A conversation with my wonderful friend Ollie
Imagine the queer dating pool as a pack of 100 smarties, he begins.
First remove all the straight people from the selection - that’s about 85 smarties gone.
The remaining 15 represent a (very approximate) 15% of the UK population who openly identify as LGBTQ+.
Next you remove all the smarties who are in relationships, taking your 15 down to 7.5 smarties.
Time to look at who you’re actually attracted to - and half the pile again.
Then consider your age range since there’s likely to be a rough limit as to what age people you want to date.
Now remove all the gay smarties who fall outside of that range.
We’ve got about 1.5 left now?
Consider also, your other relationship preferences - not everyone is going to be your type, or looking for what you are looking for.
One smartie left?
Oh wait, and did we mention whether they live locally? Is the relationship even geographically feasible?
What about sexual preferences?
What if they don't like you back?
And you (Ollie addresses me) complain about not being able to find anybody to hook up with.
Point taken. Point definitely taken.
Our conversation takes place in my back garden, a few drinks in since we’re celebrating our A-level results day. Having been keen to quiz Ollie on a number of things I don’t feel I have the experience to discuss, for some reason this felt like the perfect opportunity to record our conversation and have an impromptu podcast discussion!
Stereotypes and role models
Media representation for the LGBTQ+ community has drastically improved in the last fifty years, in fact in the last ten years there have been leaps of progress with shows like Heartstopper, It’s A Sin, Killing Eve, Young Royals, Euphoria, I could go on.
I’d like to think we have begun to turn away from predictable, problematic, two dimensional stereotypes of the gay best friend, or the tragic queer narratives that centre around shame and homophobic treatment. But while there has been fantastic improvement with media representation, there is also still much to accomplish.
Ollie and I discussed how LGBTQ+ roles have previously been shoehorned into narratives as a tick box activity. The ‘token queer’. As though the attitude is: ‘that’s done now, time to move onto the protagonists who have an actual narrative purpose’.
But how specifically are these stereotypes harmful?
Well, often gay characters are depicted doing things to hide their sexuality or relationships, (Ollie gives the example of Kevin Keller from Riverdale, “shagging in the woods”), suggesting that homosexuality is something to be hidden and ashamed of.
It’s also unusual to see the ‘gay best friend’, in a relationship. Why are they always single? To make the central female character in our traditional rom coms feel less pathetic about their own dating disasters and dilemmas?
Furthermore, Ollie notes how it is usually more “straight acting” gay characters who are portrayed as facing greater difficulties with their sexuality. Ollie finds this conveys the message that there is only one way to be confident and secure in your sexuality as a gay man. That is to be flamboyant, boldly dressed and slightly outrageous (but of course only outrageous in a way that is pleasing to straight women and non threatening to straight men).
This pushes gay men (since this is Ollie’s point of reference and the representation that has been most frequented in the media) into a restrictive bracket of “who they should be”, offering little to no variation of expression.
Of course, this is improving, and the fact that Ollie and I were able to discuss multiple popular Netflix shows to illustrate our thoughts, is encouraging. But when I asked about the media role models he had when he was growing up and if anyone on screen allowed him to feel seen, Ollie replied, “I honestly can’t think of a single gay character that I looked up to as a child”.
The next generation deserves better.
Who should represent who?
Then comes the interesting question of who should be allowed to represent who on screens and in theatres. Can a straight actor play a queer part?
A straight person cannot understand the complexities and difficulties of being LGBTQ+ in a fiercely heteronormative world, so no?
But then, does this also mean that LGBTQ+ actors shouldn’t portray straight characters? How about Jonathan Bailey in Bridgerton? I thought his role of Anthony Bridgerton was extremely convincing and not at all restricted by his preference for the same sex!
How about Luke Evans playing the very heterosexual Gaston in Beauty and the Beast and Bard in The Hobbit, among other parts? Evans has recently put forward his thoughts that, “I wouldn't have had a career if gay people played gay roles and straight people played straight roles”. (Ollie notes jokingly in this respect, queer people often act straight for a significant period of their lives so it’s not such a stretch to portray in a part!)
Should nobody be allowed to act in a role that they do not have the lived experience of? Where do we draw the line? Isn’t the fundamental essence of acting, pretending?
I asked Ollie where he felt these boundaries should be drawn and he suggested it was valuable for LGBTQ+ actors to be hired to act corresponding parts in roles that focus on struggling with sexuality and queer identities, as this is arguably a position that said actors are better equipped to portray. As devil's advocate, I asked what if casting directors and producers need someone famous? A star?
He simply replied - “make more queer actors famous”. Invest in new talent. There’s enough young gay actors in need of work!
Consider, Ollie puts forward, how many young gay people are interested and involved in drama, then think how many mainstream plots and stories revolve around these identities?
It may seem like reasonable justification that straight actors are cast in major queer roles because their ability, appearance and fact of being an ‘A-lister’ makes them most appropriate. But is this just an easy way out? Is it really that there aren’t any qualified, suitable LGBTQ+ actors for these roles, or as Ollie says, “are we just not looking for them?”
You would never hire a white person to play a character of colour.
You would (hopefully) never dream of hiring a cisgender actor to play a trans role - even though this has happened in very recent history, think Friends, The Danish Girl…
So perhaps we need to stop casting straight actors in LGBTQ+ parts?
By no means do Ollie or I have a definitive answer to these questions. This highly complex discussion deserves far more time and requires more voices and perspectives too.
What is your stance? What questions does it raise for you?
One thing for sure however is that we need more LGBTQ+ visibility within the media. Not only to give young people someone to look up to, but to normalise gender and sexuality diversity and to give queer actors more opportunities!
Overcompensation can be patronising
The rarity of shows like Heartstopper and It’s A Sin have resulted in their almost instant and huge success, yet Ollie finds this patronising. We’re still in a place where we celebrate queer television with such enthusiasm because we’re over the moon to see it at all.
“We don’t do that for every straight drama”, Ollie presses, “we want to get to a stage where we celebrate this stuff for being really good TV rather than just for being decent representation for once. Straight shows with straight protagonists don’t get the same recognition because it’s so ordinary”. (For the record, both of us think that It’s A Sin and Heartstopper are excellent television.)
A middle ground here would be the ideal. We want to see frequent narratives where a character's sexuality does not dominate and dictate their plot line. We don’t see movies where there’s a huge coming of age sequence and the young protagonist, having faced a lot of inner turmoil, finally announces to their parents that they are straight.
Future representation Ollie is hopeful for would include, “characters who just happen to have a same sex partner” rather than those relationships being used as a very conscious demonstration. But then again, if we’re talking about the media being reflective of our society, Ollie makes the point that this sort of representation would only be accurate when we have a greater culture of acceptance, thus the ‘inner turmoil’ that often surrounds narratives of young queer lives would be less prevalent.
It’s necessary and relevant to have plot lines that highlight sexuality, exploring LGBTQ+ identities by orbiting the narrative around them - but we desperately need more instances of characters who just happen to be LGBTQ+ without it being their only feature.
Ollie and I both took a moment here to appreciate the brilliance of Elle Evans in Heartstopper, who’s transness was not her entire plotline. It was significant, but she also faced day to day teenage dilemmas, just like the others around her.
In his own experience, Ollie told me how there can feel like, “a pressure to use your sexuality to define you - it’s a type of armour”. The need to constantly ‘out’ yourself for the benefit and comfort of others, because for some reason it’s everybody’s business to be informed about your sexuality? It sounds relentless.
And while Ollie acknowledges the well meaning intent of being told how, “brave”, and incredible his style and self expression is - “it’s also fucking patronising”.
The overcompensation that is picking someone out of a crowd who seems visibly queer and making the effort to actively celebrate them suggests, in Ollie’s view, that people feel their only options are to either be homophobic or try “embarrassingly hard to be allies”. Understandably, Ollie’s keen to see some sort of middle ground.
Can straight people go to gay clubs?
Gay clubs are a space of celebration and joy, but also offer a comfort and security that cannot be ensured in places dominated by straight people. Ollie and I have been on many nights out together in heterosexual clubs - because any club that isn’t a gay club is surely a heterosexual scene, right?
This will always be a slightly stressful experience for him.
He tells me what it’s like, “having to be mindful of people who could potentially harass you” and the continual, “uncertainty of how people might receive you and your identity”.
“You have to enforce your own prejudice on people in order to be safe”, Ollie says, which is also why he feels such empathy for women fearing harassment. It’s both upsetting and frustrating that women often have to do the same - assuming the worst in men around them as a form of protection. Yes, we know ‘not all men’ are homophobic or misogynistic, but we have enough case studies and personal experiences to tell us that enough are, that we need to take necessary precautions.
It becomes demoralising for Ollie, “looking for other queer people to interact or flirt with”, while also needing to safeguard himself from possible abuse.
Gay clubs and bars therefore, are not only a fun party with some actually good music but also, “a place of safety and comfort where you don't have to stress about finding other queer people to get with or watch out for potential harassers and abuse”. Similar to why women only clubs have been set up!
While I know Ollie doesn’t believe the queer clubbing scene should be excluding people, he would like to feel there is more consciousness and respect coming from those who wish to enjoy those spaces without needing their safety too. Not to mention, if he were going to a gay club with the hope of meeting other queer people only to be surrounded by more straight people - I mean, I’d be irritated too!
Going out with LGBTQ+ friends as a straight person is not inherently problematic, Ollie reassures, but it’s particularly nice to see clubs such as Revenge in Brighton selling ally tickets that charge an additional pound which is then donated to LGBTQ+ charities. This puts into practise the middle ground Ollie and I have mentioned since it “actively helps while recognising straight privilege” and gently highlights the fact that, although non LGBTQ+ people, “are welcomed into such places as allies, these spaces are not designed for them”.
It’s vital to have places where one feels like they can fully relax and be comfortable, without needing to continually be “looking out” as Ollie feels he must in bars, pubs, clubs or less familiar towns. Going shopping in nearby areas, Ollie tells me he makes adjustments to his outfit choices to avoid judgemental looks or worse. And when it comes to travelling abroad, the first bit of research is always Googling ‘gay rights’. He jokingly talks of some locations where his sexuality is, “flat out illegal there - I’d just be stoned to death!”.
I won’t tell you how the voice memo ended, but we didn’t come to any well rounded conclusions like any seasoned podcaster might. So how do I summarise this incredibly broad and insightful conversation in a way that ties everything together?
I am so thankful to have people in my life who can educate me about things I do not have immediate access or experience of. I am grateful to have the opportunity to recognise my ignorance and times where I have said something I now realise to be harmful or reflective of internalised homophobia.
One chat, one podcast, book or TV show will not suddenly present all the answers or undo the unconscious prejudice society has taught us from a very early age, but it all makes a difference.
I doubt I’ll ever stop banging on about the joy and importance of education. Being open to growth and learning is fantastic, and I encourage everyone to challenge themselves with new information as much as possible.
Inclusivity politics may seem complex and tense - things we once embraced as ordinary are now harmful and clearly unfair, but it doesn’t need to be intimidating or overwhelming. Allow yourself to be ignorant. Embrace the fact that someone you see online or in the street has a story you know nothing about. Withhold unconscious judgements that may try to arise, and to quote Lily James as Cinderella, “have courage and be kind”.
Comments