COMMENTS: 58
Tila Tequila’s Bisexual Dating Show Is More Than Just Trashy Fun
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
For those of you who haven't noticed, we bisexuals finally scored our own show -- A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila. Unfortunately, it's a reality program made by a former producer of The Bachelor that places Tequila, an exotic Asian American femme with plenty of tattoos, cleavage, and low-cut halter tops, at the center of a battle between sixteen straight men (who have the maturity of frat boys on Jägermeister) and sixteen trashy lesbians (many of whom resemble strippers much like the woman they're pursuing). Despite the contestants, the show proves to be trashy fun that grows less superficial -- mostly due to the maturity of its star -- with each episode. A surprising feat considering that most of us, that is most of us over the age of twenty-one, didn't even have a clue who Tequila was until MTV aired this show.
Known for having two million MySpace friends, writing provocative songs like "Fuck Ya Man" and "Stripper Friends," and being a Maxim cover girl, Tequila (for obvious reasons) isn't the ideal bisexual poster child. During the first episode Tequila's slutty behavior and ignorant commentary made me want to hurl things at my television. Aside from her penchant for approaching the contestants in the house and randomly making out with them then walking away, Tequila also reinforces another major bisexual stereotype -- she keeps her sexuality a secret from her potential suitors. When they arrive at the house, Tequila hasn't told any of the men or women that she's bisexual, let alone that they will be competing with members of the opposite sex for her affections. Even worse, when she tells them her sexuality in a dramatic ending to the first episode, she says, "I'm a bisexual," not "I'm bisexual." That's like Ellen DeGeneres saying, "I'm a gay." Not exactly confidence inspiring. Neither is her admission that she's a complete horndog. Tequila confides to a male Italian contestant that she has to masturbate nine times a day in order to be satisfied. Not exactly helping our image there, either, lady!
Despite claiming that both men and women have broken her heart, Tequila's clearly a new bisexual, which makes her comments and influence somewhat dangerous to seasoned members of the bi community like me. In earlier episodes she has a proclivity for turning to the camera and saying unintentionally damaging things like, "This show's the perfect experience because it's really going to help me figure out -- do I really like a guy or do I really like a girl?" Umm, the point isn't to determine whether you're straight or gay. You're allegedly bisexual, you idiot!
The point of a bisexual dating show shouldn't be to prove that we all eventually develop a preference, abandon our fence-sitting ways, and settle into a heterosexual or homosexual lifestyle. And it definitely shouldn't be to center an entire show around a bi-curious straight girl who'd make out with a woman at a nightclub after a few cocktails for the pleasure of her boyfriend. And after watching the first few episodes of the show, I wasn't entirely sure Tequila wasn't that girl. When she screams things like, "I don't know about you guys but I love strip clubs. Are you ready to party?" I can't help but miss Ani DiFranco.
The competitions on the show are designed to highlight gender roles and thus help Tequila better decide whom to eliminate. In many cases she behaves like a straight man. In the first episode she makes the female contestants play dress up and walk a runway in maid, Catholic school girl, and dominatrix-style outfits so she can objectify them like a dude, then eliminate the least sexy ones. She eliminates the male virgin for inexperience in the first few episodes, but keeps the female virgin around, excited about exploiting her innocence. She doesn't hesitate to scream, "Look at that ass!" as both men and women slither around in a tub full of bath bubbles looking for chips that will grant them alone time with her. But as the season progresses Tequila also proves to be genuine and multi-faceted despite her superficial packaging and dirty talk.
After the first few episodes Tequila stops consoling the lesbians with comments like, "I'm just trying to figure it out right now," and starts saying intelligent things like, "It just depends on the person, it's not 'a guy' or 'a girl.'" She puts looks aside, opting to eliminate pretty boys in order to keep goofy guys with senses of humor around and drops most of the trashy, self-centered lesbians, one of whom physically attacks another contestant when she isn't chosen to stay in the house. But Tequila's openness and lack of superficiality truly shines when despite her claim that she only likes "lipstick lesbians," she falls for a warm-hearted soft butch who puts on no airs and refuses to dress in the skimpy outfits chosen by the producers. As the number of contestants is narrowed and Tequila truly begins to get to know the men and women, even traveling to meet their families, she encounters a very bisexual dilemma -- the former Playboy model starts to connect emotionally and fall in love with both the men and the women.
Getting to observe this on television is a first. I, too, have fallen simultaneously for a man and a woman, and if you're not bi, you'll never understand the unique challenge it poses. I've never had the opportunity before to watch a fellow bisexual woman struggle on national television with the disadvantages and advantages of dating both sexes, and for this reason alone, the show is truly groundbreaking. It also exposes the common prejudices and assumptions straight men and lesbians have about bisexual women.
Some of the guys on the show predictably say they want to be Tequila's primary relationship but admit they are open to threesomes. Other men express anxiety and insecurities about competing for a woman with other women. One lesbian is so repulsed after she learns Tequila is bi, she quits the show, while other lesbians try to undermine each other by telling Tequila they believe other female contestants are "confused" and not sure they're only into women. These are all realistic scenarios most bisexuals encounter while dating monosexuals, and I truly feel Tequila's frustrations as she tries to sort through the drama. But I don't have a lot of sympathy for her given the venue where she's chosen to come out. Perhaps the most frustrating element of the show is why a bisexual woman would close herself off from the possibility of dating another bisexual. It would seemingly solve a lot of problems but not Tequila's own insecurities. Early in the show she expresses her concern that the contestants will lose their focus on her and start hooking up with each other. The concern proves valid when a "lesbian" contestant fools around with a man and another woman, showing viewers much to my delight that even static sexuality can be fluid in the monosexual community, let alone when the cameras are rolling.
But after Tequila ultimately gets real and eliminates the contestants who cheat on her or who don't seem capable of a genuine connection, she impresses me again by realizing her original assumptions about bisexuality were wrong. She admits, "You know when I first started out it was more 'do I want to be with a girl' or 'do I want to be with a guy?' and that was it. But now that I'm involved, I have two girls left and one guy. They're people that I really love and in this case, love has no gender." Pretty evolved commentary for someone who hasn't even come out to her own parents.
Who will Tequila ultimately pick? Who cares? I, along with bisexuals everywhere who bothered to watch this far, are just breathing a collective sigh of relief that she actually goes both ways -- not just in her loins, but in her heart.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davmills on Dec 13, 2007 5:52 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Article a bit off-putting
Posted by: diptutod
» EMPTY-V
Posted by: snideelf
Comments are closed-
Posted by: apophenia_monkey on Dec 13, 2007 6:48 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
c'mon, it's freakin' MTV--a single show on its network is about as relevant to societal commentary as faux news o'reilly factor.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I Know When I Want Insight
Posted by: johnclark
» RE: I Know When I Want Insight
Posted by: juanpecan81
Comments are closed-
Posted by: johnclark on Dec 13, 2007 7:21 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To the comment above, I don't see the author being judgmental at all. We are ALWAYS (at least 99% of the time) portrayed as "trashy" and "slutty". That or the married bisexual becoming gay in the classic coming out story. It's 2007 and I still see the gay/lesbian media calling us "confused". You see, we get it from all sides. If the slutty bisexual were only one of the many ways we were portrayed in the media, we wouldn't have a problem with it. As we all know, every stereotype is true once in a while. But when the stereotype is the only way we're portrayed, we get pissed.
At least the BBC has a show with positive portrayals of bisexuals - Torchwood.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» "Forced to watch it"?
Posted by: defrag
Comments are closed-
Posted by: goldmarx on Dec 13, 2007 7:34 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Would it be better if she played with herself more?
Or is it that masturbation is a bad thing because lust is one of the seven deadly sins and not a real emotion?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: johnclark
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: diptutod
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: goldmarx
» Furthering Stereotypes
Posted by: wheresarah
» RE: Furthering Stereotypes
Posted by: CharliePatton
» RE: Furthering Stereotypes
Posted by: goldmarx
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: lamar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ankhet on Dec 13, 2007 7:49 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: theshadowknows on Dec 13, 2007 7:54 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: vietnamsyndrome on Dec 13, 2007 8:23 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Couldn't have said it better myself.
Posted by: wheresarah
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lamar on Dec 13, 2007 8:48 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CharliePatton on Dec 13, 2007 9:10 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually Nicole, I believe you say it all when you state--and I quote--"Shut up."
Optimally Nicole, you'll take your own advice and "Shut up."
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: screwjack2000 on Dec 13, 2007 9:22 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: lamar
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: vietnamsyndrome
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: diptutod
Comments are closed-
Posted by: defrag on Dec 13, 2007 10:11 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, uh, yeah, if the show has any cultural influence it is with young people. It doesn't matter if the highfalutin' 40 & 50-somethings reading AlterNet have cable or not. Sheesh. Whaddaya want, a medal?
Perhaps more significantly, I don't notice any parents chiming in to say they prohibit, or allow, their kids to watch this show.
Myself, I'm not too proud to have cable & now I'll take a look. As a gay (not bi) man I'll probably see kids having an easier time with their sexuality than I did. I think that's a great thing but maybe I'm in a minority in this patrician crowd here, looking down your noses at TV.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Odd, disparaging comments here
Posted by: screwjack2000
» (sigh) Nice that you "personally don't care" but...
Posted by: defrag
» RE: (sigh) Nice that you "personally don't care" but...
Posted by: screwjack2000
» Maybe "Hairspray" as a comparison
Posted by: defrag
» RE: Maybe "Hairspray" as a comparison
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: Odd, disparaging comments here
Posted by: johnclark
» RE: Odd, disparaging comments here
Posted by: screwjack2000
» A lot of PRUDES here maybe?
Posted by: defrag
Comments are closed-
Posted by: STORMY78 on Dec 13, 2007 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
now an even trashier show, watch i love new york on vh1. this wacked flavor flav cast off no brains and all fake boob. guys love that.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Knot_Rich on Dec 13, 2007 10:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The kids aren't thinking about the money...
Posted by: defrag
» RE: The kids aren't thinking about the money...
Posted by: screwjack2000
Comments are closed-
Posted by: madaha on Dec 13, 2007 11:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hylasdrowned on Dec 13, 2007 11:30 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm delighted to hear that she and/or the show's puppeteers are making somewhat surprising stories and showing "character development." I'd still love to see a scripted show with bisexual characters who display anything like a sympathetic arc; I can't think of one offhand. I've never seen Torchwood, but it seems unlikely that relationships are a big focus for it.
I have to say that a lot of these comments are hilarious. I can understand being offended by the show, though I think that's rather a dull and simplistic reaction. TV is frequently ugly but it's part of our society and worth engaging with and understanding.
But "this article is offensive"? Really? Because you didn't agree with the conclusion? Because you feel that MTV reality shows are so far beneath you that any discussion of them within your frame of attention demeans you? I thought it was a thoughtful, balanced discussion of something that, like it or not, young people are going to view and take seriously to some small degree, and it will influence their perceptions of a phenomenon a lot of people still fail to understand.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: CharliePatton
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: CharliePatton
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: diptutod
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: diptutod
» Torchwood
Posted by: BenCaxton12
Comments are closed-
Posted by: apa on Dec 13, 2007 4:51 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And I think it's unfortunate that this article disparages sex workers (strippers, etc.)
Finally, as for the comments claiming that Tila is "not really bisexual": the only people who are not bisexual are those who say they aren't. If this woman says she's bi, then she is. Talk about biphobia mixed with sexism! What's so difficult about believing a woman when she talks about her sexuality?
Very unfortunate, indeed...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "exotic" Asian?
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: "exotic" Asian?
Posted by: apa
Comments are closed-
Posted by: L-boogey on Dec 13, 2007 5:38 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
EDITOR...DON'T STOOP SO LOW! This article is a vacuum! This site is where aware people try to get their news, and aware people see through hollow marketing campaigns! Read the thing again! It's lack of substance, insight and meaning is truly frustrating and offensive in quite a direct way!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davidg on Dec 13, 2007 7:55 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Philip Newton on Dec 14, 2007 9:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The world burns and we peep.
Grade: F-
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JohnU on Dec 14, 2007 9:21 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People who are attracted to more than one gender are bisexuals. People who are attracted to more than one person at a time are human. If they act on this attraction ethically, they are polyamorists or swingers. If the act on this attraction unethically, they are adulterers or rapists.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: brucerise on Dec 18, 2007 7:12 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.findbilover.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Silenceisgolden on Dec 21, 2007 11:47 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davmills on Dec 13, 2007 5:52 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Article a bit off-putting
Posted by: diptutod
» EMPTY-V
Posted by: snideelf
Comments are closed-
Posted by: apophenia_monkey on Dec 13, 2007 6:48 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
c'mon, it's freakin' MTV--a single show on its network is about as relevant to societal commentary as faux news o'reilly factor.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I Know When I Want Insight
Posted by: johnclark
» RE: I Know When I Want Insight
Posted by: juanpecan81
Comments are closed-
Posted by: johnclark on Dec 13, 2007 7:21 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To the comment above, I don't see the author being judgmental at all. We are ALWAYS (at least 99% of the time) portrayed as "trashy" and "slutty". That or the married bisexual becoming gay in the classic coming out story. It's 2007 and I still see the gay/lesbian media calling us "confused". You see, we get it from all sides. If the slutty bisexual were only one of the many ways we were portrayed in the media, we wouldn't have a problem with it. As we all know, every stereotype is true once in a while. But when the stereotype is the only way we're portrayed, we get pissed.
At least the BBC has a show with positive portrayals of bisexuals - Torchwood.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» "Forced to watch it"?
Posted by: defrag
Comments are closed-
Posted by: goldmarx on Dec 13, 2007 7:34 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Would it be better if she played with herself more?
Or is it that masturbation is a bad thing because lust is one of the seven deadly sins and not a real emotion?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: johnclark
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: diptutod
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: goldmarx
» Furthering Stereotypes
Posted by: wheresarah
» RE: Furthering Stereotypes
Posted by: CharliePatton
» RE: Furthering Stereotypes
Posted by: goldmarx
» RE: ONLY 9 TIMES A DAY??
Posted by: lamar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ankhet on Dec 13, 2007 7:49 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: theshadowknows on Dec 13, 2007 7:54 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: vietnamsyndrome on Dec 13, 2007 8:23 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Couldn't have said it better myself.
Posted by: wheresarah
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lamar on Dec 13, 2007 8:48 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CharliePatton on Dec 13, 2007 9:10 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually Nicole, I believe you say it all when you state--and I quote--"Shut up."
Optimally Nicole, you'll take your own advice and "Shut up."
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: screwjack2000 on Dec 13, 2007 9:22 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: lamar
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: vietnamsyndrome
» RE: Her "Bi-Sexuality" is an Affectation
Posted by: diptutod
Comments are closed-
Posted by: defrag on Dec 13, 2007 10:11 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, uh, yeah, if the show has any cultural influence it is with young people. It doesn't matter if the highfalutin' 40 & 50-somethings reading AlterNet have cable or not. Sheesh. Whaddaya want, a medal?
Perhaps more significantly, I don't notice any parents chiming in to say they prohibit, or allow, their kids to watch this show.
Myself, I'm not too proud to have cable & now I'll take a look. As a gay (not bi) man I'll probably see kids having an easier time with their sexuality than I did. I think that's a great thing but maybe I'm in a minority in this patrician crowd here, looking down your noses at TV.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Odd, disparaging comments here
Posted by: screwjack2000
» (sigh) Nice that you "personally don't care" but...
Posted by: defrag
» RE: (sigh) Nice that you "personally don't care" but...
Posted by: screwjack2000
» Maybe "Hairspray" as a comparison
Posted by: defrag
» RE: Maybe "Hairspray" as a comparison
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: Odd, disparaging comments here
Posted by: johnclark
» RE: Odd, disparaging comments here
Posted by: screwjack2000
» A lot of PRUDES here maybe?
Posted by: defrag
Comments are closed-
Posted by: STORMY78 on Dec 13, 2007 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
now an even trashier show, watch i love new york on vh1. this wacked flavor flav cast off no brains and all fake boob. guys love that.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Knot_Rich on Dec 13, 2007 10:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The kids aren't thinking about the money...
Posted by: defrag
» RE: The kids aren't thinking about the money...
Posted by: screwjack2000
Comments are closed-
Posted by: madaha on Dec 13, 2007 11:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hylasdrowned on Dec 13, 2007 11:30 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm delighted to hear that she and/or the show's puppeteers are making somewhat surprising stories and showing "character development." I'd still love to see a scripted show with bisexual characters who display anything like a sympathetic arc; I can't think of one offhand. I've never seen Torchwood, but it seems unlikely that relationships are a big focus for it.
I have to say that a lot of these comments are hilarious. I can understand being offended by the show, though I think that's rather a dull and simplistic reaction. TV is frequently ugly but it's part of our society and worth engaging with and understanding.
But "this article is offensive"? Really? Because you didn't agree with the conclusion? Because you feel that MTV reality shows are so far beneath you that any discussion of them within your frame of attention demeans you? I thought it was a thoughtful, balanced discussion of something that, like it or not, young people are going to view and take seriously to some small degree, and it will influence their perceptions of a phenomenon a lot of people still fail to understand.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: CharliePatton
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: CharliePatton
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: diptutod
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: reality tv plays by different rules
Posted by: diptutod
» Torchwood
Posted by: BenCaxton12
Comments are closed-
Posted by: apa on Dec 13, 2007 4:51 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And I think it's unfortunate that this article disparages sex workers (strippers, etc.)
Finally, as for the comments claiming that Tila is "not really bisexual": the only people who are not bisexual are those who say they aren't. If this woman says she's bi, then she is. Talk about biphobia mixed with sexism! What's so difficult about believing a woman when she talks about her sexuality?
Very unfortunate, indeed...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "exotic" Asian?
Posted by: screwjack2000
» RE: "exotic" Asian?
Posted by: apa
Comments are closed-
Posted by: L-boogey on Dec 13, 2007 5:38 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
EDITOR...DON'T STOOP SO LOW! This article is a vacuum! This site is where aware people try to get their news, and aware people see through hollow marketing campaigns! Read the thing again! It's lack of substance, insight and meaning is truly frustrating and offensive in quite a direct way!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davidg on Dec 13, 2007 7:55 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Philip Newton on Dec 14, 2007 9:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The world burns and we peep.
Grade: F-
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JohnU on Dec 14, 2007 9:21 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People who are attracted to more than one gender are bisexuals. People who are attracted to more than one person at a time are human. If they act on this attraction ethically, they are polyamorists or swingers. If the act on this attraction unethically, they are adulterers or rapists.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: brucerise on Dec 18, 2007 7:12 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.findbilover.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Silenceisgolden on Dec 21, 2007 11:47 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Vancouver's Games Will Be the Gayest Olympics Ever
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped




