I’m basing my thoughts on Downton, but thought I’d give it a new thread so we can add in other fictional examples. I hope this wasn’t mentioned already in Downton threads, I did look through them…
So Thomas. He’s an evil little shit. And he’s gay. My problem is: he is now steadily becoming teh evil gay. I’m not sure how I feel about this. Now that he’s coming on to the new kid it’s turning into the homophobic nightmare of “the dirty evil gays are going to touch us, rape us and turn our children gay”.
I’m in two minds:
“Teh evil gay” is not an appropriate portrayal of homosexuality on tv. Especially not if you’re trying to say gay and evil are connected. It’s starting to look as if he is assaulting the new kid, and he is the only person in the series who has done that, as well as the only person in the series who is gay. Connecting the two: not ok yet.
Part of fighting homophobia is making homosexuality normal. As such it should hold no exceptional position; gay characters can also be evil and can also sexually assault other characters.
Right now I’m leaning towards option 1: not ok. It might also be the time in which the series is set: imagine actually being gay in the early 20th century. Don’t mess with that, show how hard that must’ve been. Why does he have to live up to all the fears of homophobic idiots?
Just some random thoughts on the subject… What say you? Evil and gay, ok or not?
Thomas’s story apparently continues to develop in Series 3 of Downton Abbey. Which is now playing in the UK but can’t be generally discussed here because of spoilers. There is a thread for discussing the new stuff, not yet seen in the USA.
Yes, homophobia is bad. But I suggest you be specific about what you dislike about Thomas’s role. And limit yourself to Series 1 & 2.
–I haven’t seen Series 3 but read UK coverage. Generally, speaking it seems to be better than Series 2. And Thomas is still at Downton. But most folks here won’t be prepared to discuss it.
He’s not evil because he’s gay, he’s evil because he’s a shitbag of a person. That’s the difference. His homosexuality hasn’t been the root of his evil. He doesn’t work against Bates because he’s been spurned by him sexually or because he wants to get closer to Lord Grantham for sexual reasons, so his homosexuality doesn’t play into it.
I disagree. I think to a certain extent, his homosexuality (and the isolation and bullying he endures because of it) have been used to explain why he’s such a shit. He doesn’t like people because he’s “different” and he’s going to assume you won’t like him, so he strikes first. I think that’s the core of his character, and his main motivation.
I am also ambivalent about his character. I think there is some value to showing how living closeted gradually destroys your psyche. There have been moments where we can see the type of man Thomas could have become in a more tolerant world* especially on the most recent Season 3 episodes and he isn’t a bad guy. There a heart there, but it’s been broken so many times, he’s not allowing anyone to get that chance again.
On the other hand, the “Evil Gay Character” is a damaging trope that’s been done to death. It’s a well done version of that, sure, but it would have been nice to see something that wasn’t so clichéd. But I like the show.* and I think in the new season they are developing his character into something more complex. He is actually one of my favorites, and I used to HATE Thomas. I think the writers are good, and I am hopeful they will sidestep away from a caricatured portrayal. So, ambivalent, but hopefully optimistic.
*The spoiled boxes are discussing things that happen in the third (un-aired in the US) season. They are general; they do not discuss specific plot points, but they are spoilers nonetheless. Do not click them unless you want to know inklings of what happens in season three. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!
Ooooh sorry sorry sorry, Ellen Cherry, please add spoiler warning! I wasn’t aware that the US was behind, it’s usually the other way around…
I typed up a long response, but if half the people here haven’t seen the beginning of season three yet there’s not much point discussing it… Shall I resurrect this discussion a little later? I would really like to share some thoughts on evil and gay characters. Can someone tell me when season three is aired in the US?
This is killing me, super sorry for any spoilers. I should’ve thought about the post, but I was posting in a moment of passion. Silly me. :smack:
This kind of reminds me of how the Barron Harkonnen was gay in the Dune novel. This never bothered me, as a gay man. But evidently the intent from the author who despised homosexuality was to include the Barron as being gay so that he’d be even more evil.
Frankly, Thomas as a gay person doesn’t bother me. There are evil gay people. Nothing wrong with showing that.
I believe there is a season 3 thread going – you could go participate in that thread. Since it’s a British series, it airs in GB first – it will air in the US in January, at which point there will probably be a second season 3 thread that US watchers will post in as the season unfolds.
As much as I’m enjoying Downton, I find their depiction of homosexuality to be disturbing and very outdated. Of course there are very flawed LGBT people just as there are straight people but when there is only one gay character and he’s depicted as a selfish, immoral, manipulative person who sexually harasses a co-worker, this only validates prejudice and stereotyping. The writers of this program should be forced to watch ‘The Celluloid Closet’ to understand what they’re doing here, perpetuating a negative stereotype of LGBT people that’s been used since the beginning of film. It’s an excellent documentary that explores this issue in depth. This is no different than the ubiquitous stereotypes of African Americans in film and television in the 1960s and 70s as pimps and criminals.
And yes, I read the rest of your post but I haven’t seen anything about Thomas’s portrayal that isn’t believable - I find that he and O’Brien are such utter conniving shits much harder to tolerate.
Also, the creator of Downton, Julian Fellowes, is a “Conservative Party Life Peer” according to Wikipedia. I have to wonder if his politics and worldview have something to do with the negative stereotyping.
Yes, the character is believable but I’m not sure what the era has to do with it. Do you think all LGBT people were manipulative shits in the 1920s? I acknowledged that the portrayal is realistic in my post but you fail to see my point.
I don’t know. I see Thomas more as a flawed but sort of tragic figure. I hate him as a little shit disturber, but I see where he’s coming from in terms of doing under handed things. He just isn’t welcomed in society. I see Thomas as being affectionate to the wrong people. Of course they’re going to through him over because if ANYONE was gay back then you’d be more worse off than Ethel venturing into prostitution. He knows this and must do what he can to remain at Downton, because if he’s left to the world he’ll be eaten alive. His shooting his hand during the war was rather pathetic, but not worthy of distain in my view, because who the hell could stand a rat infested trench warfare anyway? Most of those poor bastards never came home.
I think it has everything to do with it. You seem to be making the common mistake of applying 2013 sensibilities to another, very different era. I think they could portray the way Thomas is seen by the other characters far more harshly and be accurate.
Of course not, but you’re asking a stupid and simplistic question there.
Thomas is gay. Thomas is a manipulative shit. I’m sorry you’re offended those two characteristics were combined. I can only point out, within our limited context, that O’Brien appears to out-shit Thomas by a considerable margin and is not, as far as we know, LGB or T.
I do realize they are breaking the well-honed trope of having a “balancing” character whenever a bad guy is of an identifiable group. If the murderer is black, you’d better have a charming black family somewhere at hand. If he’s a Mafia goon, you’d better have Sergeant Romano chasing him. And if he’s gay, make sure there’s a sub-plot about 'Enry the kindly poofter chicken farmer. Sorry; they left 'Enry out. It is 1920, after all.
ETA: There is more to say along these lines, but not without Season 3 spoilers. Let’s just say things could have gone a great deal worse for Tommy, eh?
The only person acting offended around here is you, by my opinion.
It seems to really pizz you off that people object to the stereotyping of minorities. I’m glad that African Americans are no longer only portrayed as simple minded housekeepers and gardeners or drug dealers and pimps.
Mad Men handled this issue in an excellent way, the bigotry of that time period is in your face. The gay character is far from perfect, they even make fun of him a bit, but they avoid the depiction of a gay man that Downton has portrayed. Creepy, immoral, selfish, making inappropriate advances. I don’t even find it believable. I can’t imagine anyone, selfish or not, caressing the upper thigh of a coworker without more knowledge that this advance was welcomed.
DaveZ, it’s pretty clear you’re the one who is highly offended here. You’ve contradicted yourself twice in your posts so far and refuse to concede that DA being a period piece, played up for a modern audience, has anything to do with Thomas’s portrayal.
Fine, you don’t like the portrayal. Point noted. I didn’t say I liked it, either, but I don’t see it as a standout slap at or extreme stereotyping, either. They are pulling off a highly nuanced character even though there’s hardly a single likeable thing about him. If you choose to see his homosexuality as meant to be another bad or unlikeable thing, that’s your interpretation. I stand by my above pairing: Thomas is a manipulative shit. Thomas is gay. Two facets, not one.
I had to think about this one a bit, missed the edit window.
What inappropriate advances? We’ve seen Thomas move on precisely two men in the entire series. The first was the young duke, in which case he thought they were picking up where they’d left off (and setting up the most gut-bustingly funny line I’ve ever heard on television).
In the second case, he’d convinced himself, and been convinced by O’Brien, that James was flirting with him - which, to a degree, he was. Thomas was extremely careful and waited the situation out for months… he just happened to have been wrong and cruelly misled.
It’s lunacy to try and infer a whole character from the parts we see, especially in such a soapy series where nothing ever changes unless the script directs it. However, that Thomas has only been suspected of being gay for some ten years means he’s either made no advances, or only very careful ones. I don’t see anything stereotyped or demeaning about his being set up with James. The reactions of the other characters are far more stereotyped than his behavior and character modeling.
Three men, Mr. Pamuk being the third. Pamuk very quickly realizes what’s Thomas is suggesting, and uses it to manipulate Thomas into showing him to Lady Mary’s room later that night.
Can I ask why we’re automatically supposed to spare any american viewers from spoilers in any Downton thread, when the same courtesy isn’t shown to european viewers when the US is ahead? Why can’t the americans just stay out of threads not marked “spolier-free”, just like europeans are expected to do?
Especially with this issue, it seems ridiculous to even discuss it without openly mentioning events in season III.