BBC is homophobic for not allowing a same sex couple for strictly

[Glasgoow]

I can't think of anyone that isn't homophobic from being offended by two guys dancing.

The BBC sounds very outdated by saying this is because its a "family show".

Oddly, according to a friend who has met them both on many occasions, it's Daphne who is less friendly, not CJ.

I did argue with him quite vehemently, but he insists it is true. CJ is friendly and chatty, Daphne less so!

It's just their choice of excuse that is shit. As if gay people don't have families, and just exist in some gay vacuum!

But it is the case that it's a mixed doubles thing, and not a dating event (though some of the dancers and contestants always seem to miss that memo...)

It's all about the steps innit?

The man has to do certain steps and holds that are judged, the woman has to do certain steps and holds that are judged. How could you judge it fairly with a same sex couple and not be accused of, I dunno, being a bit lenient or maybe the opposite.

Whichever way the judges went, there would probably be complaints about it not being fair - on the same sex couple or the other contestants or summat else.

They are dance partners not sexual partners , you plonker

"We didn’t ever approach nor did we have any plans to approach CJ to participate in this year’s series of Strictly Come Dancing. CJ’s agent gave us the opportunity to consider him but there was only one person we ever wanted from Eggheads and that was Jeremy Vine and we are delighted that we got our man.”
www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/09/04/this-tv-star-says-strictly-dumped-him-after-he-asked-for-a-same-sex-partner/

CJ desperately trying to get in the papers, nothing else to see here.

Who is CJ?

Who is CJ?

Quite

I suspect they have not offered CJ a place because he is horrible, not because he is gay

I have to agree with this TBH .

Personally I'd like to see a same sex couple, but people wouldn't bother watching for CJ would they? My vote would be for Sue Perkins or Paul O'Grady.

If the BBC were to reject a contestant/participant they would otherwise be happy to have purely because they had requested a same sex partner, then that would be ridiculously homophobic.

Yes it's a "family show" but as others have said, people are dancing not having sex. And even if they were having sex, I'm still not sure why a same sex couple would be more offensive than a mixed couple!

I agree with MovingOnUp about it being difficult to judge same sex couples against mixed sex couples. The nature of most of the dances is such that there is a leader, who is male, and a follower, who is female, so the dances themselves are inherently gender defined. The competition could be changed to make it less gender defined but I think it would have to then exclude a lot of the ballroom dances, and they are very popular with the audience. I would certainly miss them.

It's a shame really as I love watching men dance, and two gorgeous men dancing well together in some of the overtly sexy and passionate dances (like tango or paso doble) would be amazing. However CJ is neither gorgeous nor, I suspect, a good dancer so I'm not missing out on anything in this instance.

Puppy - I'm sure they'd manage. The professionals get to arrange their own choreography/steps each week anyway so it should be possible to get all of the required elements in there somewhere, and the 'celebrity' is the one whose steps would be judged, as always. It would be different from a technical point of view maybe, but different can be just as good.

It worked OK in the US I think?

What a load of complete and utter bollocks.

Allegedly Craig RH said they would remove/relax the gender rules in the next year or so anyway.

Maybe, once they've had a think about it, they might bring it in to give a boost to viewing numbers. I suspect that this years figures are going to be a huge drop on previous years as the 'celebrity' line up is very lack-lustre.

I think the point is that it is a mixed couples dancing show, and the dance would have to be different unless one of the couple was being "the lady" as someone else has put it.

It is nothing to do with sex or sexuality.

That said I"m confused about the reference to being "a family show", as it seems nothign to do with it.

I don't watch strictly, but Matthew Bourne has a sizzling ballroom scene in Swan Lake with two men dancing together. Brings a completely different dynamic to it and it's fab.

The family show comment is bizarre.

A trans sleb would fit into the show easily as the masculine / feminine roles of the dance & who was leading etc would not need amending.

I do think though that they could have same sex partners in there without too much trouble as the judges are experts and so would be able to judge perfectly well whatever the dynamic is in terms of the moves. I really don't think the public would mind either.

It doesn't seem like this bloke was actually asked to be on it in the first place though so the whole thing is moot really.

Their justification was unnecessary, but then not a lot about Strictly is exactly ground-breaking, forward looking stuff. The costumes and expected physical appearance of the dancers, for example, confirms well trodden masculine and feminine stereotypes (Pamela Stephenson's column when she was a contestant was fascinating on this)

Strictly has had loads of gay contestants on over the years, as well as CRH and Bruno on the judging panel. My gripe with the contestants is more that there often seems to be a "token gay" celeb who is expected to be fabulous (because, y'know, all gay people love sequins and can dance ). See Julien Macdonald, for eg. Again, reinforcing outdated stereotypes.

(I still love watching it, though!)

I agree, its because CJ is shit. If the celeb were famous enough, they'd do the same sex dancing.

I'm sure there was a lesbian contestant on one of the competitions in another country, and she danced with a woman. Can't find a story about it though for the life of me. Don't see why it really matters whether they dance with a man, woman or dog to be honest, it's about the skills and the performance isn't it?

I agree with MovingOnUp about it being difficult to judge same sex couples against mixed sex couples. The nature of most of the dances is such that there is a leader, who is male, and a follower, who is female, so the dances themselves are inherently gender defined

I've no idea who CJ is and I don't watch Strictly as , although I am a huge ballet fan and love good contemporary dance such as Nederlands Dans Theatre I don't like that style of dancing. But the dancing is not inherently gender defined. Not at all. There are 2 dancers each with distinct roles. It is perfectly possible for judges to judge how well each perform those roles.

They are dance partners not sexual partners , you plonker

Unless they're partnered with Kristina.

I've never seen strictly and I don't know who CJ is (bet you're all glad that I'm posting) but I remember some kurfuffle about a year ago where a male/male pair was trying to enter dance comps and they weren't allowed to. I don't think they were a romantic couple - just a dancing one. I'll have to try to google them.

this suggests the British Dance Council want to define pairs as male/female as male/male pairs may have an advantage (based on strength?)

I think it's women who would suffer though. I imagine there are far more female/female pairs who would be affected and women would get shafted with having to be constantly led whereas they can switch around more easily in same sex pairings