and the friendships we have made.

Sunshine Staalenburg, thank you for your love and support during the last months of my graduate school.

iii

Thesis Abstract

Unlike the members of other minority groups, homosexuals can hide or ―pass‖ in a straight-dominated world to avoid public hostility. Because of the reluctance of many gay individuals to publicize their status, visual media including film and television came to play an important role in shaping most Americans‘ views about gay people and gay identity during the twentieth century. It was the media that explored and communicated who homosexuals were and how they related to society.

Since the 1960s, television has been the main medium through which the American public learned about this minority group. Because television shows are the products of so many forces, historical shifts and fluctuations in their content and themes provide important indicators of shifts and fluctuations in American society and culture. This thesis will examine the representation of gay male characters, same-sex relationships, and gay themes in three of these American television series: Soap, which ran from 1977 to 1981, Dynasty, which lasted from 1981 until 1989 (with a reunion miniseries in 1991), and Dawson‟s Creek, airing from 1998 to 2003. This thesis will argue that these representations shifted over time from a heterocentric understanding of homosexuality to a more homocentric view of the gay identity and the mores of the gay community.

Key words: Gay, Angel, Homosexuality, Television, Media, Stereotypes

Introduction

Homosexuals in the United States are an enigma as a minority, invisible unless they choose to openly announce to society that they are gay, known as

―coming out.‖ At least since the 1930s, they have been subject to personal attacks and prejudice, facing a hostility that reached its height during the post-war period.1

Yet unlike the members of other minority groups, homosexuals can hide or ―pass‖ in a straight-dominated world to avoid public hostility. The social stigma and overt negative reactions many gay people face when they are honest about themselves makes it risky and sometimes dangerous for them to come out. Because of the reluctance of many gay individuals to publicize their status, visual media including film and television came to play an important role in shaping most Americans‘ views about gay people and gay identity during the twentieth century. It was the media that explored and communicated who homosexuals were and how they related to society.

Since the 1960s, television has been the main medium through which the American public learned about this minority group.

For the past half century or more, television shows have permeated

Americans‘ lives, providing entertainment as well as social and cultural

1 George Chauncey, Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World, 1890-1940 (New York: Basic Books, 1994), 331-334; John D‘Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United Sates, 1940-1970, 2d ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 91; Estelle Freedman, ―‘Uncontrolled Desires:‘ The Response to the Sexual Psychopath, 1920-1950,‖ Journal of American History, Vol. 74, No.1 (June 1987), 199- 201.

commentaries. They are not simply static representations of the creators‘ societal views but result from an array of influential variables including censorship rules, advertising, audience responses, writers' creative and political commitments, and networks‘ ideas about what topics will draw a viewership.2 Because television shows are the products of so many forces, historical shifts and fluctuations in their content and themes provide important indicators of shifts and fluctuations in American society and culture.

During the early decades of television, the depiction of homosexual characters built upon stereotypes that had existed in film since about 1930, in which homosexuality was portrayed as a dangerous menace to society. Although censors prohibited positive depictions of gay men and women, they permitted shows and scripts with obviously negative gay characters.3 However, a loosening of censorship rules in the 1970s and 1980s coincided with various cultural shifts, and television writers gradually became committed to presenting issues of human sexuality in a more honest and forthright way in their work.4 Between 1970 and the early 2000s, a number of long running shows were produced featuring openly gay characters involved in loving same-sex relationships. What is most interesting about these shows, in terms of their influence on Americans‘ understanding of gay people and

2 David S. Silverman, “You Can‟t Air That”: Four Cases of Controversy and Censorship in American Television Programming (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2007), Kindle edition. 3 Vito Russo, The Celluloid Closet: Homosexuality in the Movies, revised ed. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987), 48-59. 4 Stephen Tropiano, The Prime Time Closet: A History of Gays and Lesbians on TV (New York: Applause Theatre & Cinema, 2002), 12-13, 109.

their experiences, was the gradual shift away from the negative stereotypes that had long dominated the characterization of gay people in film and television, towards a more sympathetic portrayal of gay characters as loving, responsible members of their families and communities.

This thesis will examine the representation of gay male characters, same-sex relationships, and gay themes in three of these American television series: Soap, which ran from 1977 to 1981, Dynasty, which lasted from 1981 until 1989 (with a reunion miniseries in 1991), and Dawson‟s Creek, airing from 1998 to 2003.5 All three prime time shows contained major gay male characters and were popular. Soap was one of the first successful shows to feature a homosexual man as a main character, Dynasty lasted throughout the 1980s, and Dawson‟s Creek was one of the first shows geared towards a teenaged audience with a major gay character. Because each of these shows represented a major shift in the content presented to American television audiences, they provide valuable primary sources for understanding changes in cultural representations of homosexuality in late twentieth century

America. This thesis will argue that these representations shifted over time from a heterocentric understanding of homosexuality to a more homocentric view of the gay identity and the mores of the gay community.6

5 Representations of openly lesbian main characters emerged later and had different implications which will not be addressed in this thesis. 6 I define heterocentric as a way to view homosexuality through a heterosexual understanding, versus homocentric which instead looks at homosexuality through a homosexual understanding and experience.

The history of homosexuality is still fairly new territory for American historians, having first become a topic for serious scholarly attention only in the

1970s. Historians who have looked at the history of homosexuality have generally examined the treatment and experiences of homosexual men and women, particularly before the emergence of the modern Gay Rights Movement. Some scholars, like

Estelle Freedman and John D'Emilio, have focused on the various ways in which

American government and society actively worked to control ideas about sexuality overall and to stigmatize homosexuality specifically, especially between 1930 and

1960. Both argue that sexual nonconformity during the Cold War signaled a ―need‖ to return to ―traditional‖ gender roles in an effort to promote stability and conformity for the purpose of national security.7 Others, like Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, Lillian

Faderman, and George Chauncey, have found that historically variable ideas about sexuality and sexual identity made the experiences of gay men and women during the

19th and early 20th centuries differ greatly from those in the middle of the 20th century.8 Smith-Rosenberg argues that 19th century female same-sex relationships were socially and culturally acceptable as well as compatible with heterosexual

7Freedman, ―‗Uncontrolled Desires‘;‖ John D‘Emilio, ―The Homosexual Menace: The Politics of Sexuality in Cold War America,‖ in Kathy Peiss and Christina Simmons, eds., Passion and Power: Sexuality in History (1989); D‘Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities; John D‘Emilio, The World Turned: Essays and Gay History, Politics, and Culture (London: Duke University Press, 2002). 8 Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, Disorderly Conduct: Visions of Gender in Victorian America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985); Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, ―The New Woman and the New History,‖ Feminist Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1/2 (Autumn 1975); Lillian Faderman, Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth Century America (New York: Penguin, 1992); Chauncey, Gay New York.

marriage.9 Similarly, Chauncey finds that during the 19th and early 20th century gay men were not seen as threats to society, as in later decades, but were tolerated and seen as amusements. This began to change, according to Chauncey, during the 1930s, when gay men were increasingly targeted by law enforcement authorities and stigmatized by new negative cultural stereotypes.10

Mass media representations of gay people (as opposed to gay people‘s experiences) have been the subject of cultural studies scholars more than of historians. In 1981, Vito Russo explored depictions of homosexuality in film with

The Celluloid Closet, which he later revised in 1987.11 He sought to put an end to the ignorance of what he deemed ―dirty secrets‖ by bringing to the forefront homosexual stereotypes in film and calling attention to the negative portrayals of gay characters in these films.12 Since then, authors such as Larry Gross, Rodger Streitmatter and

Suzanna Walters have examined the gradually increasing visibility of gay characters in the media, and how that visibility has impacted gay rights.13 Stephen Tropiano‘s

The Prime Time Closet provides an important overview of homosexuality in television,14 and Harry Benshoff and Sean Griffin‘s Queer Images updates Russo‘s

9 Smith-Rosenberg, Disorderly Conduct, 53-76. 10 Chauncey, Gay New York, 57. 11 Russo, Celluloid Closet. 12 Ibid., xii. 13 Larry Gross, Up From Invisibility: Lesbians, Gay Men, and the Media in America (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001); Rodger Streitmatter, From „Perverts‟ to „Fab Five‟: The Media‟s Changing Depiction of Gay Men and Lesbians (New York: Routledge, 2009); Suzanna Danuta Walters, All the Rage: The Story of Gay Invisibility in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001). 14 Tropiano, Prime Time Closet.

work on the history of homosexual depictions and themes in American film.15 The shifting depictions noted by these authors are themselves worthy of further study.

As the philosopher Martha Nussbaum has argued, depictions of homosexuals have served important political purposes that deserve scholarly consideration.16 She explains that the religious right has continued, into the 2000s, to foster a disgust response to undermine equal rights for gays by, ―depicting the sexual practices of lesbians and, especially, gay men as vile and revolting…[and] suggest[ing] that such practices contaminate and defile society, producing decay and degeneration.‖17

Because of this, Nussbaum highlights the importance of developing a social understanding of the experiences of gays and lesbians through gay visibility.18 She notes the need for openly gay role models ―...and, perhaps even more important, the growing presence of lesbian and gay characters in mainstream media, where countless viewers learn to identify with their stories and emotions.‖19 Nussbaum‘s argument suggests it is relevant to take a closer look at how gay characters in established television shows have been developed over time to combat social disgust.

The story of this development is not a simple story of liberation or triumph.

An interesting parallel exists between the gradually more positive depictions of gay male characters in film and television and the more positive depictions of African

15 Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin, Queer Images: A History of Gay and Lesbian Film in America (New York: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006). 16 Martha C. Nussbaum, From Disgust to Humanity: Sexual Orientation and Constitutional Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). 17 Ibid., xiv. 18 Ibid., xvii. 19 Ibid., xviii.

Americans that helped transition expectations away from the villainous black brutes and the comedic coon stereotypes found in American film before 1960. Krin Gabbard has called attention to what he calls the black angel, a figure who has frequently appeared since the 1960s in films whose central characters are whites but also feature a positive black character. The black angel character is unrealistically saintly or unselfish, and sacrifices him or herself to help the central white character achieve moral growth or a spiritual epiphany. As Gabbard suggests, black angel characters enable filmmakers ―to displace the realities of African American history into … viewer-friendly narratives.‖20

They can also create scenes of easy and unproblematic black/white reconciliation, often providing the audience with an emotional, even cathartic moment....Thus, the white protagonist inevitably remains the central figure, and the black angel unselfishly moves heaven and earth to keep it that way.21

Because the African American characters in such films remain ―outside of the hierarchies dominated by whites, …audiences are less likely to notice the old structures of power still standing just outside their field of vision.‖22

Similar to the black angel, I have identified a ―gay angel‖ in the depiction of gay male characters on television. After 1970, ―gay angels,‖ or highly moral gay male characters, were used to combat the social disgust evoked by the negative stereotypes of the homosexual menace. In these early shows, the gay angels are a

20 Krin Gabbard, Black Magic: White Hollywood and African American Culture (New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 2004), 144. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid.

reflection of the heterosexual creators‘ views, because of this gay angels did not pose a radical challenge to prevailing social assumptions; like the black angel, gay angels are meant to sacrifice themselves to uphold the heterocentric social order. A shift occurs only in the 1990s with Dawson‟s Creek, a show that challenges the gay angel and heterocentric focus because the creator used his own experiences as a gay man to create a homocentric focus instead.23 It is also important to note that these advances are focused on males and not females in these particular series.

This thesis will follow the development of the gay angel on television as well as the shift away from this stereotype. It will focus on the long running prime time shows noted above because they had the most influential time slots and allowed audiences to come to know and care about the characters as they developed. Taking an in-depth look at how the gay characters developed throughout each series creates a better understanding of how the media, in particular television, influenced and has been influenced by social norms concerning sexuality, and how the Gay Rights

Movement was the catalyst for that change.

The first chapter provides a historical overview of film depictions of gay characters as well as censorship and gay history from the 1950s to the 1970s, then moves to an analysis of the groundbreaking television series, Soap. I argue that while the creators of Soap opened the door for future characters on television, they used

23 There were still gay angels in television at the time of Dawson‟s Creek. One notable show was Will and Grace (1998-2006), which had a heterocentric focus between a gay man and his straight, female best friend.

Jodie Dallas, as a gay angel, to not only challenge negative depictions of homosexuality in the media, but to reinforce heteronormative social relations. The second chapter covers the 1980s with Dynasty, where I argue that the creators used

Steven Carrington, as a gay angel, to convey the message that gay men needed to conform to social and familial pressures by trying to become straight. The creators, at the end of the series, did, however, break Steven out of the most of the gay angel role when he finally accepted his homosexuality. The third chapter covers the late 1990s and into the 2000s with Dawson‟s Creek. I argue that the creators of this series used the character Jack McPhee to challenge the gay angel stereotype by presenting the struggles of gay man from a homocentric perspective.

Chapter One

Homosexual characters have been present in American film from its earliest days and have reflected societal attitudes towards them. At the end of the 19th century, ideas about homosexuality were in flux as members of the medical profession in Europe and the United States began for the first time to examine questions about sexual orientation. Doctors began to characterize homosexuality (or what was then often called ―inversion‖) as a sexual perversion, a characteristic which

―reinforced a range of stereotypes associated with gay people [being]...pathological, sick, [having] something wrong with them, [and] something wrong with their bodies.‖1 The medical profession focused most of its attention at this stage on gender nonconformity, that is, men and women who reversed gender roles by behaving or dressing in ways thought more appropriate to the other gender. Early films also reflected the medical profession‘s obsession with so-called inverts, and the mannish woman and the effeminate man became the first iconic homosexual stereotypes.2

These stereotypes were captured in early film with transvestite characters such as

Miss Fatty‟s Seaside Lovers (1915), where male actors would dress as women.3 Early

1 Perry v. Schwarzenegger, ―Transcript of Court Trial Proceedings,‖ 2 U.S. 214-457 (U.S. District Court Northern California 2010), http://www.afer.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Perry- Vol- 2-1-12-10.pdf, 395. 2 Ibid. See also, George Chauncey, ―From Sexual Inversion to Homosexuality: Medicine and the Changing Conceptualization of Female Deviance,‖ Salamagundi (Fall 1982/Winter 1983), 114- 121. 3 Vito Russo, The Celluloid Closet: Homosexuality in the Movies, revised ed. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987), 6.

depictions of gay characters in film also included the comical sissy, evidenced by the effeminate cowboy in The Soldiers (1923), which ―...is one of the first examples of the use of the ‗harmless sissy‘ image to present homosexuality.‖4

Censorship rules, in addition, played a key role in creating stereotypical depictions of homosexual characters in film from the early stages in the industry‘s development. State censorship boards began to screen films prior to their release on a regular basis5 after the Supreme Court ruled that film was not protected under the

First Amendment in Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission of Ohio

(1915). In 1922, Will Hays worked with the Motion Picture Producers and

Distributors of America (MPPDA) to create an in-house censorship process.6 In 1927, the list of ―Don‘ts and Be Carefuls‖ was adopted by the MPPDA which included staying away from ―any reference to sexual perversion.‖7 Later in 1930, the Motion

Picture Production Code, also known as the Hays Code, was established and strictly forbade sexual perversion of any kind.8

Film censorship, however, did not come into full force until 1934 with the creation of the Production Code Administration and the Legion of Decency. Both were created as a response to moral indecency in film, and in turn spurred members of the film industry to strengthen the code in an effort to protect themselves from

4 Ibid., 26. 5 Films were sporadically censored prior to 1915. 6 Stephen Tropiano, Obscene, Indecent, Immoral, and Offensive: 100+ Years of Censored, Banned, and Controversial Films (New York: Limelight Editions, 2009), 31-32. 7 Ibid., 32, 269. 8 Ibid., 273.

further censorship.9 The Production Code Administration was in charge of approving plot synopses, treatments, and drafts prior to the production of films. Future drafts, costumes and music also needed approval.10 Filmmakers following the code‘s guidelines continued to depict homosexual characters in their movies, but now, instead of presenting them as comical but harmless, they increasingly presented homosexual characters as con-men, murderers, and sexual predators. Monster- characters warned of the predatory nature of the homosexual in films such as

Dracula's Daughter (1936), whose advertisement declared, ―Save the women of

London from Dracula's Daughter!"11 Films released from the 1930s through the 1950s produced the most dangerous stereotypes, as those decades coincided with a larger societal, media-fueled panic, labeling homosexuals as child molesters. Consequently, homosexuals were cast as deviants who caused ―moral decay,‖ had no moral restraints, and would "infect" and/or recruit children.12 Post-war films demonstrate a clear shift from the comical characters seen in earlier films to villains as seen in Rope

(1948) and Caged (1950).13 Importantly, the historically older depiction of the homosexual as a transvestite also disappeared, as gay characters were now dressed in traditionally gendered clothing. The new representations of gay characters coincided

9 Ibid., 52-53. 10 Ibid., 54-55. 11 Russo, Celluloid Closet, 49; Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin, Queer Images: A History of Gay and Lesbian Film in America (New York: Rowan & Littlefield, 2006), 75-77. 12 Perry, ―Transcript,‖ 397-401, 408. 13 Benshoff and Griffin, Queer Images, 36.

with a growing social and medical perception that gender identity and homosexuality were separate issues.14

A series of revisions to the Production Code began in 1952 when the Supreme

Court ruling in Joseph Burstyn, Inc v. Wilson overturned an earlier 1915 decision, thus opening the doors for more explicit sexual content in film.15 As a result, studios began challenging the Production Code Administration, leading to a gradual relaxation of policies about the depiction of homosexual characters. In 1953, United

Artists completely bypassed all censorship protocol and released The Moon is Blue

(1953) without approval; it became a box-office hit and further weakened the power of the Production Code.16 Then in 1961, the Production Code was amended to allow

―sensitive‖ depictions of homosexuals. As scholar Vito Russo argues, however, the amendment of the Production Code mostly allowed filmmakers to treat homosexuality like a ―dirty secret.‖17 As ―homosexuality officially became visible, the words fag, faggot, fruit, dyke, pansy, lezzie and sometimes even gay were used unequivocally as labels for lesbians and gay men....‖18

With the amended code providing an opening, filmmakers in the 1960s began to introduce a new type of homosexual character alongside the older ones: the gay man or woman as doomed, tragic figure. One of the films first to be approved after

14 Ibid. 37. 15 Ibid., 91. 16 Ibid. 17 Russo, Celluloid Closet, 132. 18 Ibid., 47.

the code revision was The Children's Hour (1962), adapted from a stage play with the same title.19 In this film, two women (Karen Wright and Martha Dobie) are falsely accused of having a sexual relationship and are found guilty in a court of law. This eventually prompts Martha's realization of her own actual lesbianism, which leads her to commit suicide rather than endure the shame. Advise and Consent (1962) portrays a similar storyline between two male characters. Russo calculates that, ―In twenty- two of twenty-eight films dealing with gay subjects from 1962 to 1978, major gay characters onscreen ended in suicide or violent death.‖20 Plot lines in which characters met violent ends covertly emphasized the dangers of homosexuality.

Filmmakers also used ―…lurid imagery (thundering music, tilted camera angles) that figured homosexuality as scary, sad, lonely, tragic, and destructive.‖21

Revisions to the Production Code, then, did nothing to produce sympathetic depictions of homosexuality in American film. Instead of challenging earlier negative stereotypes of homosexual characters, filmmakers continued to reinforce them. As film scholars Harry Benshoff and Sean Griffin put it, ―homosexuality was silly and comedic, villainous and scary, or shameful and tragic. The only major difference was that now filmmakers could name the condition forthrightly instead of only hinting at it.‖22

19 Benshoff and Griffin, Queer Images, 95. 20 Russo, Celluloid Closet, 52. 21 Benshoff and Griffin, Queer Images, 96. 22 Ibid., 94.

Censorship in television had a history separate from that of film, since the earliest television networks, the National Broadcasting Company (NBC), Columbia

Broadcasting System (CBS), and American Broadcasting Companies (ABC), had begun as radio broadcasters. Like their counterparts in the film industry, radio broadcasters under the auspices of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) initially created self-regulatory guidelines in order to ward off censorship beginning in 1923. The federal government became involved in regulating radio broadcasts with the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934, which were to be enforced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC was in charge of overseeing and fining broadcast stations, licensed under the federal government, for programs which were deemed indecent and caused public outcry, but only after the airing. Advertisers also played a large role in imposing self-regulatory measures on radio broadcasts. These all played a part in shaping the NAB Television

Code of 1952, which, similar to the radio code, urged educational and cultural programming and established a voluntary review system.23

Given the existence of this voluntary review system, television broadcasters were highly susceptible to political pressure, and the content of television broadcasts in the early years of the medium was generally conservative. The Red Scare of the

Cold War had a major impact, as networks shied away from hiring blacklisted performers and artists for fear of losing sponsors, and sponsors closely monitored

23 David S. Silverman, “You Can‟t Air That”: Four Cases of Controversy and Censorship in American Television Programming (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2007), Kindle edition.

television content for fear of public outcry and ensuing boycotts. This left advertisers in control of all program content until a quiz show in the late 1950s revealed a cheating and payout scandal. Afterwards, the television networks reassumed control in an effort to dodge government-mandated controls by following their own set of

Standards and Practices rather than directly involving their advertisers.24

The 1950s also reinforced an atmosphere of increasing discrimination and harassment towards gay men and women in the United States. Not only was the country in a state of paranoia, but the atmosphere of McCarthyism led to major assaults against the gay community. Government agencies at all levels labeled homosexuals as sexual perverts and threats to national security. Gay people were subjected to police raids on gay bars and monitoring by the postal service, which intercepted mail from suspected homosexuals.25 Homosexuals in state and federal government positions were targeted and expelled because of authorities‘ fears that they were easy targets for blackmail and subversion by Communists.26 Neither

Congress nor the courts offered homosexuals any legal protections. Therefore, gay individuals suppressed their identities and remained closeted for fear of being

24Silverman, “You Can‟t Air That”, Kindle edition. 25 For examples of increased policing at a local level, see George Chauncey, Gay New York: Gender, chapter 12, and Nan Alamilla Boyd, Wide Open Town: A History of Queer San Francisco (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003). 26 John D‘Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States, 1940-1970, 2d ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 46-51. See also David K. Johnson, The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004).

exposed, allowing media-generated images of homosexuals as dangerous and frightening social deviants to go mostly unchallenged.

To be sure, not everyone was silent. The earliest objections to these stereotypes began quietly in 1951, when Henry Hay founded The Mattachine Society to combat negative perceptions of homosexuality and to provide positive reinforcement to homosexuals who had internalized them. The group saw homosexuals as an oppressed minority whose members had an important culture of their own. If they affirmed that importance, Hay suggested, homosexuals would be able to have pride in both their community and their identities as gay men and women while proving that homosexuals made positive contributions to society. Still, as historian John D‘Emilio points out, the experiences of some of the members of the

Mattachine Society with anti-Communist harassment led the group to adopt ―a secret, cell-like structure that, by protecting members from exposure, allowed them to participate with relative safety in a gay organization.‖27 This may have been necessary at the time to protect the organization‘s members, but the act of hiding and denying homosexual involvement did nothing to challenge the negative perceptions the organization had formed to fight. In any case, gay people risked exposure by joining the group, and membership remained small.28

During the 1960s, however, a cultural revolution created the necessary cultural and political atmosphere for militant, public demands for gay rights and

27 D‘Emilio, Sexual Politics, 58. 28 Ibid., 87.

identity and, in the process, paved the way for more positive depictions of gay television characters. While the 1950s had generated conformism, the 1960s produced a radical spirit which fused the political with the personal.29 The convergence of the hippie counterculture‘s desire for ―a revolution in consciousness, a transformation of self that would create a personality, ethics, and style of living‖ with the New Left‘s

―political and social criticism‖ created a new social dynamic.30 Black nationalists encouraged African Americans to reject assimilation and embrace an authentically

Black cultural identity. The feminist movement encouraged women to think critically about the constraints imposed on them by socially imposed gender roles. Within the context of these broad challenges to social conventions, gay people began to re-frame the meaning of their identities and to expose and change social perceptions of homosexuality as a form of social deviance.31 Gay activists also began to demand equal treatment and rights as members of a ―persecuted minority,‖32which gave them the authority to begin to demand equal treatment and representation in both politics and the media.

29 Ibid., 226. 30 Ibid., 225. 31 For the argument that both ethnic cultural movements and feminism helped to create the context for the emergence of the gay liberation movement in the late 1960s see George Chauncey, Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today‟s Debate Over Gay Equality (New York: Basic Books, 2004), 29-31. See also, John D‘Emilio, ―After Stonewall,‖ in Making Trouble: Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University (New York: Routledge, 1992), 224-274. 32 D‘Emilio, Sexual Politics, 174.

The Stonewall Riots exemplify the change from the ―accommodationist spirit of the 1950s,‖ to a new spirit of gay pride and liberation.33 What may have started as a routine police raid on a gay bar in Greenwich Village ultimately erupted into a massive gay riot on June 27, 1969. From this, the Gay Liberation Front formed as part of a grassroots liberation movement of groups and networks nationwide. Gay liberation also shifted the notion of ―coming out‖ (which had been the acceptance of one‘s homosexuality and revealing that acceptance to other out homosexuals) from the personal sphere to the public sphere, where it entailed acknowledging one‘s homosexuality in all aspects of life. Increased visibility in combination with demands for social reform also encouraged community building, which positively reinforced gay identity and a sense of belonging. Post-Stonewall, gay men and women created business, political, social and cultural networks that allowed them to gain collective power.34 The growing strength of the gay community encouraged more political action and a higher level of political consciousness, leading to the support of gay- friendly candidates and to challenging laws denying equal rights.35

Members of the gay community also sought take homosexuality ―out of the shadowy realm of deviance and criminality‖ through more positive representations of homosexual characters in the media.36 Public discussion of human sexuality had

33 Ibid. 34 Ibid., 238; Grace Lichtenstein, ―Homosexuals in New York Find Pride,‖ New York Times, October 25, 1977, 83. 35 Lichtenstein, ―Homosexuals in New York,‖ 83. 36 D‘Emilio, Sexual Politics, 218.

already begun to open up, following the publication of the Kinsey Reports in the late

1940s, important Supreme Court decisions on obscenity issues during the 1950s and

1960s, and the growing proliferation of sexually explicitly content in magazines, film and books.37 In 1973, the American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.38

Hollywood‘s exploration into ―sexually explicit motion pictures‖ influenced television ―with some of the [films] being cleared for network broadcasting with little or light censorship.‖39 A demand for a reduction in violent themes on television during the 1970s created an opening for new material.40 Television networks responded with programs that featured a more open discussion of sexuality. And as they did, gay activist groups such as the Gay Media Task Force and the National Gay

Task Force challenged what they saw as negative depictions of gay characters on television.

Also by the 1970s, television content was coming under the increasing scrutiny of religious conservatives and the New Right, who fiercely opposed the gay rights movement.41 Social conservatives were well aware of the importance of television and its ability to affect the social landscape across the nation. Christian

37 Ibid, 133-134, 245. 38 Ibid, 247. 39 Robert Lindsey, ―TV Tunes in Sex as Crime Fades,‖ New York Times, March 20, 1978, C 15. 40 Ibid. 41 James W. Button, Barbara A. Rienzo, and Kenneth D. Wald, Private Lives, Public Conflicts: Battle Over Gay Rights in American Communities (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1997), 4-5.

conservatives led protests against violence on television, even inspiring lawsuits against networks for crimes copycatting violent acts they had portrayed.42 In 1975, congressional pressure to do something about sex and violence on television spurred several members of the Federal Communications Commission to push for a ―family viewing time‖ during prime time (7 p.m. to 9 p.m.). After a suit brought by the Screen

Actors Guild, the Writers Guild of America and the Directors Guild of America, these new federal restrictions on content were ruled unconstitutional in 1976.43 However, social conservatives began to monitor television shows and to threaten advertisers with boycotts over content or themes they believed to be unsuitable for television audiences, in particular, children. Then in 1977, the well-known Christian singer and

Florida orange juice icon Anita Bryant formed the ―Save Our Children‖ campaign, which fought to successfully repeal a pro-gay ordinance in Miami, Florida. Her media status ―attracted national attention and inspired rising political activism among people on the Religious Right.‖44 Modern evangelicals also used television as a unifying force to discuss social, moral and political issues on the Christian Broadcasting

Network and the Praise the Lord Network.45

42 James T. Patterson, Restless Giant: The United States from Watergate to Bush V. Gore (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 42; Stephen F. Rohde, ―It‘s Unfair Picture to Blame TV for Crimes by the Disturbed,‖ Los Angeles Times, June 29, 1978, D 7. 43 Robert Lindsey, ―U.S. Judge Rules TV ‗Family Hour‘ Constitutes Federal Censorship,‖ New York Times, November 5, 1976, 12. 44 Patterson, Restless Giant, 133, 138. 45 Kenneth A. Briggs, ―Religious Broadcasting: The Fourth Network,‖ New York Times, January 29, 1978, E 18.

This battle between the Gay Rights Movement and the New Right converged over Soap, a primetime comedy show that featured a homosexual character and created a media frenzy that worked to the advantage and disadvantage of both sides.

Susan Harris, already known as the writer of the controversial, two-part abortion episode "Maude's Dilemma" (1972) on Maude, made history again with the new comedy, which generated more controversy than any other show before it even aired in the summer of 1977. Harris had wanted to create a series following a continuous story on the intricacies of family life. Though Soap was later labeled as a satire,

Harris and co-producers Paul Junger Witt and Tony Thomas had no intention of purposely creating a show to parody daytime soap operas. Witt maintains that while elements were satirical, ―...we were satirizing the status quo more than soap operas.‖46 They wanted ―...to have characters that were more representative of what we saw going on in society, instead of this generic family that we tended to see in show after show after show.‖47

Knowing that the show would push the boundaries regarding sexual themes on television, Harris, Fred Silverman (the head of ABC programming), Alfred

Schneider and Julie Hoover (both vice presidents for Standards and Practices) created a special censorship ―rule book‖ in order to handle the sexually provocative topics in

46 Allan Neuwirth, They‟ll Never Put That on the Air: An Oral History of Taboo-Breaking TV Comedy (New York: Allworth Press, 2006), 204. 47 Ibid.

Soap.48 Schneider saw his role as a censor as a balancing act where he would have to reflect prevailing social beliefs while also having a responsibility to slowly push their boundaries.49 He became, as he put it, ―the censor turned advocate…arbiter, gatekeeper, and judge.‖50

To deflect the show‘s potential critics, ABC released a statement making clear that ―it is obviously impossible for any program that spoofs and satirizes contemporary manners and mores to avoid controversy or to appeal to every viewer.‖51 Network representatives also met with protest groups and later created a disclaimer for the opening of the first thirteen episodes.52 Advantageously, ABC already had an ongoing relationship with the Gay Media Task Force after a series of protests, in 1973, over Marcus Welby, M.D. episodes.53 ABC had pledged to attempt to create ―objective presentations[s] of…homosexual character[s] without taking sides in the religious and social controversy,‖ a plus for gay visibility and advocacy.54

In a memo leaked to the press prior to the show‘s airing, the creators described Soap as ―a further innovation in the comedic/dramatic form presenting a larger-than-life frank treatment of a wide variety of controversial and adult themes such as: pre-

48 Alfred R. Schneider with Kaye Pullen, The Gatekeeper: My 30 Years as a TV Censor (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2001), 36. 49 Ibid., 37. 50 Ibid. 51 Ibid., 40. 52 Ibid. 53 One such episode was ―The Outrage,‖ which featured the rape of a male student by a teacher. 54 Schneider with Pullen, The Gatekeeper, 95.

marital sex, adultery, impotence, homosexuality, transvestitism, religion, politics, ethnic stereotyping (and other aspects of race relations), etc.‖55

Sensationalism surrounding the show began with a Newsweek article in June

1977, which described the show and the negative reactions to the pilot screened for the network affiliates.56 The article revealed the show‘s controversial subject matter to the nation, immediately alarming conservative religious groups. Before Soap even had the chance to air, 22,000 protest letters were sent to ABC from several religious organizations as well as the National Gay Task Force and the International Union of

Gay Athletes.57 Multiple church organizations worked together to protest Soap by threatening sponsors of the program in the name of protecting children from what the churches deemed unsuitable family content.58 The Catholic Conference called Soap a

―‗debasement‘ of a family medium,‖ arguing that the show would be airing at 9:30 p.m. when millions of children watched television. While church campaigns for the cancellation of the series did manage to scare off several advertisers, the show nevertheless continued to run for four seasons.59

55 ―Taming a Lusty Show,‖ Los Angeles Times, June 27, 1977, C 12. 56 Stephen Tropiano, The Prime Time Closet: A History of Gays and Lesbians on TV (New York: Applause Theatre & Cinema, 2002), 241. 57 Lee Margulies, ―Soap‘s Producer Warns of Danger,‖ Los Angeles Times, October 6, 1977, E 26; Wayne Warga, ―Susan Harris‘ Soap: Is the Bubble Going to Burst?,‖ Los Angeles Times, October 23, 1977, O 38. 58 Les Brown, ―TV: 4 Church Units Plan to Fight ‗Soap‘,‖ New York Times, August 31, 1977, 63; Russell Chandler, ―Church Groups Step Up Attacks on TV,‖ Los Angeles Times, August 27, 1977, A 27. 59 Les Brown, ―TV‘s ‗I, Claudius‘ Will Test the Boundaries of Public Broadcasting,‖ New York Times, November 6, 1977, D 1.

At the center of this controversy was Jodie Dallas, one of the show's main characters, a single gay man who lives with his older brother, his mother, and his stepfather (Jodie‘s father is dead) in the fictional town of Dunn‘s River, Connecticut.

Soap put Jodie Dallas front and center for a full four seasons, making this character‘s permutations a mirror of the decade‘s social discussion on homosexuality and marking him as a pivotal depiction of a homosexual on television. This was a monumental breakthrough for gay characters on television because Jodie Dallas was a regular character who was revealed as a gay man from the start of the show, and because the show was able to last longer than previous shows with openly gay characters. Because the show aired for several seasons, the audience got an actual glimpse into the life of a homosexual, albeit a fictional one. Until the Gay Rights

Movement, homosexuals had been portrayed on television, if they were visible at all, as sexual deviants and/or mentally unstable. But Soap gave the general public a chance to see what the life of a homosexual might be like and, in doing so, helped to humanize homosexuals.

In addition, Soap directly reflected the tensions in families and in the larger society that resulted from homosexuals demanding equal rights and illustrated the on- going struggle for a gay identity. The year Soap premiered, 1977, was full of turmoil regarding gay rights. Anita Bryant‘s ―Save Our Children‖ campaign had won the repeal of a Florida ordinance against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Gay teachers were being targeted and fired from their jobs. An initiative campaign in

California for what later became known as the Briggs initiative sought to give school boards the power to fire homosexual teachers.60 Basic rights that would have guaranteed the ability of gay people to live openly were being denied.

As a reflection of this turmoil, the creators of Soap examined homosexuality comically, in juxtaposition with other ―problems‖ in season one. The opening episodes of the series begin with a voice-over explaining that Mrs. Dallas, the mother, has ―two problems: her son, Danny, is in the mob; her other son, Jodie, is gay.‖61 Her second husband, meanwhile, has killed her first husband, which in turn has made him impotent. Setting up homosexuality as a ―problem‖ along with being a mobster and a murderer inevitably suggests that it is a moral failing. And yet despite the show‘s baseline that Jodie is a problem because of his homosexuality, as the show evolves

Jodie emerges quickly as the ―gay angel,‖ the one moral member of the family.

Jodie appears first in the series premiere. Wearing a suit and tie and singing,

―Oh, What a Beautiful Morning,‖ he walks into the kitchen after a food fight between his stepfather and brother.62 While referencing the stereotype of the well-dressed homosexual man who loves show tunes, Jodie is not presented in a way that might induce the audience to think of the ―limp-wristed‖ stereotype. He appears actually to be a sophisticated character, whereas his male relatives are portrayed as boorish individuals whose table manners are reminiscent of a gorilla exhibit at the zoo. After

60 Philip Hager, ―Schools Center of Gay Rights Fight,‖ Los Angeles Times, August 29, 1977, I 5. 61 ―Season 1, Episode 2,‖ Soap (ABC, September 20, 1977). 62 ―Season 1, Episode 1,‖ Soap (ABC, September 13, 1977).

the stepfather remarks to the brother, ―Why don‘t you open him some Fruit Loops. It would be very appropriate,‖ Jodie takes no offense. Instead it is his brother who jumps to his feet and grabs the stepfather by the shirt, ―Listen, you animal. I told you before, my brother is not a fruit.‖ Apparently oblivious to their antics, Jodie sits down at the kitchen table and flashes a mischievous grin.63 Jodie‘s entrance indicates the creators‘ desire to make him non-threatening, thus immediately challenging previous stereotypical depictions of the homosexual menace. The portrayal of Jodie as a civilized character juxtaposed against the ruffian behavior of his relatives sets Jodie up as the moral member of the family, neither a mobster nor a murderer but just a genuinely likeable person.

The creators further used the relationship between Jodie and his stepfather to explore the social ostracism faced by homosexual men in 1970s American society, an ostracism often reinforced by a socially conditioned disgust towards homosexuality.

In the third episode, Jodie challenges his stepfather‘s hatred of him after his mother begs them to ―work things out.‖ The stepfather admits his antipathy towards Jodie, even though he cannot explain it. Jodie asks, ―It‘s because I‘m gay, right?‖ and tells his stepfather to look at him because he is a person. The stepfather responds by twitching in disgust as he slowly looks over at Jodie, his face even starting to spasm as though he is getting ready to throw up. He gets out of his chair, stating that

―[Jodie] gives me the creeps.‖ He also calls Jodie ―spooky.‖ Jodie continues to insist

63 Ibid.

that he is simply a human being, a man ―[w]ho happens to like men.‖64 The stepfather‘s response clearly signals his discomfort, and the entire interaction illustrates his almost visceral negative reaction to the idea of homosexuality, and even more so to its physical manifestation in an actual person.

The stepfather represents the older generation that was taught to fear the

―homosexual menace.‖ He explains,

…it‘s hard, this gay business. I‘m not used to it. I mean, all my life I was never around them. When I was growing up, ―gay‖ meant happy. I mean, it‘s not like I‘m used to it. And life was a lot easier then. I mean, maybe while, you know, when you guys were in the closet, maybe it wasn‘t easy on you, but it was a hell of a lot easier on us. I mean, it used to be you‘d walk down the street, a guy smiles at you, you smile back. Today, you smile back, you either get arrested or invited dancing. So it takes getting used to. It‘s hard getting used to a guy who likes guys and not girls.65

For people of this man‘s generation in the late 1970s, the learning curve was very steep, and they struggled with the fears they had been taught. Consequently, this sort of media visibility was crucial for gay people to acquire more social inclusion and for forward progress in attaining gay rights.

The different responses of the stepfather and the brother to Jodie‘s homosexuality illustrate their different generational perceptions. While the stepfather responds with disgust, the brother‘s response is one of willful ignorance. On the eve of the brother‘s departure to go into hiding from the mob, Jodie confides in him that he is gay. The brother passes it off as a joke, despite Jodie‘s increasingly adamant

64 ―Season 1, Episode 3,‖ Soap (ABC, September 27, 1977). 65 Ibid.

insistence that he is telling the truth. The brother responds with disbelief and insecurity, arguing that it‘s ―ridiculous. How can you be gay? I mean we‘re brothers, and I‘m not gay, so you‘re not gay. Anyway you‘re too good in sports.‖66

Finally, he sadly asks, ―Why?‖ The brother‘s response is one of concern that

Jodie‘s homosexuality would change their relationship, but finally he is ready to face his fears and begin to accept Jodie for who he is. The difference in the stepfather‘s on-going revulsion and disgust and the brother‘s ultimate acceptance is indicative of a generational shift in attitudes towards homosexuality. While the brother certainly had to overcome his insecurities and ignorance, his love and respect for Jodie allow him to look past his fear and prejudice. The stepfather, however, cannot overcome his ingrained fear and social training and so cannot come to a place of acceptance.

The creators used Jodie‘s interactions with his two family members to help the audience to see him as a sympathetic character. Jodie‘s dialogue with his stepfather is a demand for dignified treatment, while his talk with his brother centers on his identity and how being gay hasn‘t changed who he‘s always been. Through these conversations, the creators took a step-by-step process of first humanizing Jodie by making him safe to remind viewers that gay people were just people. Then they reaffirmed these qualities with the reminder that homosexuality didn‘t detract from who the person was and had been.

66 ―Season 1, Episode 8,‖ Soap (ABC, November 8, 1977).

In addition to using Jodie to challenge the effects of social disgust on both gay and straight people, the creators also used Jodie to examine how social disgust often pressured gay people to conform to social expectations. In the show, Jodie offers to protect his lover, a star professional quarterback, from a career-destroying scandal by undergoing a sex-change operation.67 As a gay angel, Jodie was designed to combat blatant forms of social disgust with his morality and so could sacrifice his very identity in order to preserve the heterocentric social order. His purpose as the gay angel was not to over-throw the heterocentric hierarchy but to illustrate how homosexuality ought to fit into a heterosexual world order.

This blending of purposes, to combat disgust but sacrifice to the mainstream order, created confusion within the character, as demonstrated by Jodie‘s plan to get a sex change operation. The creators played with the humor of the ―gay man in women‘s clothing‖ stereotype by having Jodie give his mother fashion tips, etc., but then they took the storyline to another level. While Jodie hints about really feeling like a woman as he explains this decision to his mother,68 his actual motivation is to conform to heterosexual social expectations so he and his closeted homosexual boyfriend can live openly without jeopardizing the boyfriend‘s job. Jodie thinks that the boyfriend would be able to be open about their relationship if Jodie was to become a woman and they looked like a straight couple. When Jodie becomes concerned that his lover is seeing another man, the boyfriend reveals that he is

67 ―Season 1, Episode 4,‖ Soap (ABC, October 4, 1977). 68 ―Season 1, Episode 2,‖ Soap (ABC, September 20, 1977).

actually pursuing a woman. He explains that he is worried about losing his endorsements if people find out he‘s gay, whereupon Jodie proffers his solution: a sex change operation. 69 The boyfriend at this point is willing for Jodie to make this sacrifice because, in their minds, they then could have everything everyone else has without fear of reprisal. In this case, the gay angel even sacrifices for other homosexuals to be comfortable in the straight world.

But the extremity of their solution is untenable. Several episodes later, the boyfriend tells Jodie not to have the sex change operation because he‘s going to marry a woman. He explains, ―Look, even if you had the operation, I mean, sooner or later people would find out. I‘d never be able to find work. I can‘t do it. I don‘t want to marry her, but I‘m scared. I guess you‘ll have trouble believing it, but I love you, and I‘ll always love you. Sorry, Jodie.‖70 The boyfriend chooses to get married as a front because he feels pressure to conform to society‘s expectations, thus suggesting that social expectations about sexuality are inevitable and can‘t be changed. Jodie‘s reaction also conforms to traditional conventions for gay characters in film. He tries to kill himself by swallowing pills, reinforcing the stereotype of the emotionally unstable, suicidal homosexual who is never meant to find true happiness.71

While the sex change plot added to the eccentricities of the show, it also highlighted an important social pressure on gay people. It captured how

69 ―Season 1, Episode 4,‖ Soap (ABC, October 4, 1977). 70 ―Season 1, Episode 10,‖ Soap (ABC, November 22, 1977). 71 Ibid.

entertainment, such as television, reflected a heterocentric social control. The Gay

Rights Movement had opened the door to a conversation about homosexuality, but at this point the conversation was still heterocentric, as Jodie‘s trials and tribulations illustrated. The male/female binary relationship still remained the ideal.

Paradoxically, however, the creators actively subverted the stereotype of gay men as emotionally unbalanced by juxtaposing Jodie with characters who were far more unstable than he was, to comment on Jodie‘s normalcy. After Jodie‘s suicide attempt, Jodie‘s hospital roommate meets some of the people in Jodie‘s family.

Jodie‘s stepbrother, a ventriloquist, visits with a puppet who complains loudly about varying illnesses he could catch in the hospital and insults almost everyone there.72 In comparison to the stepbrother and his puppet, Jodie is the picture of sanity. Jodie‘s brother also makes several visits, each time wearing a different disguise to hide from the Mob. The hospital roommate is best at summing it up: ―I don‘t know what the world is coming to anymore when a gay man who was thinking of becoming a woman, then decides on suicide, turns out to be the most normal member of the family.‖73 This underscores his ―abnormality‖ and therefore his separateness. Yet, as set up at the very beginning of the series, the gay man is still the most stable and normal of the group, and this also allows him to continue in his gay angel role.

It was in the aftermath of all this, however, that the show revealed itself to be groundbreaking but ultimately heterocentric beginning in early 1978. Though

72 ―Season 1, Episode 11,‖ Soap (ABC, November 29, 1977). 73 Ibid.

homosexuality continued to enter discussions, the creators put Jodie into mainly heterosexual relationships for the remainder of the series. It was the lure of social acceptance that they decided to spotlight. This becomes clear when Jodie meets

Carol (a woman) who is interested in going out with him despite the fact that he identifies as gay.74 This marks an important transition with Jodie‘s character as he bows to the social pressures of sexual conformity while his family members happily encourage Jodie to date Carol. Eventually, Carol manipulates Jodie into a romantic weekend, leading to a single sexual encounter and a child nine months later.75 Though confused about his own behavior, Jodie still identifies as gay.76 However, even after the unexpected return of his former football player boyfriend, Jodie denies this relationship to be a husband to Carol and a ―real‖ father to his baby.77 Interestingly,

Jodie and Carol never actually marry as she leaves him at the altar, devastating him.78

In this way the creators bridged Jodie‘s character from out, open homosexual to conflicted and guilt-ridden as they explored heterocentric pressures on gay people in this time period.

Then, in another exploration of the complexity of views regarding heterosexual versus homosexual relationships, the creators introduced a lesbian character to Jodie‘s storyline. One night after the Carol debacle, Jodie is out drinking

74 ―Season 1, Episode 21,‖ Soap (ABC, February 21, 1978). 75 ―Season 1, Episode 24,‖ Soap (ABC, March 21, 1978). 76 ―Season 1, Episode 25,‖ Soap (ABC, March 28, 1978). 77 ―Season 2, Episode 5,‖ Soap (ABC, October 12, 1978); ―Season 2, Episode 8,‖ Soap (ABC, November 9, 1978). 78 ―Season 2, Episode 12,‖ Soap (ABC, December 14, 1978).

and walks to a bridge where he finds a suicidal lesbian named Alice, who has been fired from her job, abandoned by her lover, and thrown out of her house because she‘s gay. She tells Jodie, ―My mother, a very reserved woman, screamed, spit in my face and stormed out of the room. My father, a noted psychiatrist, called me a sick twisted pervert and threw me out of the house.‖79 Jodie suggests they go out to get a drink together.

In succeeding episodes, the creators took on the age-old ―cure‖ for lesbianism

(and homosexuality). Alice becomes Jodie‘s roommate. In an awkward scene, Jodie introduces Alice to his family members, who comment that Alice is cute and try to convince Jodie to change her sexual orientation by having sexual intercourse with her. His stepfather says, ―Yeah, Jodie. Believe me. One good you know, and that‘s it.‖

Jodie shakes his head and says, ―It didn‘t work with me.‖ The stepfather counters with, ―Maybe you didn‘t get a good one.‖80 During this offensive exchange, Jodie never acquiesces to this ―cure,‖ yet the more time Jodie and Alice spend together and develop their platonic relationship during the last half of season two, the more possessive of each other they get, even growing jealous when one or the other goes on a date. Clearly the creators were paving the way for Jodie to struggle with another heterosexual relationship of some sort.

And with season three opening with Jodie and Alice celebrating three months together, the creators put Jodie into a hetero-focused relationship which on the

79 ―Season 2, Episode 16,‖ Soap (ABC, January 18, 1979). 80 ―Season 2, Episode 20,‖ Soap (ABC, March 1, 1979).

surface seemed to conform to social norms. Even so, the creators made clear that society would not accept a gay male and a lesbian in a ―real‖ relationship. The creators reminded the audience that while the relationship might consist of a man and a woman, neither was interested in having a sexual relationship with the other. Alice joins Jodie in the living room with a celebration cake. They hold hands, blow out the candles and give each other a small kiss on the lips. Jodie leans his head on Alice‘s shoulder and says, ―You know, I think relationships are better when there‘s no sex to screw things up.‖81 So while Jodie and Alice are creating a safe and controlled environment for each other, a naïve older character named Mrs. David articulates the viewpoint of mainstream society. When Mrs. David sees Alice and Jodie together, she congratulates Jodie for having become a heterosexual. Jodie corrects her, as the confused Mrs. David insists, ―But you‘re with a girl.‖ Alice explains, ―Well, we‘re both homos.‖ Mrs. David has apparently never encountered a lesbian.82 Her ignorance illustrates society‘s ideas about lesbians at that time, in addition to underscoring the prevailing view that two people of opposite sexes living together will culminate in a heterosexual relationship. By using Jodie and Alice as a

―practicing‖ heterosexual couple even while maintaining their homosexuality, the creators underscored the social push to pressure gay people into heterosexual relationships.

81 ―Season 3, Episode 1,‖ Soap (ABC, September 13, 1979). 82 Ibid.

In season three, in 1980, the creators brought up another hot-button issue for homosexuals yearning for social inclusion when they added child custody problems to the equation. In a new twist, the mother of Jodie‘s baby daughter abandons her child, and Jodie attempts to assume custody of the child. However the child‘s grandmother refuses to allow her to stay with Jodie as long as he is living with a lesbian.83 Even with a ―heterosexual‖ relationship as a cover, the idea of two gay people involved with a child is unacceptable. Interestingly, one homosexual parent isn‘t a concern, but more than one is just too threatening. Again, Jodie must don his gay angel wings and sacrifice for a heterocentric society afraid of a homosexual couple, even one man and one woman, raising a child together. Jodie makes the sacrifice, and Alice moves out.84 While their storyline centered on society‘s disapproval of two gay people raising a baby, the creators pointedly contrasted

Jodie‘s responsible and unselfish character with that the of the child‘s heterosexual mother, who has abandoned her daughter in order to run away with a man who dresses like a cowboy. Jodie continues to fight for the baby during a custody battle at the end of season three.

This custody battle served as the pinnacle of Jodie‘s gay angel role. The creators used the court scene to highlight injustices gay people endure in relationship legalities and to show Jodie as the morally decent person and parent. Carol and her mother consistently lie on the stand, prompting Jodie to create a court disturbance in

83 ―Season 3, Episode 2,‖ Soap (ABC, September 20, 1979). 84 Ibid.; ―Season 3, Episode 3,‖ Soap (ABC, September 27, 1979).

calling out their lies. Then, when Jodie takes the stand, he is subjected to a personal, insulting and irrelevant line of questioning to try to discredit him, a common tactic.

Carol‘s lawyer riddles Jodie with venomous questions such as, ―Just how many different men have you lived with, Mr. Dallas?‖ and ―What do you do? ...I mean, with a man…Exactly what are the mechanics involved?‖ and ―Did you ever frequent a bar know as Barney‘s?‖ But finally Jodie has had enough and informs the court,

…I‘m not about to be humiliated or my lifestyle desecrated anymore by these examinations. Now I‘m not going to lose my temper. I refuse to lose my self- respect…I‘d never expose [my child] to anything that was harmful or unfavorable to her health, either mentally or physically.

After Jodie finishes addressing the court, he excuses himself and leaves, his gay angel halo shining brightly as he risks losing custody of his daughter in favor of acting with integrity and honor, unlike his heterosexual counterparts.85

The outcome of the custody battle touches on several social conventions of the time, underscoring the difficulty homosexual men faced in family court matters. At the next court hearing the judge begins,

Mr. Dallas I have seen your integrity, fervor and honesty. I‘m impressed by your passion and fortitude; however, it has become apparent to me over these many years that an infant needs the kind of care that can best be given to it by its mother….[You] have shown yourself to be a concerned parent.

Carol thanks her. The judge continues, ―Last night I decided the child would be better off with her mother.‖ At this time in history, traditional, conventional wisdom sided

85 ―Season 3, Episode 22,‖ Soap (ABC, March 27, 1980).

with the mother in custody issues, even for heterosexual couples. In Jodie‘s case, the deck was stacked even higher against him. But then the judge continues,

This morning I received a call from your mother telling me that she had lied on the stand in your behalf….Forcing your own mother to commit perjury using her own grandchild as bait does not lead me to agree that this person has a clear understanding of what parenthood is all about. Mr. Dallas has that understanding. Therefore, I have decided to break with normal tradition and award custody of the infant, Wendy, to her father, Jodie Dallas.

Jodie thanks the judge and promises to work out visitation with Carol, who angrily tells Jodie it‘s not over. She later kidnaps Wendy.86 So even though the creators took the less traditional path, they still bowed to the heterocentric order by awarding custody to Jodie as a last extremity in comparison to the reprehensible Carol. If she hadn‘t been so awful, Jodie would not have won. And the judge didn‘t stop the insulting line of questioning, Jodie did. In sum, the court system was stacked against the homosexual.

The final act of a true gay angel is to succumb to societal expectations and happily choose to be ―straight,‖ and the kidnapping of Jodie‘s child is a catalyst to

Jodie‘s final sacrifice. After losing his child, Jodie finally meets the ―right‖ woman and enters into another heterosexual relationship. At the time, finding the ―right‖ person of the opposite sex was an integral part of homosexual storylines because they illustrated how homosexuality was perceived as simply sexual confusion. Jodie and his new love consummate their relationship, and Jodie proclaims it the best sexual

86 ―Season 4, Episode 1,‖ Soap (ABC, November 12, 1980); ―Season 4, Episode 2,‖ Soap (ABC, November 19, 1980).

experience he has ever had. Jodie tells his new girlfriend that he is thinking about asking her to marry him.87 Viewers are left to believe that maybe his stepfather had been right after all, and that all it really takes to ―cure‖ a homosexual is the ―right‖ sexual encounter with the opposite sex.

The show made its final paean to traditional social expectations with the final twist to Jodie‘s storyline. Jodie wants to make sure that he is no longer a homosexual before he fully commits to his girlfriend, so he hires a therapist to hypnotize him.88

As a result of this hypnosis Jodie becomes convinced he is a ninety-year-old heterosexual Jewish man named Julius.89 And while this may have garnered laughs because of the absurdity of the situation, it is important to note that he believes himself to be straight and so, in essence, is ―cured.‖ The message was that homosexuality could be altered with treatment. Therefore, across the course of the series, Soap used the homosexual character Jodie to communicate that homosexuals really only wanted to fit into straight society whether via a sex change, manipulation, duty, or being ―cured‖ by a therapist, and they used the construct of the gay angel to underscore this. This opened up an important social discussion on homosexuality in popular culture during the Gay Rights Movement. Soap‘s success paved the way for future gay characters on television and signaled a vital means of communication about homosexuality to the general public through daily and weekly shows. It also

87 ―Season 4, Episode 14,‖ Soap (ABC, March 16, 1981). 88 ―Season 4, Episode 16,‖ Soap (ABC, March 23, 1981). 89 ―Season 4, Episode 17,‖ Soap (ABC, March 23, 1981).

helped highlight a need for more gay advocacy in popular culture in order to shift from a heterocentric view of gay characters to a homocentric perspective that could educate and sensitize the public about gay individuals and their struggles against social oppression.

Chapter Two

Soap ended just as the New Right really came to power, changing the emphasis of the conservative movement, revitalizing the right, and bringing Reagan into the presidency from 1980 to 1988. Unlike the old right‘s emphasis on anti- communism and racism, the New Right presented itself as a defender of ―traditional family values,‖ which manifested as advocating conservative Christian values in public life, opposing the Equal Rights Amendment, vehemently opposing abortion, and promoting tough-on-crime policies. They also sensationalized the threat the Gay

Rights Movement posed to conservative Christians in order to get political support for their agenda.

Even as gay men and women continued to become more visible in the 1980s, the social and religious conservatism of the era spurred a rise in attacks against them, a phenomenon which became labeled ―gay bashing.‖ Major cities saw an increase in physical attacks on gay men and women, according to the National Gay Task Force.1

Gay rights leaders attributed the attacks on perceived homosexuals to a growing willingness by religious and political leaders to verbally attack homosexuality as well as to an increase in white hate groups.2 The Right also gained new legitimacy in

1986, when the Supreme Court upheld anti-sodomy laws in Bowers v. Hardwick

1 Bill Curry, ―Cities Face a Growing Problem: Vicious Attacks on Homosexuals,‖ Los Angeles Times, March 6, 1981, A 17. 2 Ibid.

(later overturned in 2003). The new level of vitriol was no doubt related to the increase in gay visibility and the threat this visibility posed to the established social order. Instead of growing more accepting of homosexuality, Americans became, if anything, more hostile and suspicious during the 1980s.

In part, this hostility was also provoked by the AIDS epidemic. In 1981, a mysterious illness began plaguing the gay male population. What appeared to be

Kaposi‘s sarcoma, a rare form of skin cancer, had begun cropping up in homosexual males in major cities: New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Doctors were baffled by these cases and were unable to explain the immune deficiency that accompanied the cancer. Outbreaks of pneumonia, in seemly otherwise healthy gay men, were also increasing and left doctors puzzled. Questions swirled around the possible causes of these two diseases: how were they linked and how transmitted?

They seemed, at first, only to affect gay males, so this new disease was dubbed, ―gay cancer‖ and Gay-Related Immune Deficiency.3 By late 1981, medical researchers believed that the diseases were caused by a virus that was sexually transmitted, but they could find no reason why the virus seemed to plague gay males over heterosexuals.4 By 1982, the disease had been identified as well in the heterosexual

3Neil Miller, Out of the Past: Gay and Lesbian History from 1869 to the Present (New York: Alyson Books, 2006), 409-410; Harry Nelson, ―Outbreaks of Pneumonia among Gay Males Studied,‖ Los Angeles Times, June 5, 1981, B 3. 4 Harry Nelson, ―Virus May Be Linked to Pneumonia in Gays,‖ Los Angeles Times, December 10, 1981, B 3.

population and was renamed Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS).5

However, limited government funding for research left few answers about the cause of the disease or any means of a cure. The health services coordinator of the Gay and

Lesbian Community Services Center in Hollywood, Thomas Nylund, blamed the lack of AIDS research funding on the disease‘s dismissal by a biased media; he cited a news commentator‘s question, ―Is the disease still confined to homosexual men, or has it become serious?‖6 The presumption that AIDS was a gay disease made television representations even more influential in shaping public perception of gay men and lesbians, especially as conservative forces tried to capitalize on the tragedy of and the message sent by gay AIDS victims.

Conservatives, such as Moral Majority leaders Jerry Falwell and Patrick

Buchanan, used the AIDS outbreak as a political tool against the Gay Rights

Movement. Both men had spread the message that the disease was a punishment, from either God or nature, because they saw homosexuality as a crime against nature.7 The AIDS crisis created a social platform for conservatives to express disdain for homosexuality and allowed them to spread paranoid fears of imminent social collapse if homosexuals were allowed to flourish and gain equality. This was exemplified by a May, 1983, issue of Moral Majority Report headlined ―AIDS:

5 Harry Nelson, ―Epidemic Affecting Gays Now Found in Heterosexuals,‖ Los Angeles Times, April 14, 1982, B 22. 6 Ann Japanga, ―Gays Trying to Deal With Fear of Cancer,‖ Los Angeles Times, September 28, 1982, F 1. 7 Eleanor Randolph, ―Falwell Urges Government Officials to Launch Crackdown against AIDS,‖ Los Angeles Times, July 13, 1983, B, 14; Morton Kondracke, ―The Right Hasn‘t the Right to Use AIDS Against Gays,‖ Los Angeles Times, June 22, 1983, C 5.

Homosexual Diseases Threaten American Families,‖ which pictured a white, nuclear family supposedly endangered by the AIDS epidemic.8 Conservative congressmen

William E. Dannemeyer and Robert K. Dornan used a House vote on AIDS spending as a forum ―to launch an attack on homosexual behavior‖ which suggested ―that the incidence of the disease…would abate significantly if gay men would abstain from intimate contact.‖9 Dannemeyer used his speech to declare that, ―God‘s plan for man was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.‖10 His also used graphic ―…anatomical detail[s] of how homosexuals transmit AIDS.‖11 Ron Najman, the media director for the National Gay Task Force ―…accused both congressmen of trying to ‗fuel the fires of hysteria‘ against homosexuals with misleading and medically inaccurate comments.‖12 Gay rights advocates argued that these methods of fear and misinformation were merely a conservative ploy to promote ―hysteria‖ and turn the public against the Gay Rights Movement.13 The conflicting images of homosexuals that appeared in the media are a vital indication of a society torn by these colliding pressures and trying to find its way.

The utter devastation of AIDS did, however, force gay culture to change.

Though the Gay Rights Movement had been born in the 1970s, tension between gay

8 Miller, Out of the Past, 421. 9 Bob Secter, ―House OKs 90% Hike in AIDS Research Funds,‖ Los Angeles Times, October 3, 1985, A 4. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Kondracke, ―The Right Hasn‘t the Right,‖ 5; Secter, ―House OKs 90% Hike,‖ 4; Miller, Out of the Past, 421.

men and gay women, as well as more generalized cultural tensions, had left homosexuals politically and socially fractured, despite a growing social recognition of a larger ―gay community.‖ However, the tragedy that AIDS inflicted on the gay community prompted gay men and women to combine their efforts to care for stricken friends and neighbors, efforts which ultimately strengthened it.14 AIDS created a necessity for gay men to reinvent themselves and move away from a sex- focused identity, expanding their socially perceived stereotypical interests. This, in combination with the need to care for AIDS victims, drew the lesbian and gay communities closer together.

This search for a new identity and the melding of the community eventually included the desire among some gay men and women to have children, drawing many gay men and lesbians into co-parenting situations and indicating a shift in gay values towards the stability of family life. This created a need to procure legal family rights.

More gay men and women used the court system in child custody disputes. Rhonda

R. Rivera, an associate law professor at Ohio State University at the time, saw this increase as evidence of ―a new pride on the part of homosexuals who no longer fear[ed] exposure and because of better support systems to help in court battles for

14 Clarke Taylor, ―‗AIDS Show‘: Daily Life with A Killer,‖ Los Angeles Times, November 12, 1986, J 9.

their children.‖15 But to succeed, such cases had to overcome the homophobia and misinformation in that court system.16

Gays and lesbians also became more politically active as a community in order to fight conservative forces that tried to undercut gay rights by equating homosexuality with AIDS. Activist groups joined together in campaigning for AIDS research funding, which the Reagan administration was slow to act on.17 It wasn‘t until 1985, when the actor Rock Hudson revealed that he had AIDS, that President

Ronald Reagan finally addressed the AIDS crisis.18 Gays and lesbians had also begun to participate openly in government positions and had become an influential political group through fund raising and lobbying.19 The 1980 congressional elections demonstrated the political strength of the Gay Rights Movement when ―51 of the 55

House members who co-sponsored the gay civil-rights bill were returned to Congress by the voters.‖20 But even so, the country was more tolerant of political advances within the gay community than it was of cultural acceptance.21 In 1984, a Times Poll found that 47% of people would not be deterred by a homosexual candidate and 52%

15 Rosemary Armao, ―3 Million Children Have Homosexual Parents,‖ Los Angeles Times, November 26, 1981, B 21. 16 Ibid. 17 Miller, Out of the Past, 418-424. 18 Vicki L. Eaklor, Queer America: A GLBT History of the 20th Century (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press), 175. 19 Kevin Roderick, ―Tensions Remain,‖ Los Angeles Times, January 1, 1984, OC 29. 20 Colman McCarthy, ―Gay Rights Issue Emerges From the Political Closet,‖ Los Angeles Times, October 5, 1982, C 7. 21 Ibid.

supported laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. However, 55% opposed the ―homosexual lifestyle, even for others.‖22

These mixed messages about gay identity and experience made the media representation of homosexuality in the entertainment industry a crucial means of influencing social views regarding gay men and women, especially when the AIDS epidemic hit. The entertainment industry had become more inclusive by creating roles for homosexual characters who were ―healthy, law-abiding, talented people…unashamed to acknowledge that they [were] homosexuals.‖23 The Alliance for Gay and Lesbian Artists (AGLA) showcased these roles and other positive representations of homosexual themes in the media with an annual awards ceremony.24 The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) was founded in 1985 in order to address ―general visibility and type/tone of attention,‖ in news coverage.25 Soon after, the group‘s ―monitoring [had] quickly expanded to include all media and types of programming.‖26 The creation of these organizations reveals the importance gay activists placed on countering negative representations in the media. It also signals how far the Gay Rights Movement had propelled gay visibility. The fact that positive gay characters and themes were present, recognized and rewarded communicates an important shift in both American culture and society.

22 Roderick, ―Tensions Remain,‖ 1. 23 Ibid., 29. 24 John Horn, ―Portrayals of Gays Honored,‖ Los Angeles Times, September 19, 1984, I 1. 25 Eaklor, Queer America, 190. 26 Ibid.

One of the best exemplars of this change is the prime time soap opera,

Dynasty (1981-1989) and the Dynasty: Reunion miniseries (1991), created and written by Richard and Esther Shapiro. The show was also recognized, in 1983, by an award from the Alliance of Gays Artists for the character of Steven Carrington.27 The series stands today as a landmark in the cultural progression of gay acceptance and identity. It engaged the audience in a serious examination of homosexuality in

American society and clearly reflected the social tensions and anxieties of a society resistant to accepting homosexuality. The show appealed to the consumer culture of the 1980s, and its dramatic interplay among the members of the Carrington family gave the series longevity and popularity, which makes possible the study of the show‘s gay character, Steven Carrington, as an important illustration of social concerns and advances regarding homosexuality.

The creators of Dynasty wanted to present a show about family that would capture people‘s interest against a backdrop of fortune and greed. The enormous success of Dallas (1978-1991) paved the way for Dynasty ―which showed that a TV series about corruption, weakness, Raw Sophomoric Sex and fast cars among the very rich could draw viewers like a fence to hot diamonds.‖28 Both series center on the families of rich oil tycoons and the luxuries and power they possess: worlds in which mansions and private airplanes are basic necessities, lifestyles that many people

27 Michael London, ―Depictions of Gays Honored by Group,‖ Los Angeles Times, September 21, 1983, H 1. 28 Howard Rosenberg, ―A Burning Questions on ‗Dynasty‘ A LA ‗Dallas,‘‖ Los Angeles Times, April 25, 1983, G 1.

dream of yet will never achieve. And while the glitz and glamour of the elite piqued the curiosities of the television audience, it was the basic character development and family interactions that the Shapiros were interested in. They believed that interesting characters and their relationships with each other made good television and added to the success of the show.29

The Shapiros saw Steven‘s homosexuality, along with his bi-sexual confusion, as an interesting aspect to his character. When the network (ABC) pressured them to

―straighten‖ Steven up after the first season, they refused and were supported by producer Aaron Spelling. Richard Shapiro thought it was important for the writers to

―ignore the fact that [Steven‘s] gay and write him like anybody else…even in the love scenes. They‘re just two people in love…write it that way.‖ Though the scenes were less explicit then the heterosexual love scenes, the implied sexual encounters were a huge step in prime time television.30

Dynasty takes places in Denver, Colorado, and centers around Steven‘s father‘s business, Carrington Oil, and their family life. The major characters introduced at the beginning of the series are his father and stepmother, his sister and an employee of Carrington Oil, Matthew Blaisdel and his wife Claudia Blaisdel. Like

Soap, Dynasty targeted a twenties and up audience. This distinction is important

29 ―TVLegends,‖ Richard & Esther Shapiro-Archive Interview Part 2 of 5, http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=jpSipR8zr2w. 30 ―TVLegends,‖ Richard & Esther Shapiro-Archive Interview Part 3 of 5, http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=4QZiPhHjCQU&feature=relmfu.

because the homosexual themes and content were not yet geared toward younger audiences, a transition not made until the late 1990s.

The pilot relayed an important question which was followed throughout the series: What should a person sacrifice to attain and maintain the American Dream?

This was defined not just as the monetary dream, but also as the pursuit of a family of one‘s own: marriage, children, and social respectability. The world of Dynasty and the Carrington family reflects these social values, and any divergence from its cultural norms is met with ostracism and/or hostility, as illustrated with the experiences of Steven Carrington, who is gay.

The creators used Steven‘s character to explore homosexuality in both a social and familial setting, focusing on the pressures facing members of American upper class society. In addition, they captured the tensions associated with generational differences regarding the acceptability of homosexuality, as exemplified by the relationship between Steven and his father. For Steven, these pressures to conform to heterocentric values are so severe that he experiences a bi-sexual ―confusion,‖ attempting to sustain relationships with women even though (according to the show‘s creators) he is in fact a gay man.31 Some gay activists saw the relationships with women as the show giving in to social pressures; however, the creators claimed they

31 Ibid.; John M. Wilson, ―Is Steven Gay? Yes, ‗Dynasty‘ Creators Say,‖ Los Angeles Times, February 26, 1984, Q 7.

wanted to explore what they saw as a genuine and serious storyline about how many gay men experienced the pressures of social conformity.32

The show‘s creators first demonstrated these heterocentric pressures by exploring the alienation between Steven and his father. Steven Carrington is first introduced as a belligerent drunk, returning from the Middle East, who refuses the flight attendants‘ requests to return to the first class lounge.33 Steven recognizes

Matthew Blaisdel, a Carrington Oil employee, who is able to get him to return to the lounge. Their conversation alludes to the existence of a strained relationship between

Steven and his father, as Steven laments to Matthew, through drunken ramblings, that he received an invitation to his father‘s wedding in the mail rather than by phone. The audience is left wondering what has happened that Steven‘s father treats him as just another wedding guest. The distance between Steven and his father is reinforced outside the airport when Steven sees his father‘s limousine but is informed that the vehicle was not sent for him and that he is expected to take a taxi home.34

Accustomed to the privilege of limousine rides, this overt shunning compounds the mystery of the relationship and his father‘s animosity.

In addition to illustrating the hostility that many gay children face from their parents, the creators also set up homosexuality as a familial burden. In a scene later in the episode, but before the audience knows Steven is gay, a conversation between

32 Wilson, ―Is Steven Gay?,‖ 7. 33 ―Oil,‖ Dynasty (ABC, January 12, 1981). 34 Ibid.

the father and the sister alludes to Steven‘s homosexuality, simultaneously conveying the father‘s annoyance that it impedes his plans for the future of Carrington Oil. The father reveals that he does not count on Steven to merge Carrington Oil with its rival through marriage, or to continue the Carrington dynasty with heirs. When the sister asks their father to put the pressure on Steven instead of on her to eventually take over Carrington Oil, the father responds, ―I‘m afraid Steven is not going to work out.‖

This exchange foreshadows what will later be revealed to be a major issue between

Steven and his father: Steven‘s homosexuality.35 Unlike the relationship between

Jodie and his stepfather, which lacks preconceived familial expectations, Steven‘s relationship with his father has the added familial and social pressure of carrying on the dynasty his father has created.

The creators used the prospects of inheriting an oil empire, and the wealth and power inherent in that, to suggest that achieving the American dream requires individuals to sacrifice their identities and conform to conservative or pre-set social expectations. This is especially evident with regard to Steven‘s character throughout the series because of his desire to gain his father‘s respect. This expectation of self- sacrifice is set up in their first meeting during the pilot when the majordomo finally informs Steven that his father is ready to see him in the library. The father begins the conversation informing Steven that his education will not be able to get him even the most menial job, and his time ―finding himself‖ in New York is over. Steven asks,

35 Ibid.

―Really, and what have I decided [to do]?‖ His father informs him that he‘ll begin working for Carrington Oil, and Steven replies, ―I see. And what career have I picked out for myself?‖36 Steven‘s responses to his father, while spiteful in tone, nonetheless establish the father‘s dominance and Steven‘s desire to conform to his father‘s wishes, despite Steven‘s resentment. This desire to please and conform is a hallmark of his character and the major catalyst for Steven‘s bi-sexual relationships and his ignorance and denial of his homosexuality throughout the series.

Although the father‘s alienation from and dominance over Steven reinforces long-standing stereotypes of homosexuals as socially deviant and weak, the creators sought to balance this message by consistently portraying Steven as a gay angel.

Steven directly challenges his father‘s business practices when he states that oil companies are corrupt and profit by unfairly exploiting the American public. His father counters Steven‘s challenge by reasserting his dominance, ―And your father is personally responsible for World War III. Now, Steven, I‘ve heard this garbage from people I almost respect. Do you really suppose I‘m going to take it from you?‖ When his father attempts to diminish Steven by pointing out that he does not work for a living, Steven counters with, ―Okay, I may not work, but at least I don‘t steal, and I don‘t rob from the people of this country by artificially pushing up the price of gasoline. I don‘t do that.‖37 Though Steven benefits from the corruption of Carrington

Oil, the creators cast his character as the moral fiber in the show‘s corrupt ensemble.

36 Ibid. 37 Ibid.

The creators‘ depiction of Steven as a gay angel, on the side of the public consumer against his oil giant father, challenges stereotypes suggesting that gay people are trite and selfish and need to be feared. Steven‘s character becomes a David challenging

Goliath as he stands up against his oil tycoon father. This was a key move on the creators‘ part because it calls to mind the inflated price of oil in 197938 and the United

States‘ suit against nine oil giants alleging ―…that the companies had artificially raised base prices on the natural-gas liquids that they bought…in order to justify charging higher prices to consumers and, ultimately, to increase their profits.‖39 Like the oil companies, the father also denies the charges. This storyline puts Steven on the side of the American people, standing up against greedy oil companies. It was a subtle statement to the viewership that gay people, via Steven, were not amoral monsters. It was this type of visibility that challenged preconceived negative stereotypes and that slowly filtered into a society and influenced social thought.

Dynasty‘s creators pushed past the boundaries of Soap in other areas as well.

For example, the romantic relationship between Steven and Ted Dinard challenged the conventions that had been established in Soap for the presentation of homosexual themes. In the episode ―Fallon‘s Wedding,‖ Steven‘s lover Ted travels to Denver to question Steven about his move out of their New York City apartment and to confront him about the social pressure he believes Steven is feeling to conform to a

38 Edward J. Markey, ―Decontrol of Oil is No Cure,‖ New York Times, January 9, 1981, A 23. 39 Richard Halloran, ―9 Big Oil Concerns Sued by U.S.; Overcharging on Product Denied,‖ New York Times, January 6, 1979, A 1.

heterosexual life style. During this conversation, Steven briefly and tenderly touches

Ted‘s face.40 The caress is quite unexpected in comparison to the portrayal of Jodie

Dallas‘ character, who is allowed no intimate physical contact with any boyfriend on

Soap. It demonstrated the creators‘ commitment to pushing the boundaries of how gay relationships were depicted on television as well as confronting the assumption that all gay relationships on television must be censored.

Yet the creators also conveyed the clear message that gay people were ultimately expected to sacrifice their authentic identities and conform to social pressures regarding sexuality. The sister represents the spokesperson for social conformity, advocating business above love, as she pressures Steven to hide his sexuality and sacrifice his true identity to attain the American Dream. When she finds Steven packing to return to his life in New York with his lover, she begs him to stay. She begins by asking, ―You‘re going to New York aren‘t you? Back to him.‖

When she questions why Steven would go back, Steven responds, ―‗Cause I want to.

‗Cause he was a very important part of my life for awhile. Because I don‘t have any life here.‖ She continues to press for more information. Steven finally tells her,

―Okay. I‘m in love with a man. And you‘re married to a man you don‘t love. Now tell me something, Fallon. Which one is worse? Which one is more immoral?‖ It turns out that the sister‘s concern is not the morality of Steven‘s relationship, but its

40 ―Fallon‘s Wedding,‖ Dynasty (ABC, February 2, 1981).

financial implications. She tells Steven that their father is not interested in giving her the fortune, so she wants Steven to stay,

Oh, Steven. Why can‘t you just take advantage of being Blake Carrington‘s son? Play by Blake Carrington‘s rules. Take and be. But don‘t be self- destructive. Keep your private life to yourself so you can take advantage of your possibilities. Please, Steven? For me?41

She playfully pulls at Steven‘s heart, his gay angel heart. He is willing to stay for her because as a gay angel it‘s about sacrificing his happiness for someone else‘s and for the ―greater good.‖ To her, it is about playing the social game to get ahead and sacrificing one‘s self to succeed based on social values. This interaction captures the sentiment of the 1980s, living the high life but paying its extreme emotional costs.

Whereas the sister represents social conformity, Ted, the lover, challenges the social norm. The creators used Ted as a disrupting force in the lives of the Carrington family. He represents Steven‘s homosexuality and a voice of reason in contrast to the emotional family expectations. When Ted comes to town, for the second time, to try and reach out to Steven, the sister intercepts him and makes clear what Steven risks if he strays from the path his father, and society, has chosen for him. She tells Ted to leave Steven alone, ―Because you‘re gonna cost him everything.‖ She insists that

Steven would be throwing away ―[h]is father‘s love … and his father‘s respect,‖ reinforcing the message that homosexuality causes familial alienation. And the sister makes clear to Ted the dangers Steven faces in the upper-class world in which the family lives, ―a world where culls and cripples and homosexuals are taken behind a

41 ―The Bordello,‖ Dynasty (ABC, February 23, 1981).

barn and slaughtered before they can be given the chance to breed.‖ Ted challenges her, ―Fallon, who the hell is more perverted—me or Blake Carrington, who goes around crushing human souls? I read about him, hear about him strangling corporations—the people inside those corporations, and for what, Fallon? More money?‖42 In presenting this exchange, the creators addressed the question of which is more or less moral: the corruption of wealth and power, or homosexuality and the right to love a person of one‘s choosing. The comparison is cemented later on in the episode when the father exerts his control by raping his wife in a fit of drunken angst over his son loving a man, his daughter loving sex, and his wife using birth control pills.43 The creators revealed the hypocrisy of society‘s opposition to same-sex relationships by making the heterosexual relationships dysfunctional and toxic, and by juxtaposing the heterosexual father‘s corruption with homosexual Steven‘s desire to live a simple, regular life.

But the creators also made clear that negative social views regarding homosexuality often destroyed that desired happiness with violence and rage. At the restaurant where Steven and Ted share an intimate dinner, a co-worker of Steven‘s witnesses Steven caressing Ted‘s face. Back on the oil rig, where Steven works, the co-worker exposes Steven in front of all the other rig workers and calls Steven a

―pre-vert.‖ A fight ensues between Matthew Blaisdel, the oil company‘s owner, and the worker when the worker refuses to back off and leave Steven alone. Afterward,

42 ―Krystle‘s Lie: Part 1,‖ Dynasty (ABC, March 2, 1981). 43 Ibid.

while standing outside the office, Matthew asks Steven, ―Now you want to tell me what that was all about?‖ Steven explains, ―He saw me with a friend of mine—guy from New York. We were roommates there.‖ Steven‘s non-specific answer leads

Matthew to ask, ―So what? I had a roommate in college I still see.‖ Then, Steven opens up the conversation, ―Were you in love with him?‖ Matthew defensively questions, ―What the hell kind of question is that?‖44 This response immediately indicates the tension associated with questioning a man‘s heterosexuality and, thus, his masculinity. The creators used it as a reminder of the socially derogatory implications of calling someone ―gay‖ to establish his social inferiority. Yet the creators used Steven to challenge that feeling of shame. Steven explains, ―I cared about him very much, and he cared about me. And he still does. Maybe I still do, too. I don‘t know. But I do know this. I‘m not ashamed of it.‖45 Unlike the creators of Soap who had Jodie‘s character contemplate a sex change to conform to society‘s heterocentric view of sexuality, the creators of Dynasty allowed Steven to challenge the inevitability of sexual conformity.

Yet Steven‘s challenge to sexual conformity has its limits, as the final and climactic scene between Steven and Ted makes clear. After Steven breaks up with

Ted in a ―Dear John‖ letter, Ted visits Steven at the mansion. While the two men are

44 ―Fallon‘s Wedding,‖ Dynasty (ABC, February 2, 1981). 45 Ibid.; The relationship between Matthew Blaisdel and Steven Carrington in the first season of the show is a crucial element for the show‘s depiction of Steven. Matthew is depicted as a working class ―man‘s man‖ whose ―live at let live‖ mentality allows for a mentor relationship to develop between him and Steven.

talking in Steven‘s room, Steven‘s father arrives home and learns that Ted is in his house. He becomes enraged and says, ―I‘ll kill him!‖ as he stomps towards Steven‘s room. The camera shows Steven and Ted saying their goodbyes as the father walks in on their farewell embrace, shouting, ―Get your hands off my son!‖ Steven tries to explain, ―Dad, we were—,‖ but the father yells, ―I said, get your hands off him!‖ He lunges toward Ted and violently pulls him away from Steven. A struggle ensues and the father pushes Ted who falls and hits his head on the corner of the hearth. Steven quickly runs over to him, ―He‘s not breathing.‖ The sister (who has been there for much of the confrontation) gasps. Steven looks up at his father and moans, ―You‘ve killed him.‖46 Though the creators may not have intended it, this melodrama served to graphically and emotionally communicate the social reminder that nonconformity leads to tragedy and violent death. Ted was the homosexual man who blocked

Steven‘s passage down the road to a heterosexual lifestyle. He ―tempted‖ and

―lured‖ Steven away from a relationship with a woman. The father‘s volatile reaction represented not only society‘s fear of gay individuals, but demonstrated the magnitude of its disgust toward homosexuality. At the same time, the creators also had the other characters react in horror and shock to Ted‘s death, thereby countering the implication that Ted‘s homosexuality brought on his own death. So, while Ted, the gay tempter, had to die, his death was not celebrated by the characters, and the scene was communicated as tragic and wrong.

46 ―The Separation,‖ Dynasty (ABC, March 23, 1981).

The creators further explored society‘s disgust towards homosexuality during the father‘s ensuing trial for first degree murder. The prosecutor aims to ―…show that

Mr. Blake Carrington knew about this homosexual relationship that existed between his son and Mr. [Ted] Dinard, and, because of that relationship, he hated the victim…with a cold and unrelenting hatred.‖47 The defense, however, states,

His intent—and his only intent—was to protect his young son. Now, as this case develops we are going to see that Blake Carrington had a strong and lifelong love for his young son. Oh, he knew that he had gone awry, but he also knew at the same time that he was well on the road to a normal and manly life. Now, on the evening of the unfortunate accident, Blake Carrington entered his home and learned to his horror and disgust that Ted Dinard was present in his home. Thinking of his son, and thinking only—only—to protect and save him from a life of shame…the defendant went upstairs to see his son, to talk to him and there found Ted Dinard with his arms around his son. Mr. Carrington stepped into the room and commanded Ted Dinard to leave.48

The creators‘ used of the words ―horror,‖ ―disgust,‖ and ―hatred‖ when discussing homosexuality in the court room scene reiterate the propaganda that homosexuality is something to fear. These words convey to the audience a sense of repulsion brought on by a simple farewell embrace. The physical contact brings on a homophobic rage and, therefore, becomes a catalyst for Ted‘s death. Both times when there is physical contact between Steven and Ted, physical retaliation follows as a reminder to keep within the social confines of heterosexuality. This violence may be in part a commentary on the increases in ―gay bashing‖ in the 1980s in the major metropolitan areas as gay visibility increased. Fueled by fear and ignorance, homophobic behaviors

47 ―Blake Goes to Jail,‖ Dynasty (ABC, April 13, 1981). 48 Ibid.

and propaganda sought to spotlight the old paean of the ―homosexual menace,‖ the predator. As with the real-life beatings, Dynasty used the physical punishment of gay people as a social reminder of majority rule and the consequences of deviation.

While in the first season of Dynasty the creators had pushed Steven‘s character towards heterosexual ―normalcy;‖ in the second season they used his character to examine the price of conformity for gay men who try to conform to social expectations.49 Though they placed Steven in multiple relationships with both men and women, the creators insisted in a statement that Steven‘s character was indeed gay. They introduced romantic storylines involving him with women in order to explore what they saw as a common trend in society of gay men marrying women to placate familial and societal expectations and to try to be ―normal.‖50 The first of these romantic storylines began with Steven and Sammy Jo, the stepmother‘s niece, sharing morning-after kisses when Sammy Jo sneaks into Steven‘s room because she is afraid of a thunderstorm.51 Steven, confused about his feelings for this woman and women in general, realizes that he‘s not in love with Sammy Jo, but is actually in love with Claudia. Claudia, however, refuses to divorce her husband.52 So, naturally,

Steven chooses to marry Sammy Jo instead! The creators developed Steven‘s erratic

49 The second season also corresponded with the beginning of AIDS. That summer in July 1981, an article in the Los Angeles Times, ―Outbreaks of Pneumonia Among Gay Males Studied,‖ reported that the Center for Diseases Control in Atlanta was investigating ―mysterious outbreaks of pneumonia‖ in gay males. In December, 1981, researchers began to suspect a virus was the cause of the disease that they found to be sexually transmitted; Nelson, ―Virus May Be Linked,‖ 3; Steven‘s ―heterosexual‖ storyline started that same month. 50 Wilson, ―Is Steven Gay?,‖ 7. 51 ―Viva Las Vegas,‖ Dynasty (ABC, December 12, 1981). 52 ―The Miscarriage,‖ Dynasty (ABC, December 16, 1981).

and desperate behavior right after the death of his former gay lover by his father‘s hands. It is that insurmountable pressure on Steven‘s character to live as a heterosexual that sends him into a confused spiral with women, including female prostitutes, and eventually leads to a divorce in season three. This desperate and chaotic behavior illustrated by the gay angel stereotype portrays the damage that conforming represents.

Then in the third season, the creators refocused on Steven‘s gay identity. After an oil rig accident overseas, Steven is assumed dead for a period of time, but eventually returns to discover that he and his wife have had a child. Steven assumes custody of the baby and moves in with a new roommate, Chris Deegan, who is also gay, though not sexually involved with Steven.53 This was a step forward compared to Soap, because the creators actually used a gay male as a roommate instead of a lesbian. Yet Steven‘s father is still unable to adjust to the idea of his grandson being cared for by two gay men. In an emotional scene, Steven‘s father drops by Steven‘s apartment to find Chris babysitting his grandson, and tries to force Chris to leave.54

Just then Steven returns to the apartment and insists that his father be the one to leave.

His father contacts his lawyer saying, ―Andrew, I‘ll be damned if I‘m going to let two gays raise that baby.‖55 Again, the issue of gay parenting, as with Soap, leads to a court battle.

53 Chris Deegan is a platonic roommate and Steven‘s lawyer. 54 ―The Cabin,‖ Dynasty (ABC, April 20, 1983). 55 Ibid.

The season three finale set up a season four custody battle between Steven and his father that made clear the challenges gay parents had in obtaining custody of their children. The growing success of the Gay Rights Movement by the 1980s had resulted in stronger support networks, allowing many gay men and gay women who were or had been in heterosexual marriages and had children to begin coming out.

This propelled gay parents into the courts to fight for custody of their children, which traditionally they could not get. Yet while some gay parents were able to win custody, prejudices towards homosexuality made the likelihood of losing high.56 This uncertainty was captured in the court battle between Steven and his father. His stepmother, his ex-lover Claudia, and his sister all testify on behalf of Steven. His father, however, is certain that the court will take Steven‘s son away because he believes that Steven‘s homosexuality makes him an unfit parent. This is compounded by both the social worker‘s and the judge‘s belief that gay parents will make gay children.57

Once again, a serious challenge from the father over Steven‘s homosexuality leads him to conform to social expectations under threat, this time of losing his child.

Despite serious reservations, Steven marries Claudia in order to retain custody of his son. This was a step backward from Soap, but also reflected the conservative times and it should not go unnoticed that AIDS among gay men was a growing concern.

The fact that the creators had Steven promise to remain with Claudia in court once

56 Armao, ―3 Million Children,‖ 6. 57 ―The Hearing: Part 1,‖ Dynasty (ABC, October 26, 1983); Armao, ―3 Million Children,‖ 6.

again reiterates the need for a heterosexual façade. He doesn‘t marry Claudia because the two are in love but because he doesn‘t want his child taken away from him. Once again he has to sacrifice his gay identity under the pressure of social insecurities and prejudices.

The creators‘ back and forth portrayal of Steven‘s sexuality generated a heated media discussion. Armistead Maupin, a well-known out writer and social commentator, argued that the marriage storyline with Steven and Claudia was the creators‘ nod to ―…the oldest wives‘ tale in the book: He‟s not really gay. He just hasn‟t found the right woman yet‖ (recall the similar storyline with Jodie and the woman he falls in love with). Maupin charged that the depiction added to the misconception ―…that homosexuality simply is a matter of willful disobedience, an acquired taste the can be abandoned as readily as nail-biting,‖ and suggested that protests from the Moral Majority had scared the creators away from presenting

Steven as a real gay character.58 The creators, Richard and Esther Shapiro, responded in a statement,

―Steven Carrington has not gone straight….He was, is and always will be gay. Gay men often have relationships with women, marry, have children. Like straight men, they want to be fathers, family men. Steven Carrington‘s story is not over with his marriage with Claudia. It has only just begun.‖

58 Armistead Maupin, ―Calendar: ‗Dynasty‘: Back into the Closet?‖ Los Angeles Times, February 19, 1984, S 7; Dynasty was widely popular with gay men and became a draw to gay bars on Wednesday nights that featured Dynasty in order to keep and draw in patrons; Anne LaRiviera, ―‗Dynasty May Be Gay Bars‘ Answer to ‗Monday Night Football,‘‖ Los Angeles Times, February 19, 1984, LB 1.

The Shapiros, Aaron Spelling and Douglas Cramer all defended their stance as strong supporters of the gay community.59

Shortly afterward, the creators brought in another gay character, Luke Fuller, who appears to be interested in relationship with Steven. Steven, being the gay angel, makes a concerted effort to remain faithful to Claudia despite his true sexual orientation.60 The creators used this opportunity to explore the issues in Steven and

Claudia‘s marriage by having Claudia, complain that she is tired of being an afterthought in Steven‘s life, revealing the tensions behind a marriage whose sole purpose was to help Steven keep custody of his child.61 Luke continues to interject himself into Steven and Claudia‘s relationship when he calls at their home to discuss business with Steven, angering Claudia. The creators used small instances like these to shed light on the lack of fulfillment in the marriage, especially for Claudia. They challenged the notion that the ―right‖ woman would ―fix‖ ―homosexual tendencies‖ and refuted Maupin‘s accusations.

The creators continued to depict Steven as the gay angel as he remains faithful to Claudia even after she begins to stray. Desperate for an emotional, physical connection with someone, Claudia is drawn to another man. Steven, despite his realization that Claudia has become interested in this man, remains faithful. Luke

59The Shapiros mentioned that they had a twenty year policy not to respond to criticisms, but they saw Maupin‘s article as an attack against Spelling and Douglas and so an important issue to combat; Wilson, ―Is Steven Gay?,‖ 7. 60 ―The Secret,‖ Dynasty (ABC, November 21, 1984). 61 Ibid.

continues to pursue him; he continues to decline.62 The creators took great pains to cement that Steven was martyring himself to societal expectations as they showed

Steven struggling against Luke‘s advances. In California, Luke meets Steven in his hotel room to go over paper work. Luke mentions how beautiful Claudia is, then

―accidently‖ pours a drink on Steven‘s shirt. When Luke tries to help him clean it up,

Steven becomes agitated and leaves to change his shirt in the bathroom. The creators had Steven take a long look at himself in the mirror,63 a look that poignantly communicates Steven‘s persistent struggle to stay committed to his marriage despite his true identity as a gay man.

The creators took advantage of the turmoil in Steven‘s marriage to explore a relationship between Steven and Luke. In ―The Will,‖ Steven finally agrees to join

Luke for a dinner between friends only.64 Even though Claudia is starting to move on,

Steven still hopes to reconcile. This is evident in the next episode when Luke tries to spend time alone with Steven, but Steven declines because Claudia is coming home and he feels loyalty to her. When Luke expresses regret at Steven‘s decision, Steven gets angry because he still clings to the hope of living a ―traditional‖ lifestyle with a wife and child, and Luke is a threat to that dream. Luke apologizes and stresses that he knows what Steven is going through because he used to be married himself.65

Again, the creators had a love interest for Steven express understanding for Steven‘s

62 ―Domestic Intrigue,‖ Dynasty (ABC, November 28, 1984). 63 Ibid. 64 ―The Will,‖ Dynasty (ABC, January 9, 1985). 65 ―The Treasure,‖ Dynasty (ABC, January 16, 1985).

struggle to live a heterosexual lifestyle in opposition to his gay identity, communicating the universality of Steven‘s predicament. This scene also implies that family life does not include the possibilities of a gay family because both men are required to leave their family units behind in order to live true to their identities.

Moreover, it asserts that the traditional heterosexual family is the ideal because everyone, including gay men like Steven and Luke, at one point seeks it out.

A major step in the slow progression of Steven‘s character towards embracing his homosexuality occurs in ―Foreign Relations.‖ Steven‘s long lost brother confronts

Steven in the workroom by snarling, ―You‘re having an affair with the little fag you‘re working with.‖ This sends the two men into a physical altercation which prompts Steven to go to Luke‘s apartment. Steven tells him, ―I‘ve thought about us.

And I know what I want to do, where I want to be, and with whom.‖ He walks into the apartment, and the door closes.66 This is the first time Dynasty creators strongly implied that Steven is going to have sex with another man instead of giving the audience a passive after-the-fact realization, as with the Steven‘s past relationship.

Compared to his previous lover having to ask to stay the night, Steven‘s direct dialogue with Luke followed by a door closing is much more sexually provocative.67

The creators, however, challenged what could have been a ―happily ever after‖ scenario and brought restrictive social expectations to the forefront when Luke wants Steven to meet his sister. The creators demonstrated the social turmoil involved

66 ―Foreign Relations,‖ Dynasty (ABC, January 23, 1985). 67 Ibid.

in living openly as a gay man through Steven‘s fear of taking the next step with Luke, meeting his family. The situation overwhelms Steven and later prompts him to try and break up with Luke. Steven is afraid that he is beginning to fall in love with Luke, which threatens Steven‘s desire to live a ―normal‖ heterosexual life with a wife and family, something he still can‘t help himself from desiring. Because the prospects of living as a gay man would destroy that notion, Steven tells Luke that he wants to make it work with his family (Claudia). The creators, however, didn‘t let Steven‘s character off that easily and remind the audience of Steven‘s homosexual identity as

Claudia interrupts their goodbye hug and angrily says, ―One of these days I‘ll learn to knock.‖ At this point Steven reminds Claudia that she knew who he was before she married him.68 The creators used this to indicate that Steven has always self-identified as a gay even though he has struggled to live as a heterosexual. This reiterates that the

Shapiros never wanted the audience to forget that Steven is gay and that, as a gay man in the 1980s, he struggles to accept and live his identity.

In the next episode, ―The Ball,‖ the creators again reinforced Steven‘s homosexuality in a meeting between Claudia and Luke. She meets with Luke and asks him to stay away from Steven because Steven is unhappy and struggling against his homosexuality. Luke agrees but tells Claudia that she is fooling herself because he has walked the same path Steven is walking, and he knows where it leads.69 The creators used this interchange to comment that despite a person‘s overwhelming

68 ―Triangles,‖ Dynasty (ABC, January 30, 1985). 69 ―The Ball,‖ Dynasty (ABC, February 6, 1985).

desire to fit in socially, his or her sexuality will win in the end. Yet, when Steven finally confronts Luke in ―The Collapse,‖ he tells Luke that he can‘t live the ―gay lifestyle‖ and be happy.70 To Steven, it‘s not about being gay, and it‘s not about being all that happy; it‘s about following in the dream of having a nuclear family, a family that Steven never had, and that his father wanted him to have and that is ultimately his strategy for finding happiness at this point.

The creators used the prospect of Steven losing Luke permanently in ―Life and Death‖ to force Steven‘s character to reevaluate whether to accept his sexuality or continue to fight it. Luke visits Steven under the guise of needing a job recommendation since he is leaving the company. In actuality, Luke just wants to see

Steven, and Steven returns the sentiments. Steven‘s father then sees the two men together, and later questions Steven about Luke. Steven interrupts, ―Dad, I love

Claudia, and Danny is life itself to me, but I‘m tired of trying to fight it—trying to deny what I feel.‖ Steven apologizes, but his father tells him, ―Steven, I lost one child this year, and now I may lose my sister—eh, I could wish things were different for you, but no matter who you are or what you are, I‘ll be damned if I‘m going to lose you.‖ Then he hugs Steven. This is a momentous occasion between the two and signifies a great step forward in pop culture, acknowledging homosexual characters as deserving of acceptance and family love.

70 ―The Collapse,‖ Dynasty (ABC, February 20, 1985).

Steven‘s character in Dynasty represented the next step forward from Jodie

Dallas. Through his on-going social struggles, he comes to stand up for his gay identity rather than deny it or completely lose himself and his chance at a happy, authentic life. In addition, by this time in 1985, the story signals a turning point for his father (by extension the cultural embodiment of the struggling older generation) and his acceptance of his son‘s homosexuality.71 After the conversation in ―Life and

Death,‖ Steven confides to his stepmother that he thought all he needed was his father‘s acceptance, but now that he has it, he knows he needs more.72 Since the first confrontation Steven has with his father after arriving home from the Middle East, the creators had Steven chase his father‘s American Dream in a frantic and desperate attempt to acquire a semblance of heterosexual ―normalcy.‖ Without the fear of losing his father, Steven begins to embrace his gay identity. In the next episode,

―Parental Consent,‖ Steven tells Claudia he is going to try to make things work with

Luke.73 This marked a turning point in the show and a commitment from the creators to explore, at least for a time, a gay relationship.

But as promising as this progress was, Dynasty, like Soap, drew the line at having a child raised by two same-sex people. Despite having family support, Steven

71 It is also important to note that the creators did not make the father‘s character an all- accepting father because after his speech to Steven he goes behind Steven‘s back and asks Claudia to stay with Steven. ―Life and Death,‖ Dynasty (ABC, February 27. 1985). 72 Ibid. 73 ―Parental Consent,‖ Dynasty (ABC, March 6, 1985).

waivers when Luke asks him to move in.74 Steven eventually invites Luke to a wedding in Moldavia75 and promises to move in with him, because he no longer cares what the world thinks. But instead of opening up a storyline to deal with two gay men raising a child, the creators had revolutionary soldiers gun down a number of the wedding guests, including Luke, thus ending season five.76 So even though the Gay

Rights Movement paved the way for ―real‖ gay television characters and challenged stereotypes and storylines, the prospects of an on-going gay relationship, not to mention a gay family, were too controversial during the 1980s, especially considering the decade‘s struggle with the AIDS epidemic.

In the season six premiere of ―The Aftermath,‖ Luke dies from his gunshot wound, which allowed the creators to further the father-son bond between Steven and his father. The father walks in as Steven comforts the dying Luke. Luke dies in agony, and Steven begins repeating Luke‘s name over and over. The father now comforts Steven, saying he is sorry, and Steven tells Luke, ―I love you, I love you.‖

In true soap opera fashion, and in the same room where Luke‘s dead body is still on the bed, Steven‘s father takes the opportunity to tell Steven, ―I thought you‘d be happier living by my values. It was wrong of me. I can see now that your own values work as well for you as mine do for me.‖ He walks up to Steven and puts his hands

74 ―The Crash,‖ Dynasty (ABC, March 20, 1985). 75 ―Kidnapped,‖ Dynasty (ABC, April 10, 1985). 76 ―Royal Wedding,‖ Dynasty (ABC, May 15, 1985).

on Steve‘s arms, ―Son, I love you. I‘d lay down my life for you.‖77 But the fact remains that once again the creators killed off the openly gay man who tried to get

Steven to live ―out‖ in a homosexual relationship. This is a clear reminder of the stereotyped ―social deviant homosexual‖ whose exploration beyond the bounds of social conformity leads to a violent and untimely death; it‘s a clear reminder of the threat to non-conformers, or as Claudia puts it, ―Poor Luke, the other outsider.‖78

However, even though Luke‘s character does die, the death opens the door for

Steven‘s father to finally and fully embrace his gay son. In effect, Steven‘s lovers are sacrificed, thus becoming ―gay angels‖ in death for the purpose of assisting Steven‘s father to grow towards acceptance of his son‘s homosexuality.

The creators continued to stress how liberating living as an out gay man should be, but they lacked any major follow through with Steven‘s character, merely grazing over larger, more controversial issues confronting gay men and women at the time. Instead of exploring any long term gay relationships with Steven, the creators brought characters in and out of Steven‘s life to highlight the importance of being openly gay. But rather than having Steven follow that openness to the next step and live as an ―out‖ example to the audience, he continuously tries to insert himself into the ―heterosexual family‖ world instead of creating a life that encapsulates all of his needs and clearly defines his American Dream rather than his father‘s. This back and forth clearly reflects the conflict between the gay rights advocates and the religious

77 ―The Aftermath,‖ Dynasty (ABC, September 25, 1985). 78 Ibid.

conservatives of the 1980s as Steven encouragingly takes a significant step forward, only to jump back into the zone of social conformity.

The final seasons of Dynasty examined the definitional confines of family during this decade. While gay families were struggling to gain rights and protections, the creators of Dynasty continued to look through a heterosexual lens for their models of family life. In the seventh season, the creators reintroduced Steven to the idea of having a traditional family. For several episodes, he and his first wife try to make it work as a family for their son, Danny. Steven desperately wants to be a family man.79 But in the ―Valez‖ episode, Steven breaks it off with her. He tells her that he can‘t change for her, and he can‘t be the man that she wants him to be. Later on in the episode Steven confides in his father about how upset little Danny is to learn that he will be leaving. His father reminds Steven that whatever happens, he will love him.80

And in season eight, in 1988, Steven leaves Denver and the show.81

The creators‘ unwillingness to allow Steven to have a happy relationship with another gay man is notable, because by the late 1980s the regulatory climate was changing enough that they might have been able to develop such a plot line. During the Reagan administration, a set of policy changes had taken place within the FCC that substantially changed older industry practices of self-regulation. Federal

79 ―The Portrait,‖ Dynasty (ABC, January 28, 1987); ―The Test,‖ Dynasty (ABC, February 11, 1987); ―The Dress,‖ Dynasty (ABC, March 25, 1987). 80 ―Valez,‖ Dynasty (ABC, April 1, 1987); Steven leaves Danny with Sammy Jo because he doesn‘t want to keep hurting the people he loves. 81 ―Colorado Roulette,‖ Dynasty (ABC, March 30, 1988).

oversight of the broadcasting industry was reduced, the NAB television code was eliminated and the Standards and Practices departments were cut back. Scholar

David Silverman notes that these changes effectively ended ―the era of self-regulation with regards to the objectionable content.‖82

In 1991, three years after the show ended, the creators made a two-part

Dynasty reunion miniseries in which they finally presented Steven as a gay man in a stable relationship and even furthered Steven‘s relationship with his father. Set three years later, Steven is now living in Washington, D.C., with Bart Fallmont. In a meeting between the father and Steven, his father asks Steven if he and Bart love each other. After Steven confirms that they do, his father tells him that he envies their relationship and wishes he and his wife could have what the two men have.83 This plots development represented a huge nod towards gay rights advocates by directly addressing many of the criticisms the show had endured. It also demonstrates tremendous progress with the father‘s character, confidently affirming to viewers that the older generation could indeed accept homosexuality. Whereas Soap had ended with Jodie in a confused state (since he thought he was an eighty-year-old heterosexual man), Dynasty, albeit the reunion, ends with a committed gay relationship (and no one has died!). However, even though the creators put Steven in

82David S. Silverman, “You Can‟t Air That”: Four Cases of Controversy and Censorship in American Television Programming (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2007), Kindle edition. 83 ―Dynasty: Reunion,‖ Dynasty (ABC, October 20 & 21, 1991).

a committed relationship, they did not continue to push the bounds into the definition of a family; they kept Steven‘s son in the custody of his first ex-wife.84

The efforts of the creators of Dynasty to balance the struggles between religious, conservative ideals and those of the gay rights advocates produced a show that exemplifies the slow pace with which the Gay Rights Movement gained ground in social thought during the 1980s. The father‘s gradual acceptance of Steven‘s homosexuality over the span of the series represents progress. But the creators approached the idea of gay ―family life‖ from the perspective of society at large, in which they only way a gay man can have a family is by becoming (or pretending to become) a heterosexual. Because they adopted the perspective of the larger society, the creators allowed Steven to consider only a limited set of options. His character struggles between his gay identity and the family life he desperately desires. The only family life possible in the show is a heterosexual family and the quickly-becoming- outdated traditional idea of the American Dream. While the show reiterated how important it was to be honest about being gay through characters other than Steven, the creators shied away from introducing a gay family with children, even to the point of killing off the one character who suggests it. Dynasty reflected an American audience that was able to deal with the idea of gay characters in a heterosexual setting and brief allusions to homosexual encounters, but drew the line at introducing a gay family unit.

84Ibid.

Chapter Three

The cultural wars of the 1970s and 1980s were heightened in the 1990s. The

Republicans lost to the Democrats after twelve years of presidential control when Bill

Clinton took office on January 20, 1993. This added fuel to an already growing fire because many Republicans saw Clinton, the ―pot-smoking, philandering, draft- dodger,‖ as ―...the epitome of all that was wrong with his baby boom generation.‖1

The conservatives longed for the Leave it to Beaver days before legalized abortion, high divorce rates and un-wed pregnancies registered epidemic public proportions.

Religious conservatives continued to fight to restore what they considered traditional

―family values‖ to preserve the American society with organizations such as the

Family Research Council and Christian Coalition. Liberals, however, saw the religious conservatives as intolerant and aggressive in their pursuits.2

The 1990s brought political setbacks for the Gay Rights Movement with the

―Don‘t Ask, Don‘t Tell‖ policy within the U.S. military and the Defense of Marriage

Act. Though Clinton had promised to do away with existing laws which prevented gays from serving in the armed forces, he instead compromised with ―Don‘t ask,

Don‘t tell‖ (DADT) which prohibited questions or answers regarding a person‘s

1 James T. Patterson, Restless Giant: The United States From Watergate to Bush V. Gore. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 260, 249. 2 Ibid., 256, 260.

sexual orientation.3 Thousands of qualified troops would be discharged after its enactment in 1993. Then in 1996, while focusing on ―family values,‖ Clinton pushed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which federally defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman and made clear that no state had to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state.4

These were crushing defeats, but when, on October 12th, 1998, openly gay, twenty-one year old Matthew Shepard died from a horrifying beating in Laramie,

Wyoming, the gay community was rocked even more. The crime grabbed the attention of the nation and shined a spotlight on the need for anti-gay hate crime legislation. Matthew Shepard became symbolic of the need to pass a hate crimes bill that included sexual orientation.5

Even with this tragedy and the conservatives‘ continuous pressure to try to reshape cultural thought, the country‘s youth continued to become more liberalized and tolerant.6 According to historian James Patterson, ―…Americans were becoming less censorious about the behavior of other people,‖ and ―attitudes towards gays and lesbians were slowly liberalizing.‖7 In addition, with an increase in the amount and intensity of sexual content on television in the 1990s8 the door opened for shows

3 Ibid., 328. 4 Ibid., 373. 5 After a decade of fighting, on October 28, 2009, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act was signed into law by President Barack Obama. 6 Patterson, Restless Giant, 269. 7 Ibid., 269, 271. 8 Ibid., 289.

containing sexual themes geared towards a teenage audience, such as Dawson‟s

Creek.9

Prior to the creation of Dawson‟s Creek (1998-2003), Paul Stupin, who would later become one of the executive producers of the popular teen drama, read a draft for Scary Movie (later entitled Scream (1996), written by Kevin Williamson. Stupin was immediately captivated by the script. He recalls that ―[he] loved it, there was great suspense, and the thing that struck [him] about it was the quality of the youthful voices; they were very witty and well constructed.‖10 Inspired, Stupin set up a meeting with Williamson to discuss making a television anthology horror series.

Williamson remembers, ―It was one of [his] first meetings after [he] sold Scream.

[Scream] had been such a big to-do that [he] was thrust into the Hollywood fast lane.‖11 Williamson, however, explained to Stupin that his interest in the horror genre was merely a childhood pursuit. This led Stupin to question what other childhood stories Williamson had to share which could be translated into a television series.

Williamson relayed how he ―…used to hang out in a small little town and make home movies in [his] backyard, and then [he] started weaving a story about a girl down the

9 The Telecommunications Act of 1996 required that all televisions made after 1999 contain a ―V-chip‖ which allowed home censorship. In addition, an age based ratings system was also created. This opened the door for more objectionable material on television because the V-chip, not Standards and Practices, was ―the new gatekeeper.‖ David S. Silverman, “You Can‟t Air That”: Four Cases of Controversy and Censorship in American Television Programming (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2007), Kindle edition. 10 Darren Crosdale, Dawson‟s Creek: The Official Companion. (Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1999), 135. 11 Ibid., 128.

creek who used to row over in a boat and [how] it was very much [his] life.‖12 After their meeting, Williamson put together a story they could pitch, about his childhood experiences.13 They first pitched the show to the Fox network in December, 1995, where Stupin had previously worked as the executive vice president of series programming, but Fox declined. Six months later the pair landed a deal to produce a show called Dawson‟s Creek with the Warner Bros network.14

Whereas Soap and Dynasty had targeted adult audiences to explore what at the time were considered ―adult‖ sexual themes, the creators of Dawson‟s Creek focused on younger audiences without shying away from this so-called adult controversial subject matter and marked a clear cultural shift in the United States media over the decades. Dawson‟s Creek premiered on January 20, 1998, and centered on a group of high school friends in fictional Capeside, Massachusetts, trying to learn how they fit into the world at large during their time of sexual awakening. Because the creators were exploring these characters‘ sexual discovery through a range of experiences and realizations, it was fitting for them to introduce their teenaged audience to the topic of homosexuality. And interestingly, the fear that youths would be exposed to homosexual content, which had driven religious conservatives into a massive letter- writing campaign and advertiser boycott against Soap, did not materialize in response to Dawson‟s Creek. The Parents Television Council did cite Dawson‟s Creek as the

12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid.

most offensive television show on network television in both 1998 and 1999; however, the show‘s popularity garnered it a Teen Choice award for Best Television

Drama in 1999.15

Because of the sexually provocative themes and the teenage target audience, the creators of Dawson‟s Creek used creative means to deal with Standards and

Practices, the network censors. Co-executive producer Jeffery Stepakoff stated that

―on Dawson‘s, we had caught on that the best way to get what we wanted approved was to leave material in drafts of scripts that we knew very well would never fly, simply to strengthen our negotiating position.‖16 These over-the-top scripts led to concessions from the network censors,

―Please reduce the number of ‗crap‘s by half in this script and consider spreading the remaining ones over the next few episodes.‖ ―Please replace the disparaging term ‗stanky ho-bag‘ with ‗prostitute.‘‖ ―Does the axe murderer have to use an axe? Please strongly consider less violent means for him to accomplish his task….‖ ―Make sure that in Act Three when the characters ‗have passionate sex on the kitchen floor‘ that they remain fully clothed throughout. Likewise, make sure that when the character takes a shower afterward he is not naked from the waist down. Can we do both of these scenes off-screen and simply reference them in subsequent scenes?‖ ―If characters drink excessively they must get sick. Please make sure such sickness is dramatized tastefully.‖ ―You may have ‗ass‘ but not ‗ass-hole.‘ ‗A-hole‘ will be accepted if you remove all the ‗craps‘s and ‗butt-breath.‘‖ ―‗Screw you is an improvement from ‗Go fuck yourself,‘ but it is still deemed inappropriate.‖

15 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118300/awards 16 Jeffery Stepakoff, Billion-Dollar Kiss: The Kiss That Saved Dawson‟s Creek and Other Adventures in TV Writing (New York: Gotham Books, 2008), 271.

―If you remove two ‗damn‘s and a ‗hell‘ you may have the keg party.‖17

By creating extreme scenarios in the scripts, the creators achieved more of what they set out to do.

Kevin Williamson, creator of the semi-autobiographical series, had been a gay man out to his family and friends since 1992; therefore, he took the opportunity in the second season to introduce Jack McPhee, a young closeted gay character who would face the same kinds of struggles as Williamson had faced as a teenager.18 Williamson recalled a conversation he had with Ellen DeGeneres in 1998, his then neighbor, in which she told him that he could be a good role model for gay youth, especially with his position as the series creator of Dawson‟s Creek.19 Williamson also brought in openly gay Greg Berlanti, who would later work on Jack‘s coming out episodes, after

Williamson read Berlanti‘s script for The Broken Hearts Club (which later won a

GLAAD media award for outstanding film). In addition to DeGeneres‘ influence,

Williamson cited Matthew Shepard‘s murder as another major influence in having

Jack come out. He said that both he and Berlanti knew it was time. As they put it,

―‗It‘s our show. It‘s now or never.‘‖20 In promoting Jack‘s coming out episode,

Williamson also outed himself to the press.21

17 Ibid., 271-272. 18 Jeffery Epstein, ―Mr. Smith Goes to Hollywood,‖ Out, March 2001, 84. 19 Jeffery Epstein, ―Kevin Williamson Unbound,‖ The Advocate, August 31, 1999, 35-36. 20 Epstein, ―Mr. Smith Goes to Hollywood,‖ 84. 21 Epstein, ―Kevin Williamson Unbound,‖ 36.

Jack‘s storyline became a means for both Williamson and Berlanti to share their personal experiences growing up by creating a character to whom gay teens could relate. Through his coming out process, schooling and relationships, Jack personifies the gay experience, and provides a perspective that directly challenges social thought opposed to homosexuality. Jack‘s personable character appeals to youth and dramatizes the need for compassion and understanding towards gay people.

Instead of trying to make the audience view the gay character through a heteronormative lens, the creators crafted a gay lens through which the audience can view society from that vantage point.

The treatment of homosexual themes in Dawson‟s Creek demonstrates a dramatic shift away from the patterns typical in previous television shows. Rather than the common heterocentric concern with how homosexuality fits into a straight defined world, Dawson‟s Creek advocated for gay acceptance and equal inclusion for gays within society. The creators propelled Jack past the gay angel stereotype and challenge social views hostile to homosexuality. Jack‘s traits, flaws and heroic moments are developed as fully as those of the rest of the major characters. The creators not only used Dawson‟s Creek as a means to capture gay struggles for inclusion, but also used those struggles as a means to advocate for gay rights.

The creators communicated the fear of isolation gay people experience to convey the social pressures put on gay children to remain hidden in a straight dominated society. They called attention to the socially instilled self-hatred many gay

youths feel through Jack‘s coming out process and the social repercussions of being visibly gay, especially in a small town. The creators made a pivotal decision to introduce Jack as a ―regular‖ straight teen so the audience can learn to care about him without any preconceived notions about his homosexuality and so be drawn empathetically into his coming out process. This was in sharp contrast to the always- gay portrayals of Jodie and Steven in the earlier series. Jack‘s character is a shy, quiet, art enthusiast who has just moved into town with his family. Eventually, he gets a girlfriend, Joey, who shares his passion for art and leads them into a brief, whirl-wind romance in a storyline that establishes what seems like a safe environment for all the children in Capeside.22

But this sense of safety for Jack suddenly becomes threatened when he is forced to read aloud a poem he has written in Mr. Peterson‘s English class, which the creators used to launch into their initial commentaries on young gay life. The students have been told that the poem is meant for the teacher‘s eyes only. But Mr. Peterson, who is cast as a soul-sucking ―teacher‖ who takes pleasure in the misery and embarrassment of others, tells Jack that he needs to read his poem our loud to the entire class. In an agonizing recital, Jack reads, ―Today. Today was a day. The world got smaller, darker. I grew more afraid. Not of what I am but of what I—‖ Jack pauses. He stares at his paper, then he looks up, his eyes communicating immense fear, then continues, ―I grew more afraid. Not of what I am but of what I could be. I

22 Jack also doesn‘t have any stereotyped ―gay-wear‖ on such as Jodie‘s suits or Steven‘s sweaters. He looks like an ―average‖ heterosexual white, teenaged boy.

loosen my collar to take a breath. My eyes fade. And I see—I see him. The image of perfection. His frame strong. His lips smooth.‖ The camera begins to pan over the students in the classroom. ―I keep thinking, what am I so scared of? And I wish I could escape the pain, but these thoughts invade my head. Bound to my memory like shackles of guilt.‖ Still looking at the poem, he starts crying, ―Oh, God, please set me free—‖ Jack starts crying more, says ―excuse me‖ and walks out of the classroom.23

The recitation of the poem exposes a very private aspect of Jack‘s self to public scrutiny, thereby threatening the safe environment that has been created for him at Capeside. The creators used this classroom scene to call attention to anti-gay harassment and a lack of social empathy as represented by the teacher, who is in his late fifties. The teacher‘s insistence that Jack read his poem, threatening to give him a failing grade if he does not, presents a powerful image of anti-gay bullying, and the audience viscerally experiences Jack‘s fear of social isolation and retribution as he questions why Mr. Peterson is continuing his attack.24 The creators purposely put

Jack in a submissive position in this scene in order to demonstrate gay youths‘ vulnerability and need for protection in environments where they can‘t protect themselves. A telling moment in which Jack‘s classmate attempts to come to Jack‘s

23 ―To Be or Not to Be…,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, February 10, 1999). The last line of the poem is ―Free from the pain and this guilt. So that I may face tomorrow.‖ 24 Gossip had spread throughout the school about Jack‘s poem and him being a ―homo,‖ and the next school day copies of the poem were plastered on the hallway walls. Jack‘s friend stands up in protest and starts reading the poem for Jack until the friend and Mr. Peterson get into a heated debate. When Jack sees his friend later on he tells him that his interference is causing more problems and tells him that he doesn‘t need a hero.

aid also highlights the need for gay youths to have straight allies to help protect them during such an emotionally turbulent time. 25

Throughout the show, the creators addressed the social problem of ostracism against gay individuals. The poem storyline proceeds when, after class, Jack and his girlfriend, Joey, are walking down the hallway towards the lockers. They see students huddled around whispering in the hall, and when Jack‘s locker comes into view, they see the word ―fag‖ spray painted in red across it as students encircle the scene. It is not a scene of empowerment for the offender but of loneliness and isolation for Jack, as he bravely walks to his locker to bear the pain of public ridicule alone.26

To explore another pertinent issue, Jack‘s sister challenges the older, socially stigmatizing view of homosexuality as a family ―burden.‖ In previous television representations of gay characters, family members consistently reacted to homosexuality as a burden of social humiliation. The creators of Soap and Dynasty had both Jodie and Steven give in to their families‘ wishes to conform and save their families from the shame of having to acknowledge a gay son or brother. The creators of Dawson‟s Creek, however, challenged that approach. When the sister first learns about Jack‘s poem she tells her boyfriend, that she would be disappointed if Jack were gay and treats Jack with a cold demeanor.27 She believes that her life is surrounded by enough chaos, and the thought of dealing with one more social

25 The friend later aired his concerns about Mr. Peterson to the school board which led to Peterson‘s early retirement. 26 Joey moves in and kisses Jack to try and offset the situation while his sister stands idly by. 27 ―To Be or Not to Be…,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, February 10, 1999).

―humiliation‖ is too much for her to handle.28 But the scene in the school hallway spurs the sister towards compassion as she sees her brother‘s pain. She apologizes to

Jack and confides in him that she has resented him for bringing more stress into their lives. But then she tells him that she has kept a copy one of the now-infamous poem that students tacked up on the walls at their school and how beautiful the poem is. She continues, ―…I don‘t know if it means that you‘re gay or not, and you know what? I really don‘t care…Jack you‘re terrified, and I‘m your sister. And I had no idea. And I just want you to know that I‘m here for you and that I love you and you‘re not alone.‖29 The creators used the sister to suggest that the treatment of homosexuality as a familial embarrassment perpetuates the social stigmas associated with it. The creators suggested that it is not homosexuality but, rather, the acceptance and official sanction of hatred and disgust towards gay people that is the true social burden.

Even with a support network established, and even two decades after Soap,

Jack‘s character continues to deny his homosexuality, illustrating the on-going social fear gay individuals often face in attempting to accept their homosexuality. This is exemplified later at the Ice House restaurant when Joey, his girlfriend, asks Jack flat out if he is gay. Jack denies that he is, she takes a few steps, the camera follows, and in the background a rainbow windsock blows in the wind, clearly visible between the

28 Jack and his sister‘s older brother died in a car crash which resulted in their mother having a nervous breakdown. They have an absentee father which leaves the two teenagers in charge of their mother‘s care. Though not mentioned thus far, the sister also has psychological issues which play a role in her coping mechanisms. 29 ―To Be or Not to Be…,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, February 10, 1999).

two characters.30 She sighs and continues, ―Okay. You don‘t know what a relief that is. I mean, not that I care. I would have dealt with it fine, I promise….‖ She keeps rambling on about her insecurities as ―Only Lonely‖ by Hootie and the Blowfish plays in the background, ―Only lonely on the inside. Didn‘t mean to take away your dreams…,‖ and Jack starts kissing her. They embrace, and Jack reassures her again that he‘s not gay. The camera pans around them and focuses in on a head shot of Jack who has fear in his eyes as the lyrics, ―Lonely, lonely on the inside‖ keep playing. 31

These lyrics communicate why acknowledging one‘s homosexuality is so terrifying for Jack. The audience is reminded that gay people feel alone and isolated when starting the coming out process. The fear in his eyes indicates that he is losing both his ability and his desire to continue his denial. Again, the creators illustrated the need for social acceptance of gays, especially for young people whose greatest everyday fear is being socially reproached for anything.

The creators also took a head-on approach in directly challenging religious views that reinforced negative social perceptions of homosexuality. Their approach represented another key difference from decisions made by the creators of Soap and

Dynasty, who performed a balancing act to appease both the socially conservative religious groups and the gay rights advocates. In a jazz club scene, a conversation between Jack‘s friend and her date specifically challenges the widely-shared notion

30 The rainbow windsock reminds the audience about a conversation between Dawson Leery, a friend of Jack‘s, and Joey in which Dawson told Joey she needed to address the ―‗gay elephant‘‖ in the room with Jack. 31 ―To Be or Not to Be…,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, February 10, 1999).

that gay people choose be gay. As the date explains, ―[E]verything in life is a decision, and all ducks choose to quack. And Jack‘s definitely a quacker.‖32 But the creators used Jack‘s friend to introduce the emerging consensus among psychologists, physicians and other scientists that people are born gay. The creators also played with the irony that, despite Jack‘s outward actions of being in a heterosexual relationship with the girlfriend (thereby ―choosing‖ not to be a ―quacker‖), the date still labels

Jack, contrary to his belief that sexual orientation is Jack‘s choice. This thereby indicates again that being gay is not a choice because it‘s identifiable even when the individual tries to act straight.

In a later scene, the creators juxtaposed differing religious views regarding homosexuality in order to further challenge the arguments commonly made to condemn homosexuality. After the conversation in the jazz club, Jack‘s friend and her date return to her house, where they engage in an argument, along with the friend‘s grandmother, about biblical injunctions against homosexuality.33 The date explains his position: ―[O]ne day I‘m going to have to answer to the big man and so will Jack.

And if he‘s ready to take responsibility for his actions, then he can do whatever he wants. I just think that his kind is damaging to the world at large.‖ After a heated exchange, the grandmother steps in. Although the grandmother is a conservative

Christian, she tells the date, ―If Jack is gay, he does not need your judgment, young

32 ―…That is the Question,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, February 17, 1999). 33 Jack‘s friend came to live with her grandmother after she was kicked out of her parents‘ house in New York City. She is an atheist, and her grandmother is a conservative Christian, which causes a great deal of friction between the two women.

man…What he needs from you, from me, from everyone else in this world is love and tolerance.‖ Jack‘s friend comes to stand next to her grandmother before the camera takes a high angle shot of the date that clearly places him lower than the two women in a submissive position. He looks down and away.34 The episode presented two strands of Christian religious views in conflict and gave a clear victory to the tolerant side, suggesting that Christianity could itself be a means for creating a more inclusive, loving society. Thus, the creators challenged homophobic beliefs as un-

Christian.

In a further divergence from previous series with gay characters, this same episode gave the creators of Dawson‟s Creek the opportunity to face the disapproving father stereotype, rather than present him semi-sympathetically. In ―…That is the

Question,‖ Jack‘s absentee father abruptly arrives on the scene, having heard rumors about Jack‘s possible homosexuality.35 He takes both Jack and Jack‘s sister out to dinner at a nice restaurant to ask, ―Are you gay, Jack?‖ Not looking at his father Jack answers, ―Would you care?‖ The father answers, ―That is not an answer. And, yes, I would. This family has enough problems. We don‘t need to add to them.‖ He grabs his wine glass and takes a heavy breath, looks directly at Jack who is staring down at the table and asks, ―Do I make myself clear?‖ The camera focuses on Jack‘s face. His

34 ―…That is the Question,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, February 17, 1999). 35 The counselor called their dad because of the issues stemming from Jack‘s sexuality and the sister‘s evasiveness with information on their mother.

eyebrows are furrowed. Jack looks up at his father and gives him a timid ―yes.‖36

Unlike similar scenes in both Soap and Dynasty, which were used to sympathetically portray the fathers‘ feelings of disgust, here the issue is only the father‘s selfish concern that his son may expose the family to social humiliation. The father‘s indifference to his son‘s emotional state also gives the audience something to ponder: which should take precedent, social perception and familial convenience or compassion towards our children?

Unlike the storylines of previous series in which the casting of gay characters as ―gay angels‖ reaffirmed a heterosexual social hierarchy, in Dawson‟s Creek Jack directly progressively challenges his father‘s homophobia and selfishness. The morning after the dinner discussion, as the father is preparing to return to his life in

Providence. When Jack comes down the stairs, they begin an increasingly more vitriolic and passionate argument over the father‘s lack of parenting. When the father makes to storm out the door, Jack grabs the open door, and says ―No! No!

You‘re not going anywhere!‖ while slamming the door shut, blocking his father‘s exit. Then, after a back and forth Jack finally yells, ―You want to resolve this?! Then you ask me again!‖ Jack starts crying, ―Ask me if I‘m gay.‖ The camera focuses on the father‘s face as he stands in shock. Jack pleads, ―Ask me.‖ The father postures himself, ―You are not gay.‖ Jack yells back firmly, ―Yes, I am!‖ The father looks down and Jack cries out, ―You know it‖ as the father turns away from his son, anger

36 ―…That is the Question,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, February 17, 1999).

in his eyes. At the end of the scene, the camera moves to a shot of the entire entryway as Jack walks past his father to slump down on the stairs with his sister standing off to the side. Jack puts his hand around a banister and begins sobbing, the camera focuses on him, ―But I can‘t try [to be quiet] anymore because it hurts.‖

The creators made a clear effort to portray Jack rather than his father as the character deserving the audience‘s sympathy as the scene continues. The sister jumps in to defend Jack, putting the children in charge. Her face is filled with pain and sadness for her brother. Jack apologizes to both his father and sister, but his father looks at him, then away, unable to show any compassion for his son. Jack continues,

―I don‘t want to be going through this, but I am.‖ He starts crying harder and his sister rushes over to comfort him. When the father says, ―Stop crying, both of you,‖

Jack‘s sister makes a stand and tells their father, ―Just leave! Get out of here!‖ The father grabs his things, looks back at his children, turns around and walks out the door.37 In this scene the creators empowered Jack to stand up against his father in an authoritative manner by giving him an ally, which challenges the compliant gay angel stereotype. The creators put the control in the children‘s hands, contrary to real life scenarios in which gay teenagers are often forced out of their homes. Again the creators deviated from previous shows to demonstrate that gay youth need to be protected not only against social perceptions which stigmatize gay individuals, but against those people, especially parents, who perpetuate those beliefs. They used the

37 Ibid.

father to villainize those whose indifference and lack of compassion towards gay people deepen their social alienation and isolation.

However, in common with Soap and Dynasty, the creators set up the older male generation as socially conservative (Mr. Peterson and Jack‘s father) and the younger generation as more liberal, but the major breakthrough in Dawson‟s Creek is the complete support and acceptance by the teens. The youth, as represented by

Jack‘s friends, directly challenge these socially conservative ideas, as seen in the classroom when the classmate stands up for Jack, in the kitchen when Jack‘s friend defends homosexuality, and in the Jack‘s home where the siblings unite against their father. This demonstrates a shift away from both Soap and Dynasty where the straight siblings did not challenge the status quo but tried to push their gay sibling towards heterosexual conformity. By using teen characters to challenge those in positions of authority, the creators encouraged their teenaged audience to stand up and advocate for gay inclusion and respect.

This message of advocacy is perpetuated through Jack‘s struggle to acknowledge and accept his homosexuality as the creators humanized the gay identity and reinforced that being gay is not a choice. After coming out to his father, the next day Jack comes out to his girlfriend, Joey. He confides to her that he told his father that he‘s gay. He tucks in his lower lip and grows teary-eyed as he explains, ―When I wrote that poem, it clicked, something inside of me that‘s been quiet for so long. And it made me realize that whatever it is I‘m going through is not going to go away,

maybe ever.‖ After they are done talking Jack reaches out and holds on to Joey‘s finger.38 Even after coming out to his father, Jack still continues to struggle to accept being gay because he is afraid. It calls to mind the torment at school, his father‘s inability to accept him, his loneliness and feelings of isolation as he reaches out to

Joey and holds her finger.

The creators set up scene after scene to make the audience ache for Jack, for gay people they know, and gay children who are alone and need support. It was a message for social acceptance from creators who went through similar pains, a social commentary meant to influence a generation of youth. Greg Berlanti, who wrote

Jack‘s two-part coming out episodes, "To Be or Not to Be…‖ and ―…That is the

Question," commented that writing those episodes ―…was the most rewarding to

[him] to write [because his ability] …to provide gay teens with the kind of character on television that [he] never had was very fulfilling.‖39 And Kevin Williamson made clear that the series was largely autobiographical with the main characters as reflections of himself.40 This gave Dawson‟s Creek a unique perspective over Soap and Dynasty, because Dawson‟s Creek‟s gay storyline came from personal experiences and made the character‘s self-realization more powerful.

In a third episode, ―Be Careful What You Wish For,‖ the creators further explored the complexities of coming out and being labeled as the ―other.‖ For gay

38 Ibid. 39 Dawson’s Creek Chat Transcript with Greg Berlanti, October 12, 2000, http://www.sonypictures.com/tv/shows/dawson/chat/greg_berlanti.html. 40 Jeffery Epstein, ―Outings on the Creek,‖ The Advocate, March 16, 1999, 46-48.

youth, the fear of isolation manifests in a desperate desire to pass as ―normal.‖ The show illustrated this desperation through an encounter Jack has with a classmate,

Abby Morgan, who he despises. Abby embodies the snake from the Garden of Eden whose tempting whispers often lead those she entraps toward temptation and self- understanding. She appeals to Jack, at a party, when she tells him, ―I‘m an outcast.

Welcome to the club.‖ The creators used her to take advantage of Jack‘s emotional vulnerability as she implies an understanding of Jack‘s ―otherness.‖ But when that doesn‘t work, she tries another tack. She says, ―This whole thing is just so ridiculous.

There‘s no such thing as gay anyway. It‘s just this weird label people came up with to persecute the normal inclination to go both ways.‖ With this she catches Jack‘s attention as she opens the door to the possibility that Jack‘s isolating ―condition‖ may not even exist. She tells him, ―Well, we‘re all bisexual, don‘t you think? We‘re all just sexual animals under God. This puritanical society would make you think our natural impulses are something to be ashamed of.‖ She tells him what he wants to hear, that he is just like everyone else.

Later on at the party Abby sees Jack alone again and stalks over to him, homing in on the weakness she has sensed in her prey: the fear of being ―other.‖

Jack informs her, ―You know, maybe you‘re not Satan after all….‖ Abby says, ―Well us outcasts have to learn to stick together,‖ as she looks at Jack‘s lips. Unfortunately,

Jack‘s now ex-girlfriend, Joey, walks in on the two kissing. Upset, Joey runs out as

Jack follows after her. Abby walks up to her friends and says, ―Not so gay anymore.‖

But Jack calls back, ―More gay than ever.‖ When Jack finds Joey outside, he tells her that everyone has been so ―okay‖ with him coming out, but Abby told him what he wanted to hear: that he is normal. He confides that he knows he is gay, and tells her,

―I don‘t want to be singled out. You know? Like I have some scarlet G on my chest.

You know? Like I‘m the Ellen of Capeside.‖

This episode illustrated how the process of coming out brought the personal into the public spectrum. Jack‘s allusions illustrate how coming out can open up gay people to public ridicule as with Hester Prynne in The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel

Hawthorne whose infamous scarlet letter ―A‖ brought with it the reminder that sexual relationships not embraced by mainstream society will lead to ostracism. The reference to Ellen DeGeneres and her 1997 coming out, arguably the most public coming out through the Times magazine, ―Yep, I‘m Gay!‖ cover story combined with the outing of her television character‘s persona Ellen Morgan on Ellen, demonstrates the public nature of being gay and its potential downfall. Ellen DeGeneres suffered from her honesty initially. Her show was canceled, and she was unable to find steady work for several years. Yet her courage inspired the gay community and closeted gay people to be open about their sexuality. The creators acknowledged the fear of isolation that coming out engendered as Jack tells Joey, ―I—I guess that thought of being gay just—seemed like such a lonely thought. I just don‘t want to end up

alone.‖41 But in spite of that fear, Jack‘s character continues forward as he embraces his gay identity and challenges those who do not accept it.

If Jack had been a character in previous series, he would have tried to fit into a heterosexual norm after accepting his sexuality, but in Dawson‟s Creek, the creators used him to redefine social norms, thus challenging the pervasive gay angel. For instance, when Jack‘s father is back in town to help with the sister‘s growing psychological problems, he tells Jack that he needs to seek help for his ―problem,‖ that being his ―confusion‖ over ―gay ideas.‖ A similar instance is also illustrated in

Dynasty, but, unlike Steven, Jack does not act ashamedly. The creators used this scene to turn the tables as Jack stands up to his father, defying the gay angel role, and tells him, ―The only problem I have is the problem that you have with my being gay.‖

As the father tries to convince Jack that he needs to change, Jack tells him, ―I don‘t want to try. ‗Kay? You want me to try.‖ The father replies, ―Because I cannot understand how anyone would choose that kind of life.‖ Jack states,

I didn‘t choose it. The only thing I chose was just to be happy. Look, I can‘t go back with you [to Providence] because slowly but surely I am going sacrifice my happiness for yours because I want you to be proud of me. I do, but not under your terms. It just won‘t work.42

The creators emphasized the need for gay people to embrace their gay identity instead of doing what their parents and others think they should by casting the father‘s beliefs as the real problem, again avoiding embodying the gay angel. In a later episode, the

41 ―Be Careful What You Wish For,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, March 3, 1999). 42 ―Ch… Ch… Ch… Changes,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, May 19, 1999).

creators reiterated this message when the father tells Jack, ―The changes that you are going to make in your life right now—changes that you have every right to make, would be too difficult with me around.‖43 This may be a slight step forward for the father, but nevertheless leaves Jack on his own as his father runs away from facing this reality.

In addition to merely documenting the experience of coming out, the creators examined what being gay actually means as Jack continues on his journey of self- acceptance and understanding by seeking out other gay people with whom to connect.

The prospect of meeting a gay teen for coffee creates visible trepidation for Jack. His inability to go through with the coffee date leads him to the realization that saying he is gay is one step, but acting/being gay is quite another.44 Later on Jack becomes acquainted with another gay teen, Ethan, on a train ride. The creators used Ethan as a mentor to Jack because of Jack‘s ―newbie‖ status. 45 During a weekend concert known as Capefest, Jack follows Ethan around like a puppy while Ethan explains the ways of the gay world, explaining that, ―Being gay isn‘t about what sex you are attracted to. It informs so much of who and what you are.‖ He says that it‘s about

―moments‖ and that ―…it‘s not just a part of your life. It‘s everywhere.‖46 The creators worked to build an understanding that being gay is about more than a person‘s sexuality, that the gay identity is intrinsically connected to a person‘s

43 ―Homecoming,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, October 6, 1999). 44 ―Four to Tango,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, December 1, 1999). 45 ―First Encounters of the Close Kind,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, December 15, 1999). 46 ―Barefoot at Capefest,‖ Dawson‘s Creek (WB, January 12, 2000).

definition of ―self.‖ It is a way of seeing the world that connects gay people through a sense of community and understanding.

In another exploration of the gay perspective, the creators offered insight into the difficulties gay teens encounter when learning who and when to trust. Having been inured to a lifetime of self-protection, it is sometimes impossible to recognize when others are holding out a conciliatory hand. Later on in the season, Jack moves back into his family‘s house to live with his sister and his dad, at the sister‘s request.

Jack invites Ethan over for the weekend, but when the father finds out, he tries to put a stop to it. Frustrated, Jack stands up to his father, ―Look—you know what? I don‘t care what your answer is because I‘m not asking. When I moved back home there was a promise that—that this would be an open household. That I could, I could live my life free of judgment.‖ When the father begins with the age-old parental response of, ―As long as you‘re under my roof,‖ the creators showed how even a simple thing such as asking a friend out for the weekend can turn into a painful ordeal for gay children whose parents have been unsupportive of their sexual orientation. The creators also used Jack here as a champion of sorts to illustrate a strong and empowered gay icon who helps to dispel the stereotypes underlying the previous time periods‘ need for a gay angel.

Yet, unbeknownst to Jack, his father has secretly been planning to use the weekend to bond with Jack and repeatedly tries to spend time with both Jack and

Ethan as the night progresses. Jack, however, is so accustomed to his father‘s

disapproval and judgment that he can only see it as an intrusion and assumes his dad is ―watch dogging‖ them. Here, the creators began to address the difficulty of breaking down the wall of self-protection gay people build to keep out the betrayal they can face from family members when the father joins Jack and Ethan for dinner.

Jack is clearly perturbed throughout dinner as Ethan and the father enthusiastically converse about old cars. When Ethan inquires what Jack‘s reticence is about, Jack answers, ―What‘s up is that I didn‘t ask you to come and visit so we could hang out with my dad who hates me. Okay? And doesn‘t even try to understand me. Who can cry tears over a stupid car, but can‘t muster up a shred of emotion for his own son.‖

The father overhears their conversation and excuses himself, but before he leaves, he turns and looks at Jack, ―You know I really thought things were getting better. I was so grateful for tonight. I cancelled my business trip this weekend to spend time with you.‖ As the creators intended, the lack of communication and understanding between these two characters illustrates the frustrations and inabilities of gay youth and parents to talk and connect. While the father is finally doing what Jack wants,

Jack can‘t see it, and the father‘s plans are foiled by his previous actions and attitudes.

Later that night Jack walks into the study in his bathrobe to talk with his father, and the creators finally removed the first brick in Jack‘s wall of protection against his father. To do this, they had the father come to the realization that his relationship with his son should be more important than his own ego through an

encounter with a co-worker. Jack starts off the conversation with, ―I just wanted to ask you why? Why this weekend?‖ The dad takes off his glasses and walks over to a chair near Jack, ―It was just—time.‖ He casts his glasses off on a table. Jack looks emotional and peers down. The father tells Jack about a coworker‘s troubled son and then says, ―It just suddenly occurred to me, Jack is a good kid. I have a good kid, and

I don‘t even know him. But I want to know him. So I cancelled my trip.‖ Jack replies,

―I just didn‘t think it would be you.‖47 By comparing homosexuality to a string of universally accepted parent-child conflicts, the creators allowed the father some insight into his own behavior and the pain he‘s been causing his son. This was a major turning point between Jack and his father even as the characters stay true to the personalities that have been so carefully developed over time. They made clear the pain that gay youth experience when their parents react with the ignorance and emotional disconnect many people of the father‘s generation were raised with.

The creators, having used Jack to challenge the issue of unsupportive parents, then moved towards directly challenging broader negative social assumptions through a prom storyline. By putting Jack in the position of having to plead to participate in a rite of teen passage as ubiquitous as the prom, the creators made a statement about how homosexuals had to fight for and are often barred from the most basic cultural ceremonies. As represented by the character Barbara Johns, the creators again had the teens face religious conservative views, but this time Jack confronts the backlash

47 ―Neverland,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, April 5, 2000).

100

directly (whereas previously others had defended Jack in abstentia). Jack tries to buy prom tickets, but since the prom theme is ―couples,‖ Jack has to relay to Barbara

Johns, the ticket-seller, that he is taking another boy. She immediately responds, ―A boy cannot go to the prom with a boy. The definition of a prom date is a boy and a girl.‖ This is the first time since Jack has come out to both himself and his family and friends that he has had to defend himself publically. His character is put in the position of having to respond to all of the close-minded reasons homophobic people use to discriminate. Barbara continues with a mean-spirited attack, ―What is it exactly that the two of you will do anyway? Take a nice prom photo for Grandma‘s photo album? Dance stubbled cheek to stubbled cheek? Share a romantic kiss under the moonlight?‖ And then, in the final threat often thrown by people of this tenor, ―I mean, you don‘t think that‘s going to weird out even the ones who are sympathetic to people like you?‖48 It is impossible here that the creators were not drawing a parallel to the current same-sex marriage debate. Barbara John‘s definition of a prom date, analogous to the conservative definition of a marriage couple, is used to exclude gay people in a social tradition meant to be a rite of passage in society. Prom is seen as a rite of passage out of high school and onto early adulthood, whereas marriage signifies actual adulthood as well as legitimizes family and children. Both of these ceremonies are greatly valued in American society, yet gay people find it difficult to impossible to fully participate, as Jack‘s character illustrates.

48 ―The Anti-Prom,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, May 17, 2000).

101

Yet instead of having Jack fight the prom committee as an adult gay advocate would and perhaps alienating people who are undecided about how they see this issue, the creators instead kept Jack‘s identity as a sympathetic gay teenager in need of support. As such, the creators called on Jack‘s straight allies like other gay individuals in Jack‘s position have done. When his sister and ex-girlfriend find out what happened to Jack, they begin discussing all the ways in which they could protest and fight for Jack‘s inclusion, but Jack tells them that he just won‘t go to the prom.

They both disagree. The sister says, ―What? You have to go.‖ The ex-girlfriend agrees and says, ―Yeah, at this point it‘s political.‖ Jack responds, ―That‘s just it.

Okay? It‘s a prom it‘s supposed to be fun. I mean, why does my entire life have to be a fight? Why is something that‘s normal for someone else have to be so political for me?‖ The sister says, ―That‘s just the way it is. And until things change, you have to fight.‖49 Jack continues to discover the issues being publically gay brings, including having a life fraught with social and political ramifications. The creators showed the importance of back-up from straight supporters.

At this point the creators opened up the idea of an alternative prom through another friend, who creates the slogan, ―Where it‘s not about who you bring. It‘s about who you are.‖ While this can be seen as a ―separate but equal‖ strategy (like

DADT and civil unions), the creators used it to evoke the vitriolic homophobic dialog gay people must endure. They directly challenged Barbara John‘s mentality by

49 Ibid.

102

setting up both prom booths next to each other, with Jack and his sister manning the

―Anti-Prom‖ ticket booth. When Barbara continues her attack once again, Jack responds, ―You know, this is not about religion, Barbara. I mean the kind that hates people. You know the intolerant, judgmental, hypocritical kind—close-minded, immature bigoted kind.‖ Again the creators worked to cast an unflattering light on those who seek to exclude gay people because of perceived differences. But Barbara comes back with, ―Look, at least I‘m not going to hell,‖ reiterating a threat gay people have hurled at them endlessly but which they also need to reconcile for themselves.

The creators gave Jack an empowering response when he says, ―Yeah? Well that threat is not yours to make.‖ 50 By having a popular television series challenge beliefs against homosexuality, the creators helped to give a means of self-empowerment to those who may otherwise feel powerless. They also presented those who are brought up with beliefs condemning homosexuality the opportunity to see how those beliefs and attitudes affect others. In this way, the creators provoked thought, provided a means for social discussion, and thereby challenged the status quo.

In the controversial season four finale, ―True Love,‖ the creators added to television history with one of the first romantic gay male kisses in prime time history between two teenagers, using it as a catalyst for reconciliation between Jack and his father and communicating hope for alienated gay teens. In the episode, Jack demonstrates he is no longer bound by what others may think about his sexuality

50 Ibid.

103

when he declares his intentions to Ethan with a public kiss. What would have been a jubilant affair, however, ends when Jack finds that Ethan is back with his ex. Jack is devastated and humiliated when he walks into his house where his father is standing in the kitchen tinkering with an engine part. When he notices that Jack is upset he stops what he is doing and asks Jack what‘s wrong. The father continues to prod as

Jack, who still does not trust his father‘s reactions to him, continues to push him away until he finally blurts out, ―You want to hear that I found out that Ethan got back together with his ex? You want to hear that I found that out after I kissed him?‖ Then

Jack continues, ―Come on, admit it. The thought of me kissing another guy disgusts you. I disgust you.‖ The father responds, ―Hey, that is not true.‖51 It is also the first and only time the creators let ―disgust‖ enter into the dialogue and scenes between father and son. Even during the most tumultuous times between Jack and his father, there was never an indication that the father was disgusted by his son being gay, a clear difference between Dawson‟s Creek in comparison to Soap and Dynasty. The father instead demonstrated a lack of emotional connection on any level with regards to both of his children. The use of ―disgust‖ in this scene was a crucial turning point in television because it was clear that disgust never entered the father‘s mind when looking at his son, that Jack internalized this disgust himself.

As it becomes clear that the father is willing to listen, Jack finally opens up to his dad, and the creators fixed a broken relationship, communicating hope to those

51 Ibid.

104

feeling abandoned by their parents. In true broken-hearted teenaged desolation, Jack opines, ―I spent an entire year developing this relationship. And working on it. Now it‘s a wash. The whole year‘s a wash, my life is a wash‖ as Jack throws his arms up.

His father declares, ―Your life is not a wash. You hurt now because you had the guts to put yourself out there, go after what you wanted.‖ Jack is leaning up the counter with his back to his dad, ―I can‘t,‖ as he begins to cry. As Jack allows himself complete vulnerability in front of his father, the creators gave the father the opportunity to finally fully comprehend the depths of his son‘s pain and loneliness.

Jack‘s anguish shows as he kneels down to the floor. His hand drags across the cabinet on the way down making a screeching noise which resonates with Jack‘s pain.

The father‘s compassion is captured in his eyes as he brings his hand up to his mouth, clearly wanting to find some way to comfort his son. Jack continues,

I can‘t keep going through this. It‘s like having all the problems of a typical teenager, and there‘s this whole other level of constant fear and pain. Do you know the anguish I went through over a kiss? One stupid little kiss? Most people don‘t have to do that.52

His father agrees, ―You‘re right, they don‘t.‖ Jack asks, ―Then why me? I don‘t want to be different. I didn‘t ask to be gay.‖ His father answers, ―No more than I asked for a gay son, but, boy, am I glad I got one.‖ Jack replies, ―You don‘t mean that.‖ His father smiles back while nodding, ―Yeah, I do.‖ Jack looks down, and his father kneels down next to him putting his hand on his back and hugs him. Jack cries into

52 ―True Love,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, May 24, 2000).

105

his arms.53 This is the final emotional scene in Jack‘s coming out process. He releases the frustration over all of the social obstacles of being gay. The audience can see how he aches for the pain his son is in and that he admires Jack‘s continuous courage to live an open and honest life in spite of the social obstacles. This is yet again another clear example of the creators‘ decision to abstain from using the gay angel stereotype: Jack does not give in to social and familial expectations and ends up changing the opposing side instead of himself.

After fully exploring Jack's coming out process, the creators then used Jack‘s character to venture into the realm of same-sex relationships, again further breaking ground in representing homosexuality on television. Though sexual content between

Jack and his romantic interests was censored, especially in comparison to the straight relationships, the creators still took noticeable steps forward. These steps marked a move towards the full inclusion of gay relationships in society and away from a gay angel representation. After Jack's devastating post-kiss conversation with Ethan, the creators gave Jack a new relationship towards the end of season four during Jack's senior year of high school. Jack gets set up to go to the prom with a friend, Tobey.54

Though Jack keeps insisting to Tobey that his interest in him is purely platonic, he later realizes that he has been afraid of how open Tobey is with being gay, but it‘s now another thing in a long list that attracts him to Tobey. Because of that new-found attraction, Jack realizes that he is no longer afraid to be gay or act gay in public and

53 Ibid. 54 The prom in season four, as compared to season three, had no same-sex date issues.

106

proceeds to kiss Tobey at prom. While both of the teenagers are standing alone at the time of the kiss, the kiss is five seconds long, which greatly surpasses the first kiss between Jack and Ethan.55 This kiss represents the creators‘ continued move towards equal inclusion because, unlike the last kiss, this kiss brings with it the promise of a relationship, one that lasts into season five, the beginning of the college years.

The creators also used the college years in the last two seasons as a means to break Jack out of his shy, innocent, ―nice boy‖ demeanor. They let Jack fully embrace the college experience as he enters a world of partying and dating, which often creates tension and strife between him and his high school friends. He is not cast as the gay angel, present to continually save the day, although at times he tries. Instead he ventures into adulthood through hard life lessons, just as the other characters do.

Off to college in the fifth season, Jack joins a fraternity which not only accepts his sexuality but actively seeks him out because of it. Jack's need to fully embrace the frat house partying identity, however, creates a wedge between him and Tobey which leads to their break up.56 Then when season six begins, we learn that Jack has had a summer fling, who has dumped him.57 In this final season, Jack has several one night stands during which the audience only sees Jack sneaking men out of the house.

There are flirtations between him and a married/closeted professor, and he enters into a brief relationship with another college student. As with the other characters in the

55 ―Promicide,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, May 4, 2001). 56 ―Use Your Disillusion,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, November 7, 2001). 57 ―The Kids are Alright,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, October 2, 2002).

107

show, Jack's relationships are often tumultuous and always fleeting. The creators used these relationships as the next step in the process of ―normalizing‖ Jack. While issues such as homophobia and AIDS testing enter into storylines, these plots are not dramatically escalated and end up being fairly matter of fact. Jack‘s storyline at this point focuses more on his partying antics, his loss of educational focus, and his dating habits.58 Significantly, the creators made Jack just another guy, a guy who also just happens to be gay.

While the creators of Soap and Dynasty faced social pressures that led them to heterosexualize their adult gay characters, Dawson‟s Creek‟s creators were able to portray a fully-realized adult gay man secure in his sexual identity. The creators used the series finale, a two-parter set five years after college, as a glimpse into the adult lives of the main characters. The finale is a crucial episode for Jack's character, who by this time has come full circle from the scared and closeted teen to become the mentor to his closeted boyfriend, Doug Witter. After what appears to be a jog on the beach, Jack and Doug are discussing Jack‘s desire to live openly as a couple. Doug responds, ―Look, you knew when we started seeing each other that I wasn‘t ready for all of Capeside to know my business.‖ Jack, expressing some annoyance, says,

―Doug, that was six months ago. You know we do live in a post Will and Grace world. I mean do you really think people still care who you sleep with?‖ Doug firmly replies, ―Yeah. Yeah, I do.‖ Jack persists,

58 None of Jack‘s storylines were extreme in comparison to the other characters on the show. They all had similar issues at one time or another.

108

Why do you care what anyone thinks anyway? I mean your family knows, they have no problem with it. Pacey, he couldn‘t be happier…. Doug, this really sucks that we have to go through this. I mean, how many weekends away are we going to have to go on before we can be together like a normal couple? It‘s as if we‘re having some sort of affair yet neither one of us are even married.59

Doug shoots back, ―Not all of us were fags at fifteen Jack. It‘s not so easy for some of us.‖ Shocked Jack replies, ―I—I can‘t even believe you just said that.‖ Looking ashamed Doug says, ―I know, I‘m sorry.‖ But Jack disagrees, ―No, you‘re not. You know what the difference between you and me is, Doug? You were a fag at fifteen.

You just haven‘t stopped hating yourself for it.‖60 Jack is thus transformed into a gay mentor/role-model for those who are afraid to live openly.

This is a significant step for gay characters on television because previous characters, such as Jodie and Steven, were riddled with self-doubt and are plagued by the need to fit into straight-defined roles. And recall the minor gay characters in

Dynasty whose interest in Steven and whose gay mentor status leads to their violent deaths, a warning to those "pushing the gay agenda." The creators used Jack's character to break free of those shackles without bloodshed or apology.

The creators also used the finale to add to the definition of family by including a gay family. This is a significant step because in both Soap and Dynasty the prospects of having one openly gay parent, let alone two, leads to court battles, conforming to heterosexual roles, and relinquishing child custody. The

59 ―All Good Things…,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, May 14, 2003). 60 Ibid.

109

creators of Soap and Dynasty were willing to open the door to the idea of gay parenting, but in the end they reaffirmed the "necessity" of a heterosexually defined family and the need for gay angels. While the other shows steered away from the prospects of portraying a gay family, the creators of Dawson‟s Creek embraced the idea of two dads raising a daughter. Jack's best friend dies in the final episode, and leaves Jack in charge of caring for her two-year-old daughter, Jack's goddaughter.

This new responsibility further encourages Doug to come out of the closet in order to be a part of Jack's new family when Jack breaks up with him because he insists on keeping the relationship closeted. While sitting on a beach, Jack tells Doug that he is contemplating moving somewhere where the two-year-old won‘t be the only child with a gay parent, but Doug tells him not to leave and tells Jack he hopes to learn how to parent quickly. A tear falls from Doug‘s eye as he tells Jack, ―I love you. I love you, Jack. I love that you are the bravest person I know. And the kindest. I love that no matter what you do, your life is going to stand out. I want to stand out with you and your daughter. If you‘ll let me.‖ Jack leans over, and they kiss in public.61 The creators of Dawson's Creek challenged the gay angel mentality by ending Jack's storyline with a complete family consisting of both a partner and a daughter. This captures the emerging addition of gay families into the larger social definition of

―family.‖

61 ―…Must Come to an End,‖ Dawson‟s Creek (WB, May 14, 2003).

110

The creators‘ intent for Dawson‟s Creek was to present ―unconventional relationships.‖ Kevin Williamson said (referring to the last scene between Jack and

Doug),

We started this show out trying to trail blaze a little bit, trying to push the buttons and try to expand beyond just the notions of what little teenage voices were. And, um, this is once again five years later, in the future, my way of saying this is where we are and where we should be.62

The show was about reaching out to both straight and gay youth in order to empower them to stand up and challenge social stereotypes, especially regarding views against homosexuality, by breaking through the gay angel stereotype.

62 Commentary by Kevin Williamson and Paul Stupin on ―All Good Things Must Come to an End,‖ Dawson‟s Creek, Season Six DVD.

111

Conclusion

After 2000, the Gay Rights Movement continued to advance despite major setbacks. The first decade of the 21st century has been a roller coaster ride for people on both sides of the debates surrounding gay rights. After civil unions were legalized in Vermont in 2000, other states began amending their constitutions to define marriage as the union between one man and one woman (Hawaii and Alaska enacted same-sex marriage restrictions in 1998). But three years later, a year after Lawrence v. Texas (2003), Massachusetts became the first state to legally recognize same-sex marriage. Later, Connecticut enacted civil unions in 2005, followed by New Jersey in

2006. Then, on May 15th, 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples had the right to get married. This, however, was repealed the following

November with a voter-approved Constitutional amendment, Proposition 8, only a month after Connecticut‘s Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry. Advances continued after Barack Obama was sworn into office as President on January 20, 2009, with his promises to repeal ―Don‘t Ask, Don‘t Tell‖ (DADT).

That year, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire all legalized same-sex marriage, followed by the District of Columbia in 2010. However, in yet another pendulum swing, that same year Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional in California, which began a long appeals court process that has yet to be concluded. Then on December

22, 2010, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act which

112

would repeal DADT, effective September 30, 2011. In 2011, New York became the sixth state to recognize same-sex marriages while thirty states had banned same-sex marriage, some even including bans on civil unions and other legal recognitions.

Despite setbacks, positive gay images in television continued to advance during these years. As a matter of fact, several major milestones were reached on cable networks, including Showtime‘s Queer as Folk (2000-2005); Bravo‘s Queer

Eye for the Straight Guy (2003-2007); the launch of here!TV (2003-present) and

MTV‘s Logo (2006-present), networks that focus solely on LGBT programming; and

Showtime‘s The L Word (2004-2009). The introduction of these new shows and networks not only marked the forward progress of the gay community as a solid target demographic but demonstrated a powerful change from Jodie, who wasn‘t even able to touch his boyfriend on screen.

The most current depiction of a gay character on television, which followed another father/son storyline, continued to advance the positive representation of gay characters and themes. In 2009, Ryan Murphy, who is openly gay, created Glee, a musical ―dramedy‖ series about an assortment of misfit students in a school show choir at William McKinley High School in Lima, Ohio. Though the original concept of the show included no gay characters, the audition of actor Chris Colfer prompted

Murphy to create a character specifically for Colfer to play.1 Murphy customized the

1 Maria Elena Fernandez, ―Chris Colfer‘s Journey from Small Town to ‗Glee,‘‖ Los Angeles Times, September 8, 2009, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2009/09/glee-creator-and-

113

character‘s name (Kurt Hummel) to reflect both him and Colfer with ―the first name

[being] a tribute to Colfer‘s turn as Kurt Von Trapp [and] the last name [coming] from the Hummel figurines ‗with rosy cheeks‘ that Murphy‘s mother collected when he was a child.‖2 Murphy wanted Kurt‘s character to be the next step in the advancement of gay characters on television, both in terms of self-worth and the father-son dynamic.

The show begins with Kurt coming to terms with being gay and the awkwardness of having to come out to his friends and father (his mother is deceased).

In the episode ―Acafellas,‖ Kurt's friends in the glee club stage a "gay-vention" for a girl who is romantically interested in Kurt but, unlike everyone else, can‘t tell he's gay. Later, when Kurt explains why he doesn‘t return her romantic feelings, she tells him that he shouldn't hide who he is. But he's not ready for everyone to know yet.

As Kurt‘s character is semi-autobiographical, Murphy used his experience with his own father to create the dynamics between Kurt and his dad, an auto mechanic.3 Murphy recalls his semi-pro hockey player father not understanding his interests in Vogue at age five and his love of the performing arts. Murphy even scripted the actual interaction he had with his father for the episode when Kurt comes out to his father, ―Preggers.‖4 When he tells his father that he's gay, the father replies,

executive-producer-ryan-murphy-discovered-chris-colfer-but-dont-tell-the-young-actor-that-it-makes- him-feel.html. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid.

114

"I know." Surprised, Kurt asks, "Really?" The father says," I've known since you were three." He shrugs, "All you wanted for your birthday was a pair of sensible heels. I guess I'm not totally in love with the idea, but if that's who you are, there's nothing I can do about it. And I love you just as much." He nods at Kurt and puts his hand on Kurt's shoulder, "Okay?" Kurt grabs his dad, and they hug. Burt thanks his son for telling him and double checks to make sure Kurt is sure.5 Despite any differences, Murphy has said,

Having a dad that loves you as a young man is a very powerful thing that you carry into the world....Because no matter what you do, in some weird, unconscious way, if you‘re a guy, you always try to please your dad. I think it‘s a great thing to put on television. You‘ve seen the gay character that gets kicked out of the house or is beaten up. You haven‘t seen the gay character that is teased a little bit, but wins and triumphs.6

The creators continually had the father support and protect his son, as seen in the episode entitled ―Theatricality.‖7 The father overhears his soon-to-be stepson yelling about getting rid of "faggy" items in the room he's supposed to share with

Kurt. The father charges in and tells the stepson that he can't live with them if he behaves like that.8 The father also gives up his honeymoon in order to send Kurt to a private school to get away from the anti-gay bullying Kurt is suffering at the public

5 ―Preggers,‖ Glee (FOX, September 23, 2009). 6 Fernandez, ―Chris Colfer‘s Journey.‖ 7 ―Theatricality,‖ Glee (FOX, May 25, 2010). 8 Ibid.

115

high school.9 Glee took large steps away from the father-son storylines in Soap,

Dynasty and Dawson's Creek.

Murphy also continued to advance the supportive gay trajectory of the series by adding Blaine as a romantic interest for Kurt in the second season.10 The pair even graced the January 28th, 2011, cover of Entertainment Weekly for a special report called ―Gay Teens on TV‖ which discussed Glee‘s impact on its 14.1 million viewers.11 In this report, Colfer suggested that Kurt and Blaine are ―…kind of like the

Joanie and Chachi of our generation.‖12 When the network ―‗made the announcement that Kurt was getting a boyfriend, people went bats---, they were so excited.‘‖ Darren

Criss, who plays Blaine, saw ―the real sign of progress [was] that the pairing…caused no controversy whatsoever. No protests. No outcry. No loss of corporate sponsors.‖13

Glee was even sponsored by General Motors directly following the Super Bowl that year.14

The boys first meet at Dalton Academy (the private school Kurt is sent to later in the series) when Kurt goes to spy on Dalton‘s glee club. Blaine takes advantage of the opportunity to flirt with this cute new boy by singing, ―Teenage Dream‖ to Kurt in the episode, ―Never Been Kissed.‖ The flirting continues in a ―Very Glee

Christmas‖ when Blaine asks Kurt to help him practice the duet, ―Baby It‘s Cold

9 ―Furt,‖ Glee (FOX, November 23, 2010). 10 ―Never Been Kissed,‖ Glee (FOX, November 9, 2010). 11 Jennifer Armstrong, ―Special Report: Gay Teens on TV,‖ Entertainment Weekly, January 28, 2011, 40. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid., 41. 14 Ibid.

116

Outside.‖15 This ―…suggestive yuletide duet caused far less commotion than, say, some of their Glee costars posing provocatively (and heterosexually) in GQ magazine.‖16 Then, in the episode ―Original Song,‖ they share their first kiss.17 Later, in the third season‘s ―The First Time,‖ the creators used the relationship between Kurt and Blaine, juxtaposed with the similar story of a heterosexual couple, to discuss sleeping together for the first time.18 The episode really focused on how both couples, regardless of their sexual orientation, are concerned more about sharing their first time with someone they love, despite the relationship stumbles of teenagers.

Importantly and ground-breakingly, Kurt and Blaine were depicted as just like any other couple worried about the right time to have sex and whom to have it with.

As evidenced by Glee, social views about sexuality continue to be reflected in television. For the Gay Rights Movement, it pushed for the normalization and integration of gay people into the social spectrum. The first step in that normalization was the gay angel, which was used as a means to combat stereotypes about the

―homosexual menace.‖ Unfortunately gay angel characters were imprisoned in a heterocentric world order; however, they did open the door for a social discussion about homosexuality. Subsequent series creators used this opening to further explore the development and ―place‖ of gay characters and themes in shows. Straight society‘s fascination with gay people, combined with the desire for gay people to see

15 ―Very Glee Christmas,‖ Glee (FOX, December 7, 2010). 16 ―Never Been Kissed,‖ Glee (FOX, November 9, 2010). 17 ―Original Song,‖ Glee (FOX, March 15, 2011). 18 ―The First Time,‖ Glee (FOX, November 8, 2011).

117

themselves represented, gave writers the motivation to imagine new storylines to captivate audiences. Their creative efforts supported the post-1970 Gay Rights

Movement‘s focus on visibility. In a time when the Defense of Marriage Act still exists, these representations fortunately continue to humanize gay individuals for the next generation, cementing the importance of television in influencing American social attitudes and, potentially, American political debates.

118

Bibliography

Primary Sources:

American Foundation for Equal Rights. http://www.afer.org/our-work/hearing-transcripts/.

Armstrong, Jennifer. ―Special Report: Gay Teens on TV.‖ Entertainment Weekly, January 28, 2011, 34.

Crackle.com. http://www.crackle.com/blog/crackles-creator-conversation-soaps-susan-harris/.

Crosdale, Darren. Dawson‟s Creek: The Official Companion. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1999.

Dawson‟s Creek. Created by Kevin Williamson. WB, 1998-2003.

Dawson‟s Creek Chat Transcript with Greg Berlanti. October 12, 2000. http://www.sonypictures. com/tv/shows/dawson/chat/greg_berlanti.html.

Dynasty. Created by Richard and Esther Shapiro. ABC, 1981-1989, 1991.

Dynasty: The Authorized Biography of the Carringtons. With an introduction by Esther Shapiro. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1984.

Epstein, Jeffery. ―Kevin Williamson Unbound,‖ The Advocate, August 31, 1999, 34.

______. ―Mr. Smith Goes to Hollywood.‖ Out, March 2001, 83.

______. ―Outings on the Creek,‖ The Advocate, March 16, 1999, 46.

Fernandez, Maria Elena. ―Chris Colfer‘s Journey from Small Town to ‗Glee,‘‖ Los Angeles Times, 8 September 2009. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2009/09/glee- creator-and-executive-producer-ryan-murphy-discovered-chris-colfer-but-dont-tell-the- young-actor-that-it-makes-him-feel.html.

Hernandez, Greg. ―Interview: ―Glee‖ creator Ryan Murphy on Chris Colfer coming out on ‗Chelsea Lately.‘‖ Greginhollywood.com, December 16, 2009. http://greginhollywood. com/interview-glee-creator-ryan-murphy-on-chris-colfer-coming-out-on-chelsea-lately- 18074.

119

Jensen, Michael. ―Interview: Chris Colfer Remembers Who Bullied Him in High School (But He‘s Such a Nice Guy He Answers Their Emails Anyway!).‖ AfterElton.com, February 23, 2010. http://www.afterelton.com/people/2010/01/chris-colfer-is-taking-names.

Kennedy, Ed. ―Chris Colfer‘s Kurt Hummel-Where Does Ryan Murphy End and the Character Begin?‖ AfterElton.com, September 10, 2009. http://www.afterelton.com/blog/ edkennedy/glee-chris-colfer-ryan-murphy.

Los Angeles Times. 1977-2003.

Moore, Frazier. ―Study finds fewer gay characters on network TV.‖ Yahoo.com, September 28, 2011. http://news.yahoo.com/study-finds-fewer-gay-characters-network-tv- 100204845.html.

Neuwirth, Allan. They‟ll Never Put That on the Air: An Oral History of Taboo-Breaking TV Comedy. New York: Allworth Press, 2006.

New York Times. 1997-2003.

Priggé, Steven. Created By…Inside the Minds of TV‟s Top Show Creators. Los Angeles: Silman- James Press, 2005.

Proud, Amelia. ―Glee deals 'delicately' with issue of teen and gay sex for the first time... but will it boost falling ratings?‖ Daily Mail, November 4, 2011. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ tvshowbiz/article-2057622/Glee-deals-delicately-issue-teen-gay-sex-new-episode.html ?ito=feeds-newsxml.

Schneider, Alfred R. with Kaye Pullen. The Gatekeeper: My 30 Years as a TV Censor. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2001.

Soap. Created by Susan Harris. ABC, 1977-1981.

Stepakoff, Jeffrey. Billion-Dollar Kiss: The Kiss That Saved Dawson‟s Creek and Other Adventures in TV Writing. New York: Gotham Books, 2008.

―TVLegends.‖ Richard & Esther Shapiro-Archive Interview Part 1 of 5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kNFxzAnyG0.

―TVLegends.‖ Richard & Esther Shapiro-Archive Interview Part 2 of 5. http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=jpSipR8zr2w.

―TVLegends.‖ Richard & Esther Shapiro-Archive Interview Part 3 of 5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QZiPhHjCQU&feature=relmfu.

120

―TVLegends.‖ Richard & Esther Shapiro-Archive Interview Part 4 of 5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xzwzxdt0Ug&feature=relmfu.

―TVLegends.‖ Richard & Esther Shapiro-Archive Interview Part 5 of 5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZ7OasU94b4&feature=relmfu.

Secondary Sources:

Bates, Billie Rae. Dynasty High: A Guide to TV‟s “Dynasty” and “Dynasty II: The Colbys”. North Charleston, South Carolina.: Booksurge Publishing, 2004.

Benshoff, Harry M., and Sean Griffin. Queer Images: A History of Gay and Lesbian Film in America. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006.

Bindig, Lori. Dawson‟s Creek: A Critical Understanding. Critical Studies in Television, ed. Mark Andrejevic. New York: Lexington Books, 2008.

Blasius, Mark, ed. Sexual Identities, Queer Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.

Boyd, Nan Alamilla. Wide Open Town: A History of Queer San Francisco. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.

Button, James W., Barbara A. Rienzo, and Kenneth D. Wald. Private Lives, Public Conflicts: Battles Over Gay Rights in American Communities. District of Columbia: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1997.

Chauncey, George. ―From Sexual Inversion to Homosexuality: Medicine and the Changing Conceptualization of Female Deviance.‖ Salamagundi (Fall 1982/Winter 1983): 114-121.

______. Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World, 1890- 1940. New York: Basic Books, 1994.

______. Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today‟s Debate Over Gay Equality. New York: Basic Books, 2004.

Couvares, Francis G. Movie Censorship and American Culture, 2d ed. Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 1996.

Cruikshank, Margaret. The Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement. Revolutionary Thought/Radical Movements, ed. Roger S. Gottlieb. New York: Routledge, 1992.

Deitcher, David, ed. Over the Rainbow: Lesbian and Gay Politics in America since Stonewall. London: Boxtree Limited, 1995.

121

D‘Emilio, John. ―After Stonewall,‖ in Making Trouble: Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University. New York: Routledge, 1992.

______. Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United Sates, 1940-1970, 2d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.

______. The World Turned: Essays and Gay History, Politics, and Culture. London: Duke University Press, 2002.

DuBois, Ellen Carol, and Linda Gordon. ―Seeking Ecstasy on the Battlefield: Danger and Pleasure in Nineteenth Century Feminist Sexual Thought.‖ Feminist Studies. 9, no. 1 (Spring 1983): 7-25.

Eaklor, Vicki L. Queer America: A GLBT History of the 20th Century. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2008.

―Ellen: 10 Years Out – A Timeline.‖ Glaad.org, April 10, 2007. http://archive.glaad.org/ media/resource_kit_detail.php?id=4000.

Faderman, Lillian. Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth Century America. New York: Penguin Group, 1992.

Freedman, Estelle. ―‘Uncontrolled Desires:‘ The Response to the Sexual Psychopath, 1920- 1950.‖ Journal of American History 74, no. 1 (June 1987): 83-106.

Gabbard, Krin. Black Magic: White Hollywood and African American Culture. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 2004.

Gross, Larry. Up From Invisibility: Lesbians, Gay Men, and the Media in America. New York: Columbia University Press, 2001.

Harris, Daniel. The Rise and Fall of Gay Culture. New York: Hyperion, 1997.

Imdb.com. http://www.imdb.com.

Johnson, David K. The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2004.

Katz, Jonathan Ned. Gay American History: Lesbians and Gay Men in the U.S.A., revised ed. New York: Meridian, 1992.

Levy, Ariel. ―American Chronicles: Lesbian Nation.‖ The New Yorker, March 2, 2009, 30.

Malone, Aubrey. Censoring Hollywood: Sex and Violence in Film and on the Cutting Room Floor. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., 2011.

122

Marcus, Eric. Making Gay History: The Half-Century Fight for Lesbian and Gay Equal Rights. New York: Perennial, 2002.

McCuen, Gary E. Homosexuality and Gay Rights. Ideas in Conflict. Hudson, Wisconsin: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc., 1994.

Miller, Neil. Out of the Past: Gay and Lesbian History from 1869 to the Present. New York: Alyson Books, 2006.

Montgomery, Kathryn C. Target: Prime Time: Advocacy Groups and the Struggle Over Entertainment Television. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.

Nussbaum, Martha C. From Disgust to Humanity: Sexual Orientation and Constitutional. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Onearchives.org. http://www.onearchives.org/.

Patterson, James T. Restless Giant: The United States From Watergate to Bush V. Gore. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Peiss, Kathy, Christina Simmons with Robert A. Padgug, ed. Passion and Power: Sexuality in History. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989.

Perry v. Schwarzenegger. ―Transcript of Court Trial Proceedings.‖ 2 U.S. 214-457. U.S. District Court Northern California 2010. http://www.afer.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Perry- Vol- 2-1-12-10.pdf.

Riggle, Ellen D. B. and Barry L. Tadlock, ed. Gays and Lesbian in the Democratic Process: Public Policy, Public Opinion, and Political Representation. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999.

Rimmerman, Craig A. The Lesbian and Gay Movements: Assimilation of Liberation? Dilemmas in American Politics. Boulder: Westview Press, 2008.

Roark, James L., Michael P. Johnson, Patricia Cline Cohen, Sarah Stage, Alan Lawson, and Susan M. Hartmann. The American Promise: A History of the United States from 1865. vol. II. Boston: Bedford Press, 1998.

Russo, Vito. The Celluloid Closet: Homosexuality in the Movies, revised ed. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987.

Scott, Joan W. ―Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis.‖ American Historical Review. 91, no. 5 (Dec. 1986): 1053-1075.

123

Silverman, David S. “You Can‟t Air That”: Four Cases of Controversy and Censorship in American Television Programming. New York: Syracuse University Press, 2007. Kindle edition.

Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll. Disorderly Conduct: Visions of Gender in Victorian America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.

______. ―The New Woman and the New History.‖ Feminist Studies. 3, no. 1/2 (Autumn 1975): 185-198.

Snitow, Ann, Christine Stansell and Sharon Thompson, ed. Powers of Desire: The Politics of Sexuality. The New Feminist Library. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1983.

Streitmatter, Rodger. From „Perverts‟ to “Fab Five‟: The Media‟s Changing Depiction of Gay Men and Lesbians. New York: Routledge, 2009.

Tcm.com. http://www.tcm.com/.

Tropiano, Stephen. Obscene, Indecent, Immoral, and Offensive: 100+ Years of Censorship, Banned, and Controversial Films. New York: Limelight Editions, 2009.

______. The Prime Time Closet: A History of Gays and Lesbians on TV. New York: Applause Theatre & Cinema, 2002.

______. ―The Prime Time Closet: Outing TV‘s Heterosexual Homosexuals.‖ PopMatters, March 19, 2003. http://www.popmatters.com/columns/tropiano/ 030319.shtml.

Tv.com. http://www.tv.com/.

Vaid, Urvashi. Virtual Equality: The Mainstreaming of Gay and Lesbian Liberation. New York: Doubleday, 1995.

Walters, Suzanna Danuta. All the Rage: The Story of Gay Visibility in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001.

124