joany208121 Posted January 9, 2017 Report Share Posted January 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Homeandawayfan. said: Dan Bennett said there was diversity coming on the way but the Channel 7 executives must have canned this idea. Andy Barrett was probably of mixed race but this was never confirmed. Apart from Greek Australia Leah the show has no diversity. Unfortunately if any diversity was on the way, I think it would be having an actor/actress clearly of ethnicity, but would not address or acknowledge this onscreen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homeandawayfan. Posted January 9, 2017 Report Share Posted January 9, 2017 In the 1980s and 1990s up to c2005 there always was something happening but it was watchable then. Today's show makes the 1980s and 1990s H&A seen very quaint, timid and tame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atrus Posted January 9, 2017 Report Share Posted January 9, 2017 9 hours ago, Wanderer101 said: Sorry just curious about this, why are you offended by that storyline? Happy to explain. I discussed this in some detail on several occasions in the UK-pace episode thread, so I'll just quote from various separate posts I made there. My opinion shifted a bit throughout the storyline, but on the whole I thought a predatory lesbian subtext was pretty clear, even if nobody ever mentioned the word itself: ... I have two major problems with the Tabitha situation... [one of which] is that I'm getting unsettling 'unhinged lesbian' vibes from her, and I worry that H&A is reverting to form in only including gay characters (if she is indeed gay) where they have sinister ulterior motives or creepy obsessions with a regular. We saw this with Spencer's cyberstalker not all that long ago, and so I sincerely hope we're not getting it again. ... I'm really, vehemently objecting to the way this Tabitha story is going. Will someone reassure me that I'm not overreacting please? I'd really, really been hoping that there was a decent explanation for her behaviour other than having a massive, creepy-stalker crush on Olivia, because that would again reinforce the stereotype that LGB people are predators by nature, and god knows we've had enough of that from H&A in the past. But no, with Tabby's comments about her and Olivia living together and sharing everything, it would appear that's exactly the route we're taking - and I'm finding myself getting really angry about it. For the umpteenth time, if you must have LGB creepers pop up periodically in the guest cast, you need also at the very least to have a strong history of depicting benign LGB characters among your regular cast. If you can't do that - and H&A has demonstrated that it can't - then leave well alone, for heaven's sake. Because it's really starting to look like small-minded prejudice from where I'm sitting... ... Possibly I was hasty prior to my earlier rant in assuming Tabitha's interest in Olivia was romantic, and her issues clearly run deeper than that - but the signs still point to that as being the most likely explanation for her behaviour in my view. She's now gone from eccentric to full-on crazy, turning up to school as an Olivia clone and then leaping on Hunter during the night in what it's probably fair to describe as a sexual assault. And even if it proves not to be the case that Tabitha wants Olivia for herself, the fact the show's been suggesting that for weeks means it's still been fairly damaging in my book. Is there such a thing as a non-romantic crush? Possibly, but a very intense crush is certainly what I'm getting from this. Tabitha's not latching onto just anyone - it's very specifically Olivia. I'll say this - that the actor playing Tabitha is doing a very convincing job. But it does nothing to assuage my concerns about the storyline. ... Aaaand 22 episodes later... (quoting Red Ranger: "As for Tabitha...well, her trying to get Olivia to undress doesn't help the psycho lesbian subtext") To say the least! I'm going to start by getting this off my chest - I'm beyond angry now about the way this has played out. 'Oh, Tabby has a sick sister - she must be very troubled - she's just desperate for a friend,' says everyone in the Bay, as if desperately trying to persuade us that this isn't exactly what it looks like. No - sorry - this is classic psycho lesbian territory. What Tabitha put Olivia through in that cyber-chat was one of the sickest things a character has ever done on this show, and for me the clear implication was that all roads were leading to getting Olivia to undress on camera. Even if there's some doubt/ambiguity about Tabby's motivations, there's been more than enough material here and over the entire storyline to be sowing the age-old seed in viewers' minds of 'lesbian = creepy'. Given this and the Spencer story a few years back, you'd be forgiven as a H&A viewer for thinking all online predators were homosexual. And I think that's appalling in this day and age, especially when the only other gay person on the show is an unseen, well-dressed diner patron who absolutely doesn't have a crush on Marilyn. I mean, for heaven's sake... The scene with Tabby and her sister saying goodbye to Olivia was just downright bizarre. I don't care how sick the sister is - having Olivia feel like she had to pretend to be Tabby's friend and hug her goodbye after what she just did felt like another ghoulish psycho lesbian moment... Just to summarise, I'm not saying such storylines are always inappropriate - it's all about context for me. If they were aired within the context of a generally LGB-friendly show, which had likeable gay characters among the regular cast, I wouldn't have so much of a problem. But when the only gay or gay-implied characters for many years turn out to be malicious predators (namely Tabitha, and Spencer's stalker - also following in the footsteps of Sarah Lewis and Eve Jacobson years earlier), one starts to wonder whether there's a more malign agenda at play here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke39 Posted January 9, 2017 Report Share Posted January 9, 2017 I loved the Tabitha Olivia Storyline, Storyline of 2016 for me. Portrayed by two very talented young actors. I get the Lesbian undertones with the undressing. But that scene was one of the most indileable scenes they have done in years. One can look at that at being maligned or something. But I felt it was someone who was in control of someone else. And from a psychological point of view, was very deep in subtext. Like Olivia was broken in a prison, and had no control. I thought it was very well done, but that is just me. As for the diversity talk. IT well happen, or it won't, were hitting a wall here. And while some may think the show is unwatchable. I don't think 2016 was that bad. It was pretty good at times. I Think if you compare it to the past as a tradationlist, and one's individual interpretation reflects that. I get that. But for a show in 2017, I Think H and A is realistic. Unlike Neighbores where it feels its stuck in the nineties, its almost unwatchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atrus Posted January 9, 2017 Report Share Posted January 9, 2017 Judged purely on its dramatic merits, the Tabitha storyline was indeed very well done - compelling viewing and acted superbly. (Albeit a bit ghoulish and horror-film, which isn't my thing, but I can appreciate it was well-made.) What I worry about is the message it sends to young viewers (and viewers in general) about lesbians, in a show utterly devoid of positive depictions. None for seven years, indeed, since Joey was written out in disgrace and Charlie was swiftly purged of any lesbian or bisexual tendencies. And then suddenly, in 2016, a female character with an obvious crush on Olivia, with whom young gay teens might finally be able to identify... turns out to be a complete and utter sociopath. One has to wonder about an outfit that is perfectly content to air that storyline, but steadfastly refuses to go near anything that portrays a lesbian in a sympathetic light. Likewise Spencer's story - a girl with whom he begins a cyber-relationship turns out to be... yes, you guessed it, an older man, who's manipulating him for sexually predatory ends. Again, a compelling storyline - again, very nicely acted. But again, take a step back: in a show that has never had a regular gay male character in its 28 years of five-days-a-week broadcast - never aired a gay kiss - one has to ask why it was felt necessary to have this man prey on a male, rather than a female, character - and why this was deemed suitable by the network, whereas a perfectly loving, consensual relationship between two males is deemed totally inappropriate. Bring in some positive depictions of gay people and they can do whatever they like with their villains and psychopaths, in my view. But in the absence thereof, in this day and age, I just find these stories impossible to justify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samdanfan Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 1 hour ago, atrus said: Judged purely on its dramatic merits, the Tabitha storyline was indeed very well done - compelling viewing and acted superbly. (Albeit a bit ghoulish and horror-film, which isn't my thing, but I can appreciate it was well-made.) What I worry about is the message it sends to young viewers (and viewers in general) about lesbians, in a show utterly devoid of positive depictions. None for seven years, indeed, since Joey was written out in disgrace and Charlie was swiftly purged of any lesbian or bisexual tendencies. And then suddenly, in 2016, a female character with an obvious crush on Olivia, with whom young gay teens might finally be able to identify... turns out to be a complete and utter sociopath. One has to wonder about an outfit that is perfectly content to air that storyline, but steadfastly refuses to go near anything that portrays a lesbian in a sympathetic light. Likewise Spencer's story - a girl with whom he begins a cyber-relationship turns out to be... yes, you guessed it, an older man, who's manipulating him for sexually predatory ends. Again, a compelling storyline - again, very nicely acted. But again, take a step back: in a show that has never had a regular gay male character in its 28 years of five-days-a-week broadcast - never aired a gay kiss - one has to ask why it was felt necessary to have this man prey on a male, rather than a female, character - and why this was deemed suitable by the network, whereas a perfectly loving, consensual relationship between two males is deemed totally inappropriate. Bring in some positive depictions of gay people and they can do whatever they like with their villains and psychopaths, in my view. But in the absence thereof, in this day and age, I just find these stories impossible to justify. Sadly having writers do a positive depiction of any group is alot to ask for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dee123 Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 There have been other story lines over the years which have been offensive and borderline homophobic. Which male character had a male stalker? Not Spencer, this was worse than that one. I wanna say Kim Hyde but i don't remember. If you add the "psycho lesbians" Zoe, Tracey, Sarah to the mix, it really doesn't paint a pretty picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 1 hour ago, dee123 said: There have been other story lines over the years which have been offensive and borderline homophobic. Which male character had a male stalker? Not Spencer, this was worse than that one. I wanna say Kim Hyde but i don't remember. If you add the "psycho lesbians" Zoe, Tracey, Sarah to the mix, it really doesn't paint a pretty picture. Kim did have a stalker, Charlie, but Charlie wasn't gay - he was jealous of what he had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke39 Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 Oh won't somebody think of the children? . I can't say any of Those storylines occurred to me until now. But I can understand if it has bothered ppl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skylover Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 It's such a shame that poorly-educated people get high up jobs as network executives. I mean really. 9 hours ago, dee123 said: If you add the "psycho lesbians" Zoe, Tracey, Sarah to the mix, it really doesn't paint a pretty picture Who is Tracey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.