Diversity

[gutterboy]

6 hours ago, Jen said:

Most YAs are binge-watching shows in Netflix or YouTube, and very rarely sit down in front of the tv to watch a show live, let alone 4 nights of scheduled viewing. But, there are still families who watch the show together. Young kids who are watching with their parents, because they still control the remote, and to see themselves reflected in the show they watch is so important. Representation of diversity on any level is so crucial to keeping the show interesting and evolving, and in a way competing with the shows being produced for the digital space.

Funny you mention that Jen. I have been thinking that perhaps the reason that the "higher ups" aren't too keen in bringing in any "controversial" characters such as same-sex couples is because they are pandering to the parents of conservative parents who want to try and hide the truth from their children and I assume the show has a large teen following and hence they are scared if they bring in anything such as this the parents won't allow their kids to watch and hence hurt their ratings.

So it is likely 50% the conservative parents fault and 50% the exexs fault for not having any balls to do it - this is just pure speculation though, but there most definitely would be those type of parents out there who are either so close minded and/or don't want to deal with the "hard questions" from their kids on subjects such as this; this will lead to the kids growing up ignorant, but at least these days because of the internet and social media they can learn about such things a lot easier than they would in the past - but the bad thing about that is they could also stumble upon misinformation - so the bottom line is for the parents to do their job and answer their kids questions, even if they find it uncomfortable.

[Blaxland 89]

1 hour ago, gutterboy said:

Funny you mention that Jen. I have been thinking that perhaps the reason that the "higher ups" aren't too keen in bringing in any "controversial" characters such as same-sex couples is because they are pandering to the parents of conservative parents who want to try and hide the truth from their children and I assume the show has a large teen following and hence they are scared if they bring in anything such as this the parents won't allow their kids to watch and hence hurt their ratings.

So it is likely 50% the conservative parents fault and 50% the exexs fault for not having any balls to do it - this is just pure speculation though, but there most definitely would be those type of parents out there who are either so close minded and/or don't want to deal with the "hard questions" from their kids on subjects such as this; this will lead to the kids growing up ignorant, but at least these days because of the internet and social media they can learn about such things a lot easier than they would in the past - but the bad thing about that is they could also stumble upon misinformation - so the bottom line is for the parents to do their job and answer their kids questions, even if they find it uncomfortable.

That may be so but what I don't understand is that 20 years ago the show didn't shy away from such things and it was more diverse. So what has happened to Australia if it has become more taboo over the years. That's if indeed that is the reason. 

[harrietjames]

Maybe the older eps were more implied when girls were "attacked" not raped. Chris Fletcher was more confused about his sexuality then gay. Whereas Charlie and Joey were more obviously gay - until they expelled Charlie from Pretend Lesbian Land with the flack they copped from the ACL. Or many the ACL has now got a bigger voice.

 

[Jen]

On 8/21/2017 at 1:11 AM, gutterboy said:

Funny you mention that Jen. I have been thinking that perhaps the reason that the "higher ups" aren't too keen in bringing in any "controversial" characters such as same-sex couples is because they are pandering to the parents of conservative parents who want to try and hide the truth from their children and I assume the show has a large teen following and hence they are scared if they bring in anything such as this the parents won't allow their kids to watch and hence hurt their ratings.

So it is likely 50% the conservative parents fault and 50% the exexs fault for not having any balls to do it - this is just pure speculation though, but there most definitely would be those type of parents out there who are either so close minded and/or don't want to deal with the "hard questions" from their kids on subjects such as this; this will lead to the kids growing up ignorant, but at least these days because of the internet and social media they can learn about such things a lot easier than they would in the past - but the bad thing about that is they could also stumble upon misinformation - so the bottom line is for the parents to do their job and answer their kids questions, even if they find it uncomfortable.

Oh that is interesting. I'm not sure that parents are necessarily trying to "hide the truth", but maybe it is the case of their core demographic being on the conservative side of things. I'm thinking about when I used to watch the show with my mum and how she is still uncomfortable about the whole same-sex marriage thing. So yes, I definitely think the execs are trying to keep that audience happy. Because, as @harrietjames put it, they were the ones who kicked up the fuss about the Charlie/Joey storyline. And why Joey literally disappeared on a boat and never came back.There definitely is an audience of those who do not think their child should be educated about other sexualities or the rights of people to marry those of the same gender - hence why we also had all this drama about the 'safe sex' schools program - because parent's wanted to make the decision about when to talk about these issues with their children.

On the other hand, sometimes if you're not being talked about at all, then that's just as bad? No publicity is bad publicity? I don't know, but I would be interested to hear from someone higher up about what they perceive their main target audience is. What seems to happen is potentially writers are happy to do these sorts of storylines and then they get vetoed or something. Again, just speculating and joining some dots.

[atrus]

My guess is that the suits simply don't want a repeat of what happened in 2009; they're driven by commercial imperatives first and foremost, and don't want to scare the horses. This may be compounded by their personal conservatism, or it may not be, but either way it's apparently a risk they're not willing to take, despite comparable shows having since successfully introduced numerous gay characters without any backlash. My suspicion is that the 'no gays' policy is not written down so as to avoid the potential for leaks and negative publicity, which means that producers and writers will assume it continues to apply, even once executives have lost interest in upholding it.

I'm confident that it will change and I hope relatively soon (perhaps this referendum you're holding in Australia will be the thing that makes the difference - who knows?) But in the meantime, the writing team could help the cause enormously (as I believe most of them wish to do) by not introducing guest characters like Tabitha and the man who was stalking Spencer, for whom homosexuality is apparently allowed but only in the context of their being antagonistic, 'creepy' characters. (This, tellingly, the network doesn't object to.) When you simultaneously continue to deny airtime to gay characters who aren't sociopathic stalkers, that's really damaging, and sends the message that all gay people are predatory and unhinged.

[Blaxland 89]

I have noticed also the show steers away from anything happening in real life. 

With all the debate and voting people have to do in Australia in regards to equal marriage I think that possibly years ago the show would bring it up. 

The current show has defiantly detached itself from the outside (real) world. 

[Matt]

1 hour ago, Blaxland 89 said:

I have noticed also the show steers away from anything happening in real life. 

With all the debate and voting people have to do in Australia in regards to equal marriage I think that possibly years ago the show would bring it up. 

The current show has defiantly detached itself from the outside (real) world. 

With the postal vote happening now, if the inhouse team plotted a story about it, it wouldn't be onscreen until April next year - and would most likely be outdated.

[Blaxland 89]

4 hours ago, Matt said:

With the postal vote happening now, if the inhouse team plotted a story about it, it wouldn't be onscreen until April next year - and would most likely be outdated.

I do realise that mate. I'm just speaking generally. Or they could film a little bit and stick it in to an episode that's due. 

I just mean that there are not references to real life like there used to be.

mentions of prime ministers, the royals, immigration issues, Australia wanting to become a republic are all thing that were slotted into the show. 

Not so much now, just another way in which the characters and show in general is harder to identify with nowadays imo

And is there really any legitimate excuse for a show in 2017 not to represent any black, gay or disabled people as full as full time main characters. An all white cast is unnecessary and should be unacceptable. 

[Matt]

6 minutes ago, Blaxland 89 said:

And is there really any legitimate excuse for a show in 2017 not to represent any black, gay or disabled people as full as full time main characters. An all white cast is unnecessary and should be unacceptable. 

Did I try and justify this? However, with Leah being Greek and the Morgans as half-Asian, I don't know whether you could consider it an "all-white cast". However, and I've said this before, and I'll say it again, the lack of is better than having one for the sole purpose of tokenism.

[Homeandawayfan.]

40 minutes ago, Blaxland 89 said:

I do realise that mate. I'm just speaking generally. Or they could film a little bit and stick it in to an episode that's due. 

I just mean that there are not references to real life like there used to be.

mentions of prime ministers, the royals, immigration issues, Australia wanting to become a republic are all thing that were slotted into the show. 

Not so much now, just another way in which the characters and show in general is harder to identify with nowadays imo

And is there really any legitimate excuse for a show in 2017 not to represent any black, gay or disabled people as full as full time main characters. An all white cast is unnecessary and should be unacceptable. 

As a long term viewer I totally agree with all of this. Yes Leah is Greek and the Morgans are half Asian that still does not account for the fact there are no LGBT characters in the show. And no I am not trying to promote diversity in H&A, I am just stating that in 2017 H&A needs to get with the times. Apart from Alf the rest of the show is so alien to what it originally was and does seem to be trapped in its own universe well away from reality.