thetabbycat1123: Brilliant post!! Agreed. We should never settle for condescending portrayals.



amazonchyck: I agree to disagree. You are certainly free to cut Joss slack if you want to but I am certainly as free not to cut him slack if I don't feel he merits it. While Joss was giving us all that "groundbreaking stuff", he was already planning to kill Tara and turn Willow evil in another lesbian cliche.



IMHO BTVS did more harm than good to the lesbian community by failing to carry thru with the promise of the first long term lesbian relationship on primetime TV. That would have been a real landmark. Instead we got another dead lesbian after sex. That was the context of Tara's death that Joss gave us rather than the kind of death that all the heteros on the show got. For example, Tara death could have been an heroic death like Tabby Cat suggests. Joss Whedon has always gotten some sadistic joy out of pissing off shippers and playing one ship off of another. In this case, he has caused the fracturing of the lesbian fanbase into warring camps of those who see the cliche vs those who do not and/or of W/T fans vs those of other 'ships. It has played out in the letters pages of the gay rags and fan sites/boards. Buffy fandom has become toxic and divided and nowhere more than among gay fans. I used to go to other boards but stopped because of the acrimony. BTVS's legacy is a bad one instead of the really groundbreaking one that it could have had IMHO.



Not too mention the dead (Larry) and evil (Andrew) gay men that Josswad has inflicted on the world. This is why I won't cut Joss any slack. Joss has tried to weasle out of his responsibilty ever since the story aired. First, it was "I never cared about the issues when Tara was introduced nor those when she died". Then "Amber will be back but Tara won't". Then that plan B nonsense he spewed at SFX. Like Xita says he got the credit from the gay rags now let him be a man and take the criticism. If we are not ready to deplore the cliches, then that is all we will get on TV. I won't settle for that and take the crumbs that they deign to give us.

_____________________

I see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 11/17/03 11:17 pm

Here's my post, finally:



Hey, amazonchyck. First of all, we don't flame at the Kitten. We often disagree and I do believe you'll find many people disagreeing with you in this thread about this issue, but we absolutely do not flame here.



That said, I do disagree with some of your points.



The cliché is not pervasive only in "early cinema." If, say, The Children's Hour, had been the last in a line of films that featured the cliché and since then, we had had only the occasional dead/insane/evil/etc. lesbian portrayal, this whole thing would most likely have been a non-issue. But the cliché is alive and well now. (You will find more on this in some of the threads on Genuine Molded Plastic.)



Yes, the movement is all about equality and it's because I believe that that I disagree with you. Because we are not treated equally in film and television. When a straight character is killed or portrayed as a monster, there are a great many other straight characters available to the audience who are alive and well, happy, balanced, healthy, etc.



Not so with us. We are underrepresented to begin with and also disproportionately portrayed in a manner fitting the cliché. This adds up to inequality.



If we were represented in a proportion equal to our percentage of the population and those representations ran the same gamut of types of portrayals as those of straight characters, again, this would be a non-issue. No one would have a leg to stand on when they began talking about a dead/evil lesbian cliché if only, say, five percent of all lesbians were portrayed this way. Since this is not the case...well, there's that inequality again.



I believe that writers should be free to write what they like, the way they like, portraying their characters as they see fit. Of course. It's a free country. However, if you are going to put the fruits of your creativity out there in the world, you must be prepared for criticism and I don't believe for one second that it is wrong for the audience to be critical of the creation or the creator her/himself.



That is how we express that we are unhappy with how we are being portrayed. If we don't make those points, and loudly, no awareness is raised. Many people have stated right here in this very thread that they had no idea such a cliché even existed until they became aware of the brouhaha following Tara's death and came here to see what it was all about. Furthermore, if a writer out there can sit down to write an episode of a television show more well-informed than s/he was before, this can only be a good thing because it benefits not just LGBT folks, but the straight audience as well.



We do not need such ideas as that we are fundamentally dysfunctional and/or deserving of punishment reinforced in the media. Minds can be changed by television and many were changed by the beauty of Willow and Tara. What is the effect of seeing us repeatedly vilified and abused and killed off with so few more positive portrayals to offer balance? What does that do to the 13-year-old girl who cries herself to sleep every night because she has a crush on another girl in her class and thinks she's a monster because of it? What does that do to people like, perhaps, that girl's friends who think fags and dykes are icky?



While I support the freedom of writers to create as they see fit, my personal feeling is that this also comes with a responsibility to think about things like diversity, fairness, and how different groups of people have historically been portrayed during the process of creating any art or entertainment.



A single portrayal may not necessarily be offensive, in and of itself. However, when there is a surfeit of that type of portrayal, it does become a problem. And what Joss did was contribute to that surfeit and I am passionately certain that it was right to challenge it.



Sure, he killed lots of straight characters. BtVS was packed full of killing. That? Not really the point. A quick trip through this thread from its beginning will explain why.

---

So up on your feet. Up on your feet! Somewhere there’s music playing.
Don’t you worry none. We’ll just take it like it comes. One day at a time, one day at a time.
-- "One Day at a Time" - John and Nancy Barry

amazonchyck: The points that you raised about cutting Joss slack has already been raised in regard to Girlfriend's magazine editorial which covered the same ground. You can scroll back and get the responses at the time. If you read the FAQ for this board, you will see that what you posted on season 7 is off topic to this board and was before "Seeing Red" aired. This board was created as a haven for fans of Willow/Tara who were chased out of other boards for favoring that relationship. W/other has always been off topic because such discussions were used to tell us that we shouldn't like Willow/Tara whether it was because people didn't want Willow gay, didn't like Tara's body type or shy personality or whatever. This group continues to be marginalized in Buffy fandom and the Kitten board remains a haven for them. I am proud to be a Kitten.



For my part, my perspective is 180 degrees from yours. I have found discussion of the dead lesbian cliche is off topic everywhere else but here. I have felt censored posting on other boards and the newsgroup. The only place I have felt welcome in cyberspace as a W/T fan is here. This board has been a haven for many like me who felt that Mutant Enemy caused a disservice to the lesbian community by ending an exceptional gay portrayal in the dead lesbian cliche. Apparently, I am not supposed to feel that way and have to cut Joss slack as you and Girlfriends magazine insist. I'm sorry but I don't agree.



I feel strongly that Joss Whedon and Mutant Enemy should not be praised without great qualification for their gay portrayals. I don't feel that Joss Whedon is in any way a gay activist and will continue to write in opposition to that characterization. I have written many letters to the Editors of the gay rags voicing my views and will continue to do so. Otherwise, I fear that Joss Whedon will be hailed as a hero by those who want to forget the lesbianand gay cliches that followed "Seeing Red". Mutant Enemy gave us many gay cliches from dead gays/lesbians to "girl on girl action" (sex w/o love) for the boys. While I can acknowledge the good in W/T, I have see not good since and BTVS, for me, is a microcosm of the devolving of lesbian portrayals on TV after W/T. Networks want boy numbers and TV producers like Joss Whedon are bending over backwards to give it to them with the usual lesbian and gay cliches. ME used to bust cliches. Now they can't tell when they do one. After destroying the only long term lesbian relationship on primetime TV, I will never again watch a show by Joss Whedon or Mutant Enemy.



Amazonchyck, I disagree with you but that doesn't make you wrong and me right. Just as your arguments do not make me wrong. The difference between us is that this is the only place where I can post my views without being attacked. On the other hand, there are many boards where your views are welcome as you said. Moderated boards have rules and if you don't like the rules such as feeling that it is censorship, for example, then you are not obligated to join or post at the board. Other boards have rules that I have disagreed with like banning criticism of ME or discussion of the cliche to keep a positive tone. As the FAQ suggest you should lurk around and get the "flavor" of the posts and if it doesn't don't suit you, you can move on. For example, for my part the boards that are nothing but praise for ME and Joss do not interest me but I certainly don't feel I should post there and tell them it's censorship because I can't post criticism or post telling them that they aren't allowing free discussion or that they shouldn't praise Joss and ME. I respect their rules and move on. You speak as if the Kitten board is the only one with rules that govern what people post. This is simply not the case.



I'm sorry if you don't feel welcome here. I can commiserate as I have also felt unwelcome as a W/T fan in many places except the Kitten board. As maudmac said, people don't flame here. However, they do disagree and I certainly do. Disagreement is not flaming and asking folks to abide by board rules is not censorship IMHO. For me, The Kitten Board is the only place where I have enjoyed Buffy fandom.



I want to thank Xita and the mods for running this great board!!! You guys rock and have soldiered on in the face of great adversity. You are my heroes.

_____________________

I see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 11/18/03 11:00 am

A few clarifications:



First - I am not saying that we shouldn't say Tara dying was a bad thing. Like Xita said, she shook Joss' hand when she thought he was doing a good thing and she's now free to criticize him for doing a bad thing - absolutely. I'm simply saying that I find the Lesbian FAQ to be, well, unequal, just the way that I find affirmative action unequal - the point of life should be that everyone is equal, not that we elevate minority status so that it becomes equal - that is a band-aid, not a solution. So, while I see that society needs the evil lesbian FAQ and affirmative action in the SHORT term, I think the ultimate goal is equality without boundaries, and that means, no one gets any more help than someone else. I realize that may be an unattainable goal in the long run, but hey, I'm an idealist.



Second - as for sam's point about the disagreement amongs W/T fans - I'm guessing this is the source of why Xita felt it necessary to edit my earlier posts of certain references to Season 7 (even though they were putatively on-topic). People disagree and that's not a bad thing. It should always be respectful and it shouldn't be personal, but people should disagree - that's the beautiful thing about free speech - the KKK gets to walk down Main Street and then a pride parade gets to walk down Main Street and the parade watchers get to make decisions for themselves - that's the essence of a free society. The most unwelcome I've ever felt in cyberspace is strangely enough at this site (where I presume the original point was inclusion) and part of that is because there is almost a unanimity of thought regarding the lesbian FAQ and W/T topics, which indicates to me that mass censorship is going on, something that I think it very harmful to any community.



Third (and last) - W/T may have fell into Joss' lap, but it was the BTVS writers and producers who were willing to go to the screen with a gay relationship - despite chemistry, they could have chickened out (like the Xena writers) and kept it coy or simply ignored it. All I'm saying is that Joss is both the man you applauded when he went to the mat to get a lesbian kiss aired on the WB and he is the man you villified when he killed Tara. He is BOTH - one doesn't necessarily cancel the other - I'm just arguing that a little perspective needs to be kept. Like Xita said, he is more than deserving of a handshake one day and a slap up the head the next.



amazonchyck

Hey,I was kicked off of certain Yahoo groups because I said I did not agree with such homophobic statements as"The lesbo b**ch got what she deserved.Also because I was not going to bend down and kiss the Biffy and Spiffy crews butt.As early as season 4 when I first started going online there were Spiffy and Biffy are great but I wish Willow would stop mucking things up with the gay thing comments.When I spoke up in defense of Willow/Tara. I was banned.That was their right.They have the right of free association.So do we.We can choose what we want on the list and don't want on the list.



I slipped up because I did not understand the posting FAQ's and was edited.Once things were clarified I promised to be more careful and went on.



Censorship is a part of life.If a private group censors certain ideas from it's discussion,there are other markets for the idea.There are plenty of places for Pro ME thought and talking about events after SR. The groups i was banned from had a right not to listen to my POV and we have a right to disagree with your POV.It was not your POV that was edited it was certain references that members of this group find disturbing.



Please feel free to disagree.Just don't take it personally if we do not get your POV.I enjoy lively debate.It is much more interesting than everyone having the same opinion.I used to have the same opinion you did.So I don't hold it against you.I just disagree.





Tabby Cat

amazonchyck: The FAQ is pretty clear about no discussion about post "Seeing Red" events. The issues you have brought up on what can and can't be posted have been brought up before hence that is why it is in the FAQ. Other boards have similar rules to keep the board on topic. Political posts are not exempted to my knowledge. Alt newsgroups have no such rules and thus support your absolutist view of the First Amendment. Boards are moderated to prevent folks from flaming one another and to keep the discussion on topic.



I can understand you point of view on board rules. I came from newsgroups and had difficulty with the idea of rules but I learned to appreciate the rules for creating the Kitten Board as a haven for W/T fans. Mutant Enemy abandoned Willow/Tara but for me the last ten minutes of "Seeing Red" never happened and it's great to have a board where the badness after SR is not thrown in your face. If you want to discuss the stuff that happened after "Seeing Red" there are plenty of other boards to do that. The Kitten board rules are no more restrictive than that of other moderated boards. When I go to a board, I read the FAQ. if I don't agree, I move on. I never tried to change the culture at the boards that denigrated W/T and disallowed discusssion of the cliche. I simply stopped going there because their point of view did not suit me. They are entitled to run their board as they please and I don't see them as breaking the first ammendment.



As Maudmac said, there will be no cliches when we are treated equally in film and television as are straight characters. The majority of portrayals of Lesbians on TV and in movies is as 2 girls having sex for the boys without love. Two women kissing as tittillation for the boys is a well known cliche: Kiss that leaves men open mouthed. Yep this is a part of the great lesbian tapestry but we had that over and over again and I am frankly bored with just that. I want to see more loving relationships between two women. This is far more rare. Gay people, just like straight people, have sex for all sorts of different reasons but we primarily get to see lust or shagging. Where is the love? When we have the whole gay tapestry on the screen there will be no cliches but that day looks far off to me.



"Queer eye for the Straight guy" is hailed for promoting gay visibilty while I see the same old male gay cliches. IMHO Willow/Tara were special and the only good lesbian portrayal until the awful cliched end. Now all we get is the same old girls kissing and screwing for sweeps. I'm not seeing the progress but that's just me.



In a perfect world a board like this will not be needed because every board will allow free and untrammelled discussion. In a perfect world, there will be no lesbian cliches because the full tapestry of gay life is on the screen.



This is not a perfect world.

_____________________

I see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 11/18/03 2:03 pm

Consider the can of worms officially opened



I don't traditionally lurk on a great many message boards, so I am truly saddened to discover that a great many of them either did or still do prohibit W/T discussion. I am also saddened to hear about the whole "lesbo got what she deserved" talk. That's sad, sad, sad.



But ultimately, I have a pretty absolutist view of the First Amendment - I support those idiots' right to say whatever sick, sad statements they have, because their ability to do so protects my ability to say they're sick and sad.



I haven't read the Girlfriends' article, so I can't comment on that - but hell no, I support everyone's right to criticize Joss and ME, I was just taken aback by the vitriol being thrown around here. I'm not saying I'm wrong or right, I was just trying to interject some perspective into the debate, by looking at the whole context.



I will disagree with the girl-on-girl action (sex w/o love) necessarily being "for the boys." Displaying the full gamut of gay relationships means showing that gay people, just like straight people, have sex for all sorts of different reasons (love, lust, or better get a shag in before the world ends). The movie "Wild Things" was for the boys - I never got the sense that BTVS was.



As for the Kitten board - they pay for this space and they have the absolute right to edit/delete it. I was just surprised that the barest mention of She-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named in a completely political discussion was enough to get an edit. I think that's going a bit far, but then again, I don't own this space and if I want to mouth off about my opinions, I can use my own space (Now, if only I could get paid for that - yee hah!) . I don't personally agree with banning any speech, but I can see why this space was set up if other boards were as unfriendly as you describe. I don't agree with a policy of exclusion in response to a policy of exclusion, but I can understand the need.



Anyway...thanks to everyone for their thoughtful posts. You have all made me think, even if I ultimately come to different conclusions.



amazonchyck

I did look at the FAQ. Let's look at it again:



It says:



"In general: Don't post things that would go against the credo of the board, W/T love all the time! So if you keep 2 things in mind you should be ok, the focus of the Kitten, the Witches and the Bad Wardrobe is W/T, and it is a gay and lesbian centered place. W/Other T/Other is OFF TOPIC and is not welcome anywhere on the board."



But then says:



"Can I post about Buffy? No. Buffy and any other ME show is off topic on all our forums, it cannot be discussed anywhere except if it clearly relates to W/T (like the lesbian cliche FAQ for example). "



That is what the FAQ for "The Kitten" says. THe FAQ for the "Different Colored Pens" section is quite different.



Those posts, read together, do not say that you can't mention anything post "Seeing Red" - they say, you can't discuss Buffy except inasmuch as it relates to W/T. Ergo, I felt my post about Season 7 happenings related to W/T the same amount that the dead lesbian cliche relates to W/T - both posting go to whether the dead lesbian cliche should still be brought up today and whether Buffy fell into it. It is logical to use post-Seeing Red occurrences to shed light on the W/T dynamic.



I realize I'm probably being a snarky lawyer about all this, but I DID read the FAQ and my posting was technically within the parameters under my reading. Furthermore, I am not trying to flame this board and tell you all that you should do something different. I was/am simply posting a different perspective. *Sigh*

We figured that should be clear enough and not open to interpretation, but I guess it's not. Oh well, too bad, though at least it gives us something to do every now and then

Anyway, let's keep this about the lesbian FAQ and not the board's FAQ, any questions about that can be take to email.

The last mosquito that bit me had to check into the Betty Ford Clinic.

--Patsy Stone

Keep it up Sam, what you say may not change the world in a day but you might change people's minds one at a time. Until I found this board I was not really aware just how underrepresented the LGBT community is in the media, I certainly was not aware of the cliches, and I am a part of this community. I am aware now and now I notice every gay character I do see on TV and I notice their fate and lo and behold, it is almost always a bad one. I am not trying to look for bad examples, they just appear on my tv screen at random.



I am sure most, if not all, the writers and producers of the shows or movies these gay characters appear in, do not doom these characters because they are gay, yet somehow consistently year after year gay characters for the most part meet an unhappy end. Why is that, it isn't a coincidence anymore. I don't really understand it, I just know that it cannot be a good thing, and I don't think it is unfair to be upset about this and to ask for things to change. If we would sit back and continue to take it, what would change? The non gay majority for the most part isn't really affected by the bad portrayal or lack of gay characters, why should they care unless they, like me, are made aware that this is going on and this is a problem. If things (not just in the media, but in the society it reflects as well) are ever going to change for the better, the majority has to be willing or has to care enough to allow these changes to happen and preferably actively help, like those girls xita posted about in the LGBT news thread. Anyway, ultimately, asking for a fair representation isn't asking for preferential treatment, just fair will do, and it has to start somewhere. I really wish it could have started with Willow and Tara. I am happy I found this board, so I can still hold onto what is good about WT and at the same time be aware about what has gone so horribly wrong.

The last mosquito that bit me had to check into the Betty Ford Clinic.

--Patsy Stone

Edited by: DrG at: 11/19/03 1:36 am

Amazonchyck, I actually sympathize with a lot of what you have said. I do think that the negativity after SR hurt the board's popularity quite a bit. That being said though, I find the negativity and extreme virulence with which Joss was cursed not very surprising. To so many here, Willow and Tara were highly important. In some cases they literally saved lives. Hard to imagine that two imaginary characters could have that big an impact, but they did. At the time Joss seemed like a great advocate and friend of the gay community.



Unfortunately what came about was his betrayal of those that had accepted him with open arms and great praise. The death of Tara was no heroic, it seemed creatively bankrupt, was not handled well in the show or in interviews afterwards, was certainly not treated with dignity on the show afterwards, and most importantly once the ramifications of the action were seen, was not fixed or any attempt at mollification taken. Instead it seemed like W/T fans were actively belittled or vindicatively attacked. The very depth of emotion and feeling many kittens had for W/T meant that when their trust was abused, they lashed out. What was worse, is that no other area besides the Kitten seemed to even acknowledge their loss, pain or outrage. Is it any wonder that Joss became the most condemned and villified man on earth here? Some just needed to vent while others were pissed about being suckered into believing what turned out to be lies of good intentions. Betrayal by someone trusted always cuts the deepest and explains much of the reaction here.



Unfortunately Joss' own words seem to indicate that he never really was the friend he professed to be. He had the chance to really change the cliched view of lesbians. He had a chance to totally break new ground, take a stand and mean something. But instead he backed down from that role and fell into line with the masses. His statements even seem to show that he never really intended to make a statement about tolerance and that Lesbians could develop as loving a relationship as anyone else. His intention was to inflict pain on the fans by having them care for W/T, the same way he wanted fans to care about B/A, and then break them up. He really did not care about the issues or how his characters were viewed. He seems to have fought for the Kiss in the Body more because he didn't believe HE should be censored than that he thought lesbian affection should be shown on TV along with Hetro affection. It seems like he never really cared about lesbian issues or truly being a friend to lesbian interests. If that were the case he probably wouldn't have had SR end like it did.



Does Joss deserve some credit? Of course he does. The creator and writers were the ones who originally thought of and developed Willow, Tara and made Buffy one of the best shows on TV. Their skill allowed many to obssess about the show or characters to a great extent. If they had no skill, this would never have happened. W/T did not entirely fall into his lap, he could have nixed the whole thing and not allowed it to develop as it did. Now I still give Aly and Amber more credit for the chemistry behind W/T and for it having such an impact, but Joss was involved. He could have killed Tara at any point in season 4. But he didn't.



But he also didn't realize how socially irresponsible he was being, how short sighted and unrealistic it is to just ignore the issues and assume what he is showing will harm none. He harmed a lot of people in a minority that is underrepresented, villified, at times outcast and others oppressed. It would be nice if gays were treated like anyone else on TV, but they're not. Good depictions, as Sam7777 has indicated, are few and far between. Gay rags seem to think any exposure is good. African Americans fought against that sort of thing when all that was seen were blacks in servile positions, mammys or sambos at the beck and call of whites. I think the gay community needs to realize that reinforcing stereotypes means that they are not seen as individuals but as part of a group. In this case a group that is portrayed badly. Positive portrayals are rare and need to be nurtured, not squashed and destroyed. Sure, if there had been another gay couple, also loving on Buffy, that survived and was as wholesome as W/T than the SR storyline might not have hurt as much, been such a betrayal. But there wasn't. Joss took away the only lesbian role models on television without even considering what impact that might have. And he never was man enough, adult enough, to admit his mistake and fix it. He could have, but didn't. And in the end that is why I will never forgive Josswad (a term I use with great scorn and derision for a little man who could have been so much more) for what he did, nor really cut him any slack. I'll give him a little credit, but no easy ride.



Garner



PS Sam, I hope you do continue trying to change things. The gay press seems abominable and part of the problem, not the solution towards tolerance and acceptance.

I think the negativity was necessary then. I also believe that part of healing and letting it go was to drop the subject where it wasn't absolutely crucial. I believe that if we had continued to have certain subjects open, this would be the day where we would still be getting drive by posts whose sole purpose would be to harrass and offend us.

Since we began the board we don't allow homophobic remarks, in my mind it is very similar.



Anyway, enough on our policies back to the debate.





The question is, should we praise someone who really has no interest in our causes? I would rather support shows such as shows by the people behind My so Called LIfe. Even though they may make mistakes (they haven't yet in 3 shows), they are obviously interested in the issues of ending homophobia. Those are the poeple I would rather praise.

- - - - - - - - - - -
"Hard work often pays off after time but laziness always pays off now!"

That's an interesting question Xita - should you praise someone who hits the nail on the head, but didn't really mean to hit the nail in the first place?



That reminds me of a constant question we asked in my Gay&Lesbian Literature class in college - what is gay literature? Does the writer have to be gay? The characaters?



I'm not sure if anyone here as ever seen Revolutionary Girl Utena, either the movie or the series (I recommend both for anyone who likes anime). The series has a great deal of homosexual undercurrents that become more blatant as time goes on (the movie is just flat out gay). Now, the creator of this anime is a straight man who said he used lesbianism as a way of portraying "other-ness" - he said he always felt like an outsider in high school and that he used lesbianism as a way to depict that. I always thought that was interesting, but I was a bit confused up front as to whether I liked that viewpoint or didn't. I think I ultimately came to the conclusion that he did it very well, it wasn't pandering, and it was really very tender, so I appreciated the body of work, even if I wans't sure of his intentions.



Which leads us back to the original point. I think you absolutely need to support producers, writers, and actors who really try to get the queer voice heard. But you can also appreciate a body of work for its power, even if the creator of that body of work didn't necessarily intend to make a statement. I mean, the producers of Xena never meant for it to raise any gay issues (then they realized it, played with it a little, then tried to stop playing with it, realized they were stuck with it now, and then butchered it for a few seasons, but that's another story!), but I appreciate the fact that it became a body of work that gays and lesbians could identify with. Ergo, I shout out some amount of praise to Rob Tapert and the rest of the folks at Renaissance Pics, but not the same amount of praise I would to say, Amber Benson, who as an actress has gone above and beyond the call of duty for the gay community.



In the same vein, regardless of whether Joss meant to do good things for the gay community, his body of work did, and I appreciate that fact. Again, it got butchered along the way, and again, I'm not going to go balls out for a guy who says he doesn't care about how his show affects people, but I got to give the man some credit for what he has done.



So, I guess my answer would be, you can separate the body of work from the creator to a certain extent, but that I am more likely to defend someone who really puts their neck on the line for a marginalized community.



On a side note - it must be hard to be a TV writer for a show that you know has a huge social significance. The fact that any decision you might make will piss some people off is hard and I imagine it ties some people into complete knots. Do I think this excepts writers from thinking about what they're doing? No, but I can also see the point of the writer who has a certain idea for a show that conflicts with what he/she should socially do - creative freedom versus social responsibility can be its own censorship.



Just my less than .02 cents.



amazonchyck

Garner: Thanks. Brilliant post. I wish I could say it as well as you do.



amazonchyck: I respectfully disagree with you. I see where you are coming from but I cannot go there. All of this stuff has been debated before and as Xita says, it was best to drop the subject where it wasn't absolutely crucial. The lesbian cliche may feel unequal to you but it does reflect how I feel and many on this board. You might want to look at the archives to get an idea of how many people were hurt by what Joss has wrought. It's hard to judge without the history of what happened here.



I feel that Joss' body of work did not help the gay community in the end and did little more than hurt and fracture an already marginalized group. You say that Joss should be give credit for good gay portrayals of the past and I say that he lost that credit when SR aired. I see no reason to feel otherwise. Joss could have mended fences by having some sort of tribute to Tara as Garner says but he didn't give a damn about gay fans when he introduced Tara nor when he killed her. I cannot and will not praise such a man. Nor will I ever support his work again. You can separate the body of work from the creator to a certain extent but you cannot separate the body of work from it's cliches. The "body of work" implies the work as a whole including the ending of W/T. In that vein, the awful cliched ending of both Xena and W/T invalidates alot of the "good" of that body of work IMHO. Like Garner says a lot of fans were hurt by the brutal ending of W/T and even more so by the callous attitude of ME and Joss Whedon after. I don't thank Joss Whedon for leading us on only to give us the dead lesbian cliche.



I don't believe that people should hide behind "creative freedom" as an excuse to avoid social responsibility. Gene Roddenberry never did. I believe he helped to change the world with the first interracial kiss on TV. And he cared about the issues when he had Kirk and Uhura kiss and the issues after. You don't have to lose your humanity to be creative IMHO. Joss Whedon's "creative freedom" fell before the sponsors of his show when he dropped the fast food joint plot at their request. Joss' "creative freedom" seems closely tied to his pocket. I see nothing to respect or admire in that. Any praise I had for Joss Whedon is in the past, all I see now is the cliched and awful present and no attempt on his part to do more than continue to marginalize the group he hurt. Joss Whedon has done nothing to get my praise now.



Joss Whedon has alot of defenders but the Kitten board is the only place where I can air my views. Joss can pick up a phone and get prominent media placement in a magazine or special. All I can get is the letters page to air my point of view. Even so I will not stop criticizing Joss Whedon and ME. They do not deserve an unvarnished legacy as gay heroes. The gay rags keep telling us that we have to appreciate the crumbs that the media gives us. I don't accept that second class status. It's funny that their "creative freedom" often leads to only one plot: dead and tragic gays and lesbians. Where is the "creative" in that "freedom". I want better gay portrayals on TV and we will need better people than Joss Whedon or Rob Tapert to get them. We need people who have the courage and vision to present more of the rich tapestry of gay life.



This is why I think GLAAD should be more proactive and push as the NAACP has for more hiring in the production and writing departments of the networks.



I won't settle for second class status and just take the crumbs that they deign to give us.

_____________________

I see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 11/18/03 11:26 pm

Hey, amazonchyck. Welcome to the board. I'm a big fan of Revolutionary Girl Utena, myself, and not least because of its unrelenting kinkiness (or, perhaps 'twould be better to say, its wonderfully understated yet constant use of various sexual combinations as both metaphorical and actual representations of human behavior. Er, or some such.)



Having read what you've written on this thread, I don't think your views are actually very far off from the views of most of us here, really, although I think you've managed to touch some still-raw nerves (Joss Whedon is probably never going to be anything but persona non grata around these parts.) I think your analogy to affirmative action is a good one - in an ideal world, where there genuinely was a level playing field, it would be unnecessary, and that is clearly the goal to strive for. But as long as unfair inequities exist, some kind of balancing mechanism is called for until true equality is reached.



In the world of the creative arts, obviously that's a tricky thing, since censorship is something that no one here wants to see. However, no one here, as far as I know, has ever suggested that we *force* writers to "hold their pens" - merely that we continue to *ask* them to exercise judgement and consideration. And, rather than censorship, that's dialogue, which to me is the epitome of free speech rather than its opposite.



(Incidentally, while we're on the subject of free speech, I actually tend to personally think this board would benefit from a looser policy, but I respect the decision that's been made not to do so and abide by it. Or, er, would, if I ever posted here more than once in a zillion years or so.)



I think it's especially important to note that no one has ever asked that lesbians be solely portrayed as immortal dispensers of sunny goodness at all times and in all places - even though, of course, they are - but rather that they be portrayed in the full range of the human experience, good and bad, alive and dead, instead of in one rather prejudiced and hurtful manner. And, right now, the playing field in that regard is far, far, far from level.



As to how much credit to give Joss, and why we seem to treat him worse than if he'd never introduced a lesbian character in the first place, probably the best I can do is refer you to item 5 of the lesbian cliche FAQ:



"5) Shouldn't you just be grateful that [Mutant Enemy] gave you gay characters at all? Doesn't the positive role model of a same-sex couple that Willow and Tara have provided for two years make up for how things ended?



"We are grateful. We are SO grateful. And we've said so every chance we've gotten. We've written letters to Mutant Enemy and Fox praising and thanking the show for giving gay people, especially questioning youth, two beautiful, caring lesbian characters that they could relate to. We've encouraged the media to pay attention to and praise the Willow/Tara storyline. We've begged friends and family to watch the show. Some of us have been lucky enough to meet Mr. Whedon, Ms. Hannigan, Ms. Benson, and other Mutant Enemy staffers and tell them how much this storyline means to the gay community and how much we appreciate their efforts.



"Willow and Tara have indeed provided a role model which was nearly unique in prime-time television, and have served as an example of the beneficial effects such a positive image can have. Numerous letters have been written by gay teens and adults detailing how the existence of Willow and Tara have helped them find hope for the future, come out of the closet, or become comfortable with their orientation.



"However, rather than making up for Tara's death, it actually just made it worse. People placed their trust in the Willow/Tara relationship, and came to regard it as a rare safe place where they could return to renew their hopes; a fairly natural thing to do in light of the fact that there were so few other places they could go to do so. So when the Willow/Tara relationship collapsed into the same cliché of death and insanity as so many others had before, hope and trust that had built up over years was crushed. The message seemed to be that there is no hope, no safe place, and that the happiness was a lie - death and derangement will always be the end result."



It hurts more to have something precious taken away from you than never to have been offered something precious in the first place.



--- kyraroc

Lost in Ecstacy

Edited by: kyraroc at: 11/19/03 1:14 am

Kyraroc it is very nice to see you post again.

Quote:

---

(Incidentally, while we're on the subject of free speech, I actually tend to personally think this board would benefit from a looser policy, but I respect the decision that's been made not to do so and abide by it. Or, er, would, if I ever posted here more than once in a zillion years or so.)

---

I agree with everything you said, except that, heh. I want to respond to this and to say something in general, as it this keeps coming up in one form or another. You were here when the shit hit the fan and you know what things were like in the spoiler forum. Not very nice, a lot of anger and hurt and pain, and it flowed over to the rest of the board. Those feelings are still there, and every once in a while it flares up. Whedon has done absolutely nothing to change things, absolutely nothing, unlike Steve Deknight, instead he just keeps adding insult to injury and as long as he does, whenever his works or actions get discussed that anger will be there. There are only a few things that are topic non grata on the board now, W or T/other (that has always been the case, this is a WT shipper board after all) post SR discussion (except for the lesbian cliche discussion of course) and any other (future) ME shows. That's it basically, for anything else there has been created a place on the board.



There are enough places where those topics that are off limits here can be discussed, and like this one, those boards have rules of their own. I expect there are very few places on the internet where you can just say or discuss whatever you want and have that place still be a nice one. If we opened up the board to these topics again, we would again get people popping in saying the most hideous things. I do mean hideous things, I am not just talking about riding the ME love train. Freedom of speech is great good, but there are still rules of conduct, we don't allow flaming of fellow posters, we don't allow homophobia (which can be expressed in the most polite ways and it will of course still be very hurtful), if we did, this board would not be a safe place to get away from that.



If I were to call a patient of mine an asshole or something even worse, I'd get fired, even if said patient was acting like an asshole. I could claim freedom of speech, but it would not do me any good. I can't say things like that, I know it, and if I can't live with it, I am free to find another job. I can't go into someone's house and insult them and not expect to get kicked out. I don't consider an internet discussion forum to be any different. There are rules, they are usually made clear in a board's FAQ, if I don't like it, I am free *not* to post there.



The FAQ is there to prevent us from having to do anything, I'd rather never edit a post ever again, and given the amount of posts we get and the amount of editing we do (very little percentage-wise, I think for the most part the FAQ is clear, and the atmosphere on the board is good, certainly better than it was when we were in the middle of SR. I think we made the right choice, and this board is still here, and still growing, there has to be something we've done right. I won't say it's perfect, but if there is a place in the world that is, I'd like to visit it.

The last mosquito that bit me had to check into the Betty Ford Clinic.

--Patsy Stone

Edited by: DrG at: 11/19/03 2:28 am

Hi, DrG. Nice to post again. I've been lurkin' around, but quiet-like.



I actually don't disagree with anything you said. I'm aware that without these (not particularly restrictive and, at the moment, relatively seldom necessary) policies, the Kitten would not be, well, the Kitten. And I dearly love the Kitten.



I think, in retrospect, I misspoke last night (hey, it was 2:00 AM) when I said I think "the board would benefit from a looser policy". It wouldn't. What I really meant was that *I* would personally feel more comfortable with a looser policy. Possibly because I'm a writer, I have a visceral reaction of horror whenever anyone's written words are deleted, be they the trolliest of trolls. At the same time, I'm aware of the need for safe space, the still-raw feelings which still have the potential to explode, and, having seen it, just how attractive this board is to trolls.



For me, it's a dilemma with no solution. So I just accept it, and content myself with being dearly glad that the Kitten is still around and still is what it is, and, incidentally, THANK YOU moderators for all your efforts in keeping it that way. But when I see someone wondering why they've been edited, no matter how clearly they've violated the board FAQ, I can't help but feel sympathetic.



--- kyraroc

Lost in Ecstacy

As all the others have said, the bottom line is not only the cliche, but the treatment afterwards. At least Steve DeKnight, who was as villified and condemned and cursed as anyone, had the courage to come back to the board and apologize. He might not have been sincere, might have wanted viewers for Angel, or whatever. It doesn't matter. He took the time to do it and I will speak a bit kinder towards and of him.



Josswad did none of that and instead threw little barbs at us in the show, like offhand saying Dawn killed Miss Kitty, and then specfically lied and treated us badly with his own statements. All he had to do was just say, "I had a specific vision in mind, I didn't know it would hurt so many people, for that I am turly sorry. My show is about pain and suffering and it is too bad that this was taken too heart too much." And then left it at that. He didn't have to admit a mistake, or guilt, just said he sympathized with our pain but that was the way he wanted things to go. His personal treatment of the situation is what continues to keep people angry at him and makes it hard to say anything good about him. It's almost like it got personal for both sides, never a good situation.



Garner

Found this just a little while ago,



School Suspends Female Students for Kiss

By WILEY HALL



CLARKSVILLE, Md. (AP) - Inspired by a high school assignment, Stephanie Haaser leaped onto a cafeteria table, shouted ``End homophobia now!'' and kissed classmate Katherine Pecore.



Haaser said she was making a statement on behalf of gay and lesbian students because she was bothered by the verbal and physical harassment they face.



Their principal said he respected what the students were trying to do, but they needed to learn more appropriate ways to make a point. Haaser and Pecore were suspended for two days.



``It's highly inappropriate to stand on a table in the cafeteria and make out, whether the kiss was heterosexual or homosexual,'' said River Hill High School principal Scott Pfeifer. ``I don't think there's a school in the country where parents would consider that appropriate behavior.''



Haaser, a junior, said she chose to make the statement as part of an English class assignment, which required that she engage in a nonconformist act in the tradition of Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson.



``You hear derogatory comments in virtually every class,'' Haaser said. ``It's not always spiteful - someone might say, 'Oh that's so gay,' where 'gay' means stupid or dumb. But those comments can be really hurtful.''



Haaser said teachers who hear such remarks rarely intervene.



River Hill administrators said they pride themselves on the school's respect for diversity. Pfeifer said the school has a Gay-Straight Alliance club and a diversity committee of students, teachers and parents. The school recently celebrated National Coming Out Day.



``I wouldn't put up River Hill as a national model,'' Pfeifer said, ``but I would say we are as sensitive about these issues as anyone.''



The incident has sparked debate about tolerance at the school.



A few days after the kiss, juniors Mia Freyer and Anna Boyland staged a brief protest outside the school on behalf of the suspended students. They carried signs that read ``Down with Homophobia'' and ``Don't: Hate and discriminate.''



Joshua Lamont, a spokesman for the national Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, said there are just under 2,000 gay-straight alliance clubs at high schools and the number of clubs grew by 50 percent in the past year.



But there has been a growth of intolerance, as well, Lamont said. An annual survey of high school students found that more than 90 percent reported hearing homophobic remarks last year and more than 82 percent reported teachers heard the remarks but did nothing about them, Lamont said.



A third of the students who identified themselves as gay in the survey reported skipping school for fear of verbal or physical harassment.



``I fear harassment is the rule rather than the exception,'' Lamont said.



Eileen Woodbury, a special assistant to Howard County school superintendent John O'Rourke, said county school officials plan to strengthen staff development on diversity issues.



``I don't doubt that it happens in our schools as well and we're deeply concerned about the professional response,'' she said.



Haaser said the kiss has raised awareness of the problem.



``It's been wonderful to see and hear the discussion that have taken place at my school since the kiss. People are a lot more aware of the issue,'' she said. ``And I like to think the hurtful, derogatory comments about gays have subsided, at least for a little while.''





Catt

I want it. Give it to me. I love it. 7-Year Bitch

Edited by: cattwoman98111 at: 11/20/03 2:52 pm

This is my 0.02 units of whatever your preffered currency denomination is.



When Willow and Tara were going strong Joss whedon and ME were happy to accept any praise about them. Making statements to the effect of we're getting all this praise from gay viewers, aren't we wonderful. It's only now that this prasie has turned into criticism that they try to deflect it by saying they don't care about issues. IMNSHO that is totally wrong. They acceptd the praise over creating something wonderful, they should now accept the criticism for ruining it.



It has been said that the Joss whedon we're criticising now is the same person that we were praising before. This is true. However he isn't the person we thought he was. I thought that he was a great writer who cared about his viewers and who wanted to create a decent show that didn't resort to stupid cliches and heavy handed moralising. I was wrong on all these counts.



It's true that he's free to write any program that he wants to but on the same basis I'm free to citicise him and boycott his shows if they don't live up to my expectations, which is what I will be doing.

Anya in a wimple...I'd pay full admission for that. Gods Served And Abandoned - by Antigone Unbound


You know the worst thing about people in a relationship? The fact that they're in a relationship. - Hilda Spellman

I'll echo the sentiments of many other Kitties here with regard to Joss and the rest of Mutant Enemy.



For the best part of five years, 'that show' was a wonderful television program that could have left behind a beautiful legacy had it ended after those five Seasons.



But it didn't. The horrific-ness of Season Six is unfortunately imprinted upon my memory as a lesson in why I will never bother forming an emotional connection with TV characters ever again. Willow and Tara's beautiful relationship was (and still is thanks to this board) a beacon of light in an otherwise blackened landscape. They provided so many people with hope that maybe once, there could be a happy, healthy same-sex relationship based upon love and trust, and that the characters could follow their hearts and be rewarded for it instead of being punished for simply being who they are. And then, just like that, Joss snuffed it out in a) a deeply unpleasant and disturbing way (that I'm sure thrilled all the sadistic homophobes out there); b) a manner that not only invoked a horrific cliche regarding gay characters (that the show had always accepted praise for avoiding), but also a tired narrative cliche (good guy goes bad, which has been done twice before on 'that show' and had an earlier episode focusing on the exact same idea).



At the end of the day, people are going to remember the last thing they saw. It's not going to be Willow's brave declaration of her love for Tara; Tara's acceptance by the Scoobs as her family; Tara's love and support for nearly every other character; nor the way their love bloomed. It will be the blood splattered on Willow's shirt. And Joss deserves no credit for that, no matter what happened beforehand. He may have provided the environment for the relationship to grow, but Amber and Aly did all the work. Amber managed to create a wonderful character using the minimal material she was given, and it was due to the effort of the actors that the relationship became so beautiful. My gratitude will always be for Amber and Aly. Joss can shove his 'vision' where the sun don't shine, and I look forward to seeing his cruel, overinflated ego collapse with his career.

Every time you walk away, I pretend that I'm okay

Okay, I probably don't deserve to post anything on here for a few reasons but I am going to make a comment, if you all don't mind. A few people on this board know who I am and I have posted a picture and a little about myself. There is no such thing as a normal person but I would like to consider myself a person, none the less. Anyway, I just got done reading this thread, not just because it has been a thread that I haven't read. But, because, I am ignorant about gay relationships. First, I am a Christian. So, now that I have expressed that, I just want to thank you all for opening my eyes about this topic. I love the Willow and Tara relationship on BtVS. I really do. A huge portion of my Christian friends do not think it is right for me to show interest in that show, nor take interest in the relationship that Willow and Tara had on the show. On the religious standpoint, I am going against what I am suppose to be standing for. But, I, as a person, curious none the less, did not understand fully about gay relationships. Just from what I saw on TV and read in books and magazines, I still didn't really see the whole picture.



This board, you peoples, have given me a broader understanding on this. And, I think I have finally learned something. And I will stand by this, as a human being, as a Christian. Love is love. As for the way it is shown on net work TV and/or movies, that is something that I am still not worthy enough to go into and explore. I just wanted to really thank you all for opening my eyes.



I didn't know too much about a lot of the controversy behind Joss, the writers, and crew of BtVS about Willow and Tara's relationship. I am somewhat up to speed now about you'll discussion and views. I will never speak up on it, being that I am not that knowledgeable, but I just want to let you all now, that others are watching and you all are definitely giving insight to those who are willing to heed an ear to. Okay enough with my babble. Thanks for listening and doing with you all do. My gratitude extends farther than a thank you can go. =)

Aaron

'TaraBaby77'


"It's about two people,
regardless of sex, who love each other and treat each other with compassion and
respect."

Edited by: TaraBaby77 at: 12/22/03 9:00 am

It's great when people have an open mind Thank you for being open to new ideas. This was what this thread was about, giving voice to a seldom heard opinion.

- - - - - - - - - - -
"Hard work often pays off after time but laziness always pays off now!"

a deeply unpleasant and disturbing way (that I'm sure thrilled all the sadistic homophobes out there);



I got three emails from members of a Buffy Yahoo group I was on.The basic message was "hey fag,your dyke heroes are dead.Now please shut up about them and let us get back to discussing the real women on the show.



Then I got one that said"Tara bit a bullet.Please follow her example so We don't have to put up with a fag like you on the list.The wimp moderator refused to do anything becuase my hate mail was sent off list.



So Joss thank you so much for making these moronic homophobes happy and betraying this transgendered female who used Willow Tara as a refuge from those who hate me becuase I am not a man and those who hate me becuase I am comfortable with being a women in a man's body and refuse to become "more a women" by dressing like a women.



I thankyou for giving me Willow.Always will.But I will always bear a grudge against you for treating Tara like a plot device instead of the warm,sweet girl that she is.



And your Fireflop DVD was fun to tape to a skeet and blow the hell out of.Transference if you will.



RED/Leia FAN

Redleia, this is the sort of thing that makes me question whether lesbians and gays are really more accepted now or not. I suppose the good news is you only got three messages not an innundation of ones saying the same thing. Still, I find that terrible and reprehensible. I hope that you have found a place here on the kitten that is more understanding and supportive. And yeah another reasons fo, another "Fuck you very much Josswad!" if I've ever seen one.



Garner

I believe that lesbians and gays are more comfortable now but not more accepted. While there is less overt prejudice there remains alot of hidden prejudice IMHO. The usual tragic lesbian storylines that were once punishment for an immoral lifestyle are now just "being treated like everyone else" (only more tragically). The same images of dead lesbians prevail however. I see current lesbian portrayals stuck in the male titillation mode: if they are young and pretty, they can have sex. The media can have it both ways titillation for young male ratings coupled with kudos from the gay rags. A true portrayal of lesbian life is what is lost.



I think we need to move on to another kind of lesbian portrayal: committed and/or loving relationships that do not end in death. Right now we face states and the federal government considering ammendments to limit marrage to a man and a woman thus outlawing gay marriage. If that is done, it is not hard to see a day when only "married" people can adopt or be school teachers (re. not allowing somone in a domestic partnership). Today we face an erosion of gay rights and need to win the PR battle with the general public to prevent such measures from passing. The Media prefers to portray gays as either tragic or sex crazy and both views give the public a skewed and highly inaccurate portrait of gay life.



Many people have never met a gay person and get most of their ideas about them from the media. We can see all kinds of straight relationships in the media from the 50 years married couple to the young and beautiful out on the make. Yet gay portrayals are very much the latter. Why? It doesn't reflect real life but it does present a view of gay and lesbian life that is far removed from marriage/family and thus more palatable to the status quo against gay marriage and adoption.

_____________________

I see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 1/14/04 5:54 pm

Ok a while back I posted here about the general poor state of RPGs in treating women and lesbians in particular. I mentioned a few products, namely by Mongoose Publishing, here, pub106.ezboard.com/ftheki...6&stop=360



Well it is my pleasure to let you all know of a new product I recently picked up.

It is called the Book of Erotic Fantasy, valarproject.com/index.php , and it is designed to add more “adult” themes to your game.



Now I fully expected this book to be a bit of pornographic trash, not unlike some of the products I have mentioned in the past, or juvenile like the Mongoose offerings. I have to admit I am pleasantly surprised. The tone is adult, but the audience is adult.



Does it add anything to the game? No. Not really. I am a married father, somewhere along the way I figured out this “sex thing”, but it is designed really not do that.



Think of it as the “Joy of Sex” for RPGs.



Now why is this even remotely important here?

The reason is Chevel and Varleria.



They are among the featured personalities of the book, in fact they are the first. Chevel is a Bard and Varleria is a Paladin, a holy warrior dedicated to the cause of good.



They both also happen to be lesbians. In fact when describe how “stereotypical” good people see sexual relationships they are the ones that are used.



They are both presented in very positive light and by the end of the book, both are still sane, good and alive.



The rest of the book reads the same way there is the important stuff (like rape being very bad and tables of pregnancy results and STDs) and typical RPG stuff (did you know there is a higher percentage of homosexuality among Halflings (Hobbits) than in human populations?) but the book is fair, balanced and actually an entertaining read if you don’t mind your games to be a little saucy.



It was not only a nice surprise to see that this book was so well done, but it was also not playing into the same tired clichés and stereotypes.





If you game and you want to support a company that seems to get it, then check out The Book of Erotic Fantasy.



Or check it out for the “Phil and Dixie” cartoon alone. Old school D&D geeks (like me) will understand what that is all about.



Warlock

-----

Web Warlock

Coming Soon to The Other Side, The Netbook of Shadows: A Book of Spells for d20 Witches

"'A bunch of has-beens' how is that different from any other show on the WB?" - Bobcat Goldthwait, on "The Sureal Life"

Edited by: WebWarlock at: 1/15/04 8:28 pm

I cant help but not say something...although what to say is really quite beyond me so Im gonna babble on here and hope some point is made in my ramblings.



I read though many of this and one thing did kinda pique my interest...whether or not if gays/lesbians are more acdepted now verses then (whenever then is). Id have to say...



Agreed we are more out there, more open, easier to find and such, but is the populace more accepting now than then?



My opinion is this: No.



Just because we see an increase in numbers in the movies, books, articles and such doesnt mean that the overall world view has changed. There is still oppression. I work in a small town where if who I am got out, I would definately lose my job. People here do know, but it is not talked about, it is not addressed, it is a hidden secret known to all. I deal with the stress every day knowing that if I do one thing considered way wrong, they will use that as the reason for dissmissal and not the real reason why they want me gone. So I work, do my job above and beyond the standard...just to survive.



I think there are the same number of gays and lesbians now in the world as there was 10...20...30 years ago or more, its just that we have had enough oppression of of who we are that finally, because of politics and the changing world, that we've grown a backbone of sorts...we are sticking up for ourselves and in doing so, finding more of us out there than we thought..but we have always been here.



Just my opinion of it all...

----------

Tara: You think you know. What's to come. What you are. You haven't even begun."

- Restless



Amber Benson Accolade