Strictly same sex couple (Nicola Adams) Not really a homophobe, it's just the mechanics that don't work....

[RumTruffles]

.....NOT MY WORDS. This was a conversation I overheard on Saturday night.

DW and I popped out for dinner for a child free evening. Was having a lovely time, before I unintentionally, but unavoidably tune in to a conversation at the next table.

A couple of brothers (I presume) had taken their mother out for dinner and the subject of Strictly and Nicola Adams came up. I tried hard to ignore, as I could tell this wasn't going to be something I wanted to hear.

One of the brothers, who was incredibly loud, stated that he "doesn't necessarily have an issue with the whole same sex thing but it's just the mechanics that don't work in a show like Strictly". Just the mechanics?! The mum went further and scoffed "Bah! Well the BBC have gone too far! I won't be watching Strictly again. They've lost me". Good riddance as far as I'm concerned. She then went much further and said one of the most disgusting things I'd ever heard "I mean, I was surprised they gave her a medal at the Olympics. It was obvious she was a lesbian even back then", to which all 3 of them mumbled in agreement.

I was about to say something, when the loud brother caught my eye and saw I was seething and he very abruptly steered the topic of conversation to something else.

Wise

I could feel my blood boiling. Do people really think like this?! Still?

I understand I am possibly throwing myself into the lions den somewhat, with the "controversial" strictly debate as I've seen this being discussed on here before a couple of years ago, but honestly, in 2020 are people still thinking that it looks "wrong" to see a couple of the same sex dancing?

The mother of course went to a totally different level of bigoted and is clearly just a horrible person, but it reminded me how this attitude still exists and it's f@#%ing depressing!

That's it really. Please tell me I'm not the only one who finds this attitude depressing as hell!

I wonder if she felt the same about however many Strictly celebs with prosthetic limbs? Dancing dances that are traditionally for people with ‘normal’ legs, two apiece.

I can't see a problem with two men or two women dancing with other in general, and for some types of dance I can't see that it matters in the slightest.

However I'd have thought for some dances, where there are more male and female roles, it wouldn't work as well to have a same sexual couple. I'm no dance expert but I'd have thought the waltz, Rumba and Paso Doble might be in this category.

And I agree that it would be harder for a gay couple to do some lifts.

It will be interesting to watch and see how it goes.

Well I'm not in agreement with them but they are entitled to to their opinion.
Your right to be offended doesn't trump their right to Express their opinion.
Dont listen in on others conversations then you won't run the risk of being offended.

If only you'd said something OP, the whole restaurant would probably have clapped.

@Maskedcrusader, as I've said several times now, they were practically shouting. I wasn't listening in and originally I was trying to zone out, but how on earth can you when someone is at this volume? You can't.

I honestly don't understand why some posters are making the point that I should mind my own business. My question wasn't, should I have said something? I didn't. My question was, how common is this attitude now?

I swear some posters just like to unnecessarily attack the OP.

TitOfTheIceberg

If only you'd said something OP, the whole restaurant would probably have clapped.

Because they are challenging societal norms. Because they want to. Because its different. Because why the hell not? There are many potential reasons why. I'm surprised you can't see that.

Do societal norms always need to be challenged, though? What would you think if they insisted on dancing in their grubby jeans or a shellsuit - or naked? What if they demanded to do break-dancing or the macarena instead of the tango or paso doble that everybody else is doing that week?

If it were based on assumptions of sexuality, it would make sense to challenge things more; but it's a TV programme with an established format. You wouldn't get a big name going on The Celebrity Chase and then demanding to have Anne Hegerty asking the questions whilst they vied against Bradley Walsh in answering them. Why not? They're both just people? But that's just not how it works.

If they were going to shake up the format, it would make more sense if they just randomly assigned all of the celeb contestants to a professional, paying no heed to sexuality or whether they ended up with mixed, all-male or all-female pairs. In fact, why just stick with pairs? They could have three of them dancing the tango and adapt it for a trio so that it ends up still the tango in name only. What if a puny male celebrity insisted on having the under-16s ballroom champion as his partner so that he'd find it much easier to lift her?

I agree that they have their right to express their opinions, just as you have your right to strongly disagree with them. The Olympics comment was weird, and I would have laughed too, but the Strictly comments weren't malicious in any way. It's just entertainment. If the official cricket authorities changed the rules to allow/stipulate pine bats instead of willow ones, the world's biggest cricket fan would still be fully at liberty to criticise the decision and decide they no longer wanted to follow the game.

Do societal norms always need to be challenged, though?

Probably not always, but given that women often dance together, challenging the 'norm' of only having one man and one woman dancing on Strictly doesn't seem to be one that is worthy of such a long thread, to be honest!

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

Because they are challenging societal norms. Because they want to. Because its different. Because why the hell not? There are many potential reasons why. I'm surprised you can't see that.

Do societal norms always need to be challenged, though? What would you think if they insisted on dancing in their grubby jeans or a shellsuit - or naked? What if they demanded to do break-dancing or the macarena instead of the tango or paso doble that everybody else is doing that week?

If it were based on assumptions of sexuality, it would make sense to challenge things more; but it's a TV programme with an established format. You wouldn't get a big name going on The Celebrity Chase and then demanding to have Anne Hegerty asking the questions whilst they vied against Bradley Walsh in answering them. Why not? They're both just people? But that's just not how it works.

If they were going to shake up the format, it would make more sense if they just randomly assigned all of the celeb contestants to a professional, paying no heed to sexuality or whether they ended up with mixed, all-male or all-female pairs. In fact, why just stick with pairs? They could have three of them dancing the tango and adapt it for a trio so that it ends up still the tango in name only. What if a puny male celebrity insisted on having the under-16s ballroom champion as his partner so that he'd find it much easier to lift her?

I agree that they have their right to express their opinions, just as you have your right to strongly disagree with them. The Olympics comment was weird, and I would have laughed too, but the Strictly comments weren't malicious in any way. It's just entertainment. If the official cricket authorities changed the rules to allow/stipulate pine bats instead of willow ones, the world's biggest cricket fan would still be fully at liberty to criticise the decision and decide they no longer wanted to follow the game.

Why is it a problem to have increased visibility for a marginalised group in our society who continue to experience discrimination?

Your comparisons are absurd. Do you think there are closeted shellsuit wearers out there wondering how they're going to come out to their families about their desire to wear shellsuits openly? Engaged in self harm and possibly suicidal because they're ashamed and fearful of losing their families and loved ones because of their shell suit wearing activities?

This increases visibility and representation for a still discriminated against group, that is why it is important.

If you think wearing shellsuits is analogous to that I think you need to think a little bit harder.

This increases visibility and representation for a still discriminated against group, that is why it is important

I agree. Just wondering why the gay male contestants didn't dance with men, or why Strictly didn't feel that was important.

I do think it's a bit of a shame for girl/girl couples. The whole sport got a boost from Strictly, and it definitely showed how strong and athletic boys have to be to do it well (and, in terms of street cred for teenager boys, that you get to dance with some very attractive girls!).

I'd have liked to have seen a representative girl/girl couple, because they do tend to be forgotten about a bit. And Nicola isn't going to do that. Obviously I want her to feel comfortable and do well, but it would be nice for girl/girl to see matching dresses, side-by-side work etc — Strictly promoting their style of dancing for the first time.

Perhaps they didn't want to?

It's not exactly a sport where gay men are unusual... and they all dance with girls.

Sorry, that last post was in reply to Janevaljane (great username btw!).

Susan Calman (who is married to a woman) said herself that she would hsve hated a female partner whilst on Strictly as it should be a man and a woman.

This increases visibility and representation for a still discriminated against group, that is why it is important.

I think my hyperbole might not have quite communicated as intended there, but how are the gay celebrities not visible and represented when they're right there on the show?

How does it help visibility or representation if a female celebrity who everybody knows is a lesbian (because she's a celebrity) is paired with another woman in a contest that is about dancing and nothing to do with sex or sexuality?

If they were on Celebrity Masterchef or Celebrity Bargain Hunt, would you think their sexuality would be better represented by insisting on being paired up with a same-sex team-mate to cook or buy antiques with?

Can't gay people just be treated the same as everybody else without the need to keep mentioning or looking for visual clues to remind people that they're gay? You wouldn't do it in everyday life, would you? "This is my friend, Sarah - I don't think you two have met before, have you? She's a lesbian!"

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

This increases visibility and representation for a still discriminated against group, that is why it is important.

I think my hyperbole might not have quite communicated as intended there, but how are the gay celebrities not visible and represented when they're right there on the show?

How does it help visibility or representation if a female celebrity who everybody knows is a lesbian (because she's a celebrity) is paired with another woman in a contest that is about dancing and nothing to do with sex or sexuality?

If they were on Celebrity Masterchef or Celebrity Bargain Hunt, would you think their sexuality would be better represented by insisting on being paired up with a same-sex team-mate to cook or buy antiques with?

Can't gay people just be treated the same as everybody else without the need to keep mentioning or looking for visual clues to remind people that they're gay? You wouldn't do it in everyday life, would you? "This is my friend, Sarah - I don't think you two have met before, have you? She's a lesbian!"

There will be a sizeable proportion of the viewing audience for this particular program that have no concept of Nicola Adams being gay.

Some of these viewers will probably turn to other people in the room with them and ask 'Why is that woman dancing with another woman?' And my hope is that they happen to be in a room with people who can then have an open and sensitive conversation about why that might be the case.

And when in the future a great-grand child comes out as gay, or wears non-normative clothing for their gender, that person has already had a little bit more exposure to openly stated representations of alternative sexualities/ gender presentations, and that makes that process just a little bit easier for all. (And no, I'm not saying this is an age thing, there are people of all ages who, whether they are aware of it or not, have a degree of discomfort about what they perceive as violations of norms.)

"Can't gay people just be treated the same as everybody else without the need to keep mentioning or looking for visual clues to remind people that they're gay?"

Haha, you'd like to think, wouldn't you? But gay people are still shouted at, spat at, asked 'So which of you is the man /woman then?', laughed at, jeered at, afraid to walk hand in hand etc, etc.

Each time someone steps up and unashamedly states 'This is who I am', rather than quietly getting on with convention and expectations, they make it that bit easier for those continuing to experience discrimination for trying to be openly who they are inside.

So why wasn't all that important (and I agree its important) when gay men were on the show?

Each time someone steps up and unashamedly states 'This is who I am', rather than quietly getting on with convention and expectations, they make it that bit easier for those continuing to experience discrimination for trying to be openly who they are inside

Nicola Adams does that anyway. If her partner on Strictly is straight, how is that breaking boundaries and challenging societal norms?

@suggestionsplease1, thank goodness you're on this thread you say it much better than me. Those comparisons were ludicrous and you explained why perfectly.

@Bbq1, but Susan doesn't speak for every gay woman, just as a straight person doesn't speak for every straight person. Why was her choice more valid than Nicolas? I suspect, simply because you agreed.

Can't gay people just be treated the same as everybody else

But that's the thing, they're not and it's not really something you see when you're not actually in that community. I came out in my late 20's as bisexual and before that, I identified as straight and had no real idea of the continued discrimination within the LGBT community, until I was in it.

It's about creating real equality, not about drawing attention for ratings, which btw, is unlikely to happen. I suspect if anything, their ratings will go down.

I also don't agree that dancing has nothing to do with sexuality. It does. Watch the tango on YouTube and tell me there's nothing sexual in that dance! If you are someone who only think that looks "right" with one man, one woman, I'm sorry but that is nothing but homophobia, dressed up as someone who is just a traditionalist.

As I said up thread, it doesn't necessarily have to do with the individuals sexuality, I.e, a gay man can happily dance with a woman etc. They don't need to have sexual desire for their dance partner, it's a performance - an act, but homosexuality is within our society, like it or not, but it's still not fairly represented. Not by a long shot. Heterosexuality is still displayed as the "norm" in most areas of our society, including ballroom dancing. Why? Dancers have said themselves, there are no rules about mixed gender pairings, so again, the comparisons about other sports suddenly changing the rules, isn't really a comparison.

@Janevaljane

Each time someone steps up and unashamedly states 'This is who I am', rather than quietly getting on with convention and expectations, they make it that bit easier for those continuing to experience discrimination for trying to be openly who they are inside

Nicola Adams does that anyway. If her partner on Strictly is straight, how is that breaking boundaries and challenging societal norms?

She does it anyway and she's apparently happy to do it some more. Good for her.

I don't think many typical viewers out there are going to be doing an elaborate forensic break down on the extent to which societal norms have been challenged in this particular pairing and coming to the conclusion 'Oh Nicola Adams was doing so well with the visibility and representation thing, but now that I know her dance partner is straight I can see that was all for nothing.' But if that is your take-away from it, fair play to you.

But her dance partner is straight. She's not a lesbian. So it doesn't challenge anything. And I found all the stuff about her checking with her wife that it was ok a bit...I mean the woman professional is straight. All it's going to do is make people wonder if she's gay. Maybe she is, in which case that's great.

I am truly shocked that people think like this and even more shocked that they feel free to loudly spout their hate in a public place.
This kind of hate talk is everyone's business, its unacceptable.

@Janevaljane

But her dance partner is straight. She's not a lesbian. So it doesn't challenge anything. And I found all the stuff about her checking with her wife that it was ok a bit...I mean the woman professional is straight. All it's going to do is make people wonder if she's gay. Maybe she is, in which case that's great.

Why would it make people wonder if the woman professional is gay?

Why would it make people wonder if the woman professional is gay? confused

Because its only challenging norms if she's gay! Otherwise its just two women who have randomly chosen to dance together.

@Janevaljane, I'm sorry? Why is it only challenging norms if she's also gay?...