THE L WORD: FOR BETTER, FOR WORSE

When The L Word debuted on Showtime in early 2004, no one really expected it to have the lasting success that it has since enjoyed. Now into its fifth season, the "lesbian drama" remains one of Showtime's most popular series, and it has garnered a loyal following of lesbians, bisexual women, straight women, gay men and straight men alike. It reaches audiences across the world, as far away as South Africa, Russia and Brazil. It led to last year's introduction of OurChart, a networking site for queer women with original editorial and multimedia content. And it has attracted such guest stars as varied as Anne Archer, Roseanna Arquette, Anabella Sciorra, Ossie Davis, Arianna Huffington, Camryn Manheim, and Snoop Dogg (among others). Season 4 saw the addition of actors Marlee Matlin and Cybil Shepard to the cast. In other words, The L Word has transcended both initial expectations as well as its target audience, making significant contributions to popular culture. Not to mention what it has done for lesbian visibility in the media.

Of course the show is not without its faults, and sometimes I wonder what keeps bringing me back season after season. Well, it's an addicting guilty pleasure and in a class of its own in terms of representation of queer women on TV. Besides the teen drama South of Nowhere, which I have written about previously, as well as a new series, Exes and Ohs on LOGO (MTV Network's "gay" channel), The L Word remains a forerunner in lesbian visibility. Something which, as GLAAD has pointed out, is seriously lacking on television these days. So I keep watching, despite the show's sometimes painful flaws. But that's not to say there is nothing positive. In fact, there is quite a lot of positive things about it. So, allow me to share my thoughts on the "Best and Worst" of The L Word.


"DANA, MOST GIRLS ARE STRAIGHT ... UNTIL THEY'RE NOT" -- WHY I WATCH

Naturally, I can't speak for every viewer of the show, but here are my opinions on the positive aspects of The L Word.

1. Positive representations of lesbians and their lives
It's a television show, so it can't be expected to reflect reality at all times (or even most times). That's what we have "reality" TV for. But The L Word challenges stereotypes and preconceived notions about lesbians. The women on the show are attractive, successful, independent and interesting. The author of a 2005 article for New York Metro asserts, the women of The L Word, while oft-times criticized for being "too beautiful" (on a recent broadcast of The View, guest Jennifer Beals was asked "Aren't there any ugly lesbians?"), finally help gay women to break free of the long-held stereotypes. The author states, "After years of living down our dumpy reputation, perhaps it behooves us to put our best, most made-up faces forward, for a change. I mean, how many “anomalous” dykes does it take to prove to straights and gay boys that not all lesbians wear bolo ties and Birkenstocks?"

For gay women, there is an affirmation of their lives and sexualities. Producer Ilene Chaiken says about the show, “There’s a unique anthropology to our lives. It makes these stories especially worth telling because most people don’t know these details. The lesbian characters we’ve seen were mostly created by men. We’ve been marginalized from the culture for a very long time, and I think that we’re ready to claim our rightful place.” A 2005 article in Inside Entertainment contends, "The L Word is groundbreaking simply because it’s helping to reshape the lesbian image within the mainstream, and is an archetype for lesbians to own and embrace their sexuality. At a time in North America where homosexuality and gay marriage are politically contentious issues, The L Word may well be a catalyst to change and expand cultural attitudes on the intricacies of women’s sexuality."

In this clip, Bette finds out that Tina and her are going to have a baby



2. Straight viewers can relate!
One of the things that has come as a surprise to many of those involved in the show is its appeal to a wide demographic. It's true, straight women love the show. Why this should come as a surprise, I'm not really sure, since gay women certainly don't seem to have much of a problem watching and relating to shows and movies about straight people. Nevertheless, it can certainly be viewed as a good thing that straight people like the show. Jennifer Beals, who plays the character Bette on the show, said in a 2004 interview with Steppin' Out Magazine, "I think the show makes clear, all of us have the same issues of love, loneliness, work, ambition, and family. We share all of those concerns. The L Word helps normalize these relationships." Straight women can watch the show and see that many of the issues that the women on the show face are no less alien to them than the issues being faced by the ladies of Sex and the City. In a time in history pivotal to the civil rights movement for LGBT individuals, something like a television show that makes the lives of gay people seem less alien is a good thing. When speaking on the controversies surrounding gay marriage and how something like The L Word can make an impact, Beals (who is, by the way, heterosexual), has this to say: "It's based in fear, fear of the other, fear of what is not like you," she says. "But when you are able to see lives on a day-to-day basis, rather than reducing it to politics, then it humanizes a whole community of people that were otherwise invisible. I think pop culture is really helpful in letting people see another side of life
Here is one of my favorite scenes from Season 4, where all the women are talking on the phone with one another. I mean, who can't relate to this?




3. Not afraid to poke some fun -- Camp runs rampant
I'm always up for some fun gay camp, for some hilarious exaggerations of stereotypes. (I loved the movie But I'm a Cheerleader). The L Word sometimes toes the line between camp and actual perpetuation of stereotypes, but overall things tend to turn out fairly well. For someone unfamiliar with "gay culture" and lesbian stereotypes, this stuff might just go over his or her head. Which might be why some straight reviewers have been unable to appreciate the show. On the other hand, some gay viewers might find themselves offended by what they view as outright stereotypes. I say that it should, for the most part, be taken in jest and enjoyed. Season 1 might have had some of the best material, and a writer over at AfterEllen wrote a terrific article back in 2004 called All-Girls' Camp: Playful Exaggeration of Lesbianism in "The L Word". The author, Nora Spencer, explains the characters as following: "The characters on the show aren’t meant to be literal embodiments of all lesbians, but caricatures of lesbian stereotypes, playful exaggerations of lesbian extremes: Bette (Jennifer Beals) is the type-A breadwinner; Tina (Laurel Holloman), the fertile housewife; Shane (Katherine Moennig), the sensitive stud; Dana (Erin Daniels), the dyke tennis player; Alice (Leisha Hailey), the quirky bisexual; Ivan (Kelly Lynch), the gentlemanly gender-bender."

Spencer also refers to the various "campy terms" used in the show, such as: "Lesbian bed death", "The Lesbian Urge to Merge", "Has-bian", "Turkey baster", "U-Haul" and "Dyke Drama." She also refers to the idea of the "Lesbian look" which is brought up a number of times in Season 1. One of the most hilarious exaggerations of the idea that all lesbians can fit into a certain "box" occurs when Dana is trying to determine whether a woman she is interested in "plays for the gay team", as Alice refers to it as. What ensues is a "mission deployment" by the women of the show where they use visual cues to try to determine said woman's sexuality:

BETTE: Well, she's got some good lezzy points for her walk and the way she moves that chopping knife.
SHANE: But she's way femmy on the coiffure tip.
ALICE: Yeah, and her reaction to the two of you kissing was split because she didn't freak out which was a good sign, but she hardly paid any attention.
TINA: But you guys, she's got nine in the lez column and she only has seven in the straight.

Overall, the show's ability to sort of poke-fun at lesbian stereotypes makes for some great comedy.



4. The arrival of ethnic diversity and issues of race
From the beginning the show had at least some diversity. Bette, one of the main characters (played by Jennifer Beals) is biracial and her sister Kit (played by Pam Grier) is black. In Season 1 the issue of race was explored somewhat during a few episodes in which Bette and her partner Tina (played by Laurel Holloman) were in group therapy. In their group was a black woman named Yolanda who harped on Bette for supposedly not identifying as a black woman. Bette criticized Yolanda for placing her sexual identity behind her various other identities. Additionally, when Bette and Tina were trying to decide on a sperm donor for the child they planned to have, race also came into play. Bette wanted to use an African American donor so that their child would be representative of the both of them. Tina wondered whether she was prepared to be the mother of a biracial child and whether it was too much "otherness" to place on a baby (Ultimately, the did use a black donor).

However, the majority of the cast remained lily-white until Season 2 when a "Latina" joined the cast in the form of Carmen de la Pica Morales (played by Sarah Shahi). Now, I put Latina in quotes because the actress playing Carmen was actually a mix of Mediterranean and Persian heritages, although the character was supposed to be Chicana. Now, there is plenty to say on this issue as well as on the issue of how Carmen's Mexican family was portrayed. But I will save any comments for by "Worst of" list. At least the show was trying to be inclusive. And in Season 4, while we lost Carmen, we gained another "Latina" character, Papi (played by Janina Gavankar -- again not a Latina actress). Another lesbian of color arrived in the form of Tasha (played by Rose Rollins), a black woman serving in the military.

While The L Word may not be as diverse as it could be (still hoping for some representation of Asian women), it certainly does better than many other shows -- including hits like Sex and the City. And for that, I have to give it some praise.

5. Transgender issues
Season 3 was hailed for bringing the arrival of The L Word's first "butch" character. One of the criticisms of the show was how femme all the women were. The characters that came closest to being "butch" was Shane (played by Kate Moennig), who was really more of the waifish, androgynous type. Jenny's (Mia Kirshner) new girlfriend Moira (played by Daniela Sea) really did seem to be what we would call a "butch" lesbian. But not too far into the season Moira revealed that she actually had always felt like she was meant to be a man. So she began a transition into Max and we got the first real transgender character on the show. In Season 1 and 2 we saw the character Ivan (played by Kelly Lynch), who was a Drag King and quite possibly transgendered, but that issue was never explored in detail. In Max/Moira, we got the first glimpse at transgender issues.

Unfortunately, many people feel that the issue was not dealt with well and that poor acting skills further detracted from a potentially powerful storyline. I have to agree that the storyline could have and probably should have been a lot better, considering how misunderstood transgender issues are. But at least they tried, which is at least one step forward.



6. Coming out in Mid-life
In Season 4 Cybill Shepherd made her debut as Phyllis, the Vice-Chancellor of the fictional California University, where Bette landed a position as Dean of the Art School. Shortly into the season, Phyllis reveals to Bette that she thinks she is a lesbian. Throughout the rest of the season we see Phyllis experience her first love affair with another woman and come out to her family, thereby ending her marriage of thirty years. In Season 5, Phyllis is in a serious relationship with another woman but is thinking about playing the field, finally seeing all the options that are open to her. Sexuality in older women is something that is rarely seen on TV in the first place, so it is refreshing to see a middle-aged woman experiencing a sexual awakening. And it is also true that there are many women who marry young and take years before they fully realize/accept their real sexual identity. I'm glad that the show is featuring this demographic of women.

7. Leisha Hailey, Comedic gold and Group Dynamics
Probably my absolute favorite thing about The L Word is Leisha Hailey, who plays the role of bisexual journalist/radio host/internet writer Alice Pieszecki. Hailey was not widely known before landing her role on the show, although gay women might have known her from a small role in the 1997 lesbian film All Over Me, or from her position as lead singer in the pop duo The Murmurs, or as former girlfriend to musician k.d. lang. But after landing the role of Alice, women everywhere fell in love with her. Her acting skills are genuinely good, with dead-on comic timing and the ability to generate heartfelt emotion during more dramatic scenes. Her on-screen chemistry with Erin Daniels, who played Dana in Seasons 1-3 also contributed significantly. From Alice tagging along while Dana planned to come out to her parents at their Country Club ("I can act Republican!") in Season 1, to the two of them role-playing in Season 2 ("Captain, my Captain!") to Alice's psycho-obsession in Season 3, whether as best friends or as lovers, those two were comedic gold. And even with Dana now gone, Alice continues to be one of the best parts of the show. And viewers seem to agree. Leisha Hailey was voted as #1 on the AfterEllen Hot 100 list of 2007.

And on the topic of comedy, the group scenes of the show really continue to be some of the best. Season 1 saw a lot more of these, we drifted away from them in later seasons, but have luckily begun to see a return. One of the things that works best about the group scenes are the great dynamics between the characters. They are funny, warm and really embody female friendships. That's what people like to see. Season 1 was filled with parties, poker games, sleepovers, and roadtrips to Dinah Shore weekend. I hope that we see more of that in Season 5 because those group scenes really are some of the best parts of the show.

Here is a clip from Season 1 that highlights some of the group interactions:




8. Beautiful women
Okay, so I'm not completely shallow and I know that one of the criticisms of the show is that all the women are pretty gorgeous, but it also does make it enjoyable! Besides, it isn't fair to expect the show to represent all gay women. Nobody expects a show like Sex and the City to be representative of all straight women after all. So in addition to all the other great things about The L Word, getting to see gorgeous women like Rachel Shelley, Jennifer Beals, Sarah Shahi, etc. is just an extra perk!


"IS THIS A BISEXUAL THING?" -- THE THINGS THAT MAKE ME SQUIRM

1. Big gaping holes where plot should be
Even some of the best shows on TV unfortunately have the occasional plot hole, but some of the ones that turn up on The L Word are incredibly annoying. It makes you wonder if some of the writers just joined in without watching or reviewing previous episodes. One of the biggest annoyances is the case of the disappearing character. In Season 1, we learn that Marina (played by Karina Lombard) was in a long-term, live-in relationship with Francesca. Francesca was the financing behind Marina's business, the cafe The Planet. At the start of Season 2, Marina has attempted suicide and has returned to Italy to stay with her mother. Suddenly, Francesca is never mentioned again and the character Kit is trying to buy The Planet from Marina's family, when in Season 1 Marina had been trying to figure out how to buy The Planet for herself and win her autonomy from Francesca. So that didn't make any sense to someone who had actually been following the details of the show.

In Season 2, Jenny and Shane become roommates and get a third roommate, the token "straight guy" Mark who turns out to be a voyeuristic creep. But at the end of the season, Jenny has decided to let Mark continue living with them. Season 3, Mark is gone and it isn't mentioned at all what happened to him. I didn't really care much what happened to him, but still -- where did he go? Carmen was a main character on the show in Seasons 2 and 3 and at the end of Season 3, her and Shane were supposed to get married until she was left at the altar by Shane. After that she completely disappeared and wasn't mentioned again. I thought that this was completely peculiar, since all of women on the show represented her main group of friends. Why did everyone stop being friends with her? Naturally, they did this because they had dropped the actress Sarah Shahi from the show. But they could have tied that storyline off a little better, like said that she moved away or something to get over her and Shane's break-up or something. In Season 4, the character Papi showed up and suddenly became buddies with everyone. In Season 5, she's disappeared. Most viewers didn't like Papi very much, so maybe that's why they got rid of her. But, again, no explanation? In my opinion, a well-written show should have some sort of explanation for these types of character disappearances, even if it is only one line thrown in.

2. Did you have a personality transplant? -- Character 180's
This is one of the most obnoxious things about the show in my opinion because it really reflects poor writing. Good writers should be able to create believable character development. Obviously, people do change over time, but it shouldn't just happen out of nowhere. Some of the characters on The L Word are seriously all over the place and viewers just can't follow. One great example is Helena. When she appeared in Season 2, she was the perfect example of a "power lesbian." She was successful, determined, and pretty predatory. She knew what she wanted and went after it, not caring who she stamped on along the way. "Giving" would be last word that anyone would think of to describe Helena, and pretty much no one liked her. But in Season 3, Helena has inexplicably become Alice's best friend and was suddenly the nicest person in the world -- helping Alice through her break-up with Dana, using her private jet to fly everyone to a basketball game, paying for Shane and Carmen's wedding in Canada. What the hell happened? I think the writers wanted to keep Rachel Shelley on, which makes sense because she's beautiful and a pretty decent actor. But in Season 2, the Helena storyline seemed to not have anywhere else to go. So I guess they decided to give her a personality transplant rather than create a new character. An AfterEllen writer comments on Helena's transformation: "The (questionable) writing was really on the wall when Alice started acting like Helena was her BFF (Best Friend Forever). Why was Alice practicing yoga with Helena and insisting on her inclusion in The Group? What happened over the summer that made these two so tight? Maybe Alice had something to do with the soul transplant that transformed Helena from the umbilical cord-twisting villain of Season 2 into a three-dimensional human being."

Meanwhile, the viewers were left extremely confused.

Tina is another character that has been all over the place. At the end of Season 2, her and Bette have just gotten back together and had a baby girl, Angelica. At the beginning of Season 3, their relationship is suddenly failing and Tina has gone from being a sweet and caring person to pretty much a bitch who is having a cyber-relationship with a man. Later she decides to leave Bette to pursue relationships with men, yet she still identifies herself as a lesbian. She acts very confrontational and is always yelling at Bette whenever they are together. As AfterEllen writer Karman Kregloe stated in an article on Season 3, "Tina deciding that she's bisexual is one thing, but it's as if she's become repulsed by her former lesbianism. And the notion of Tina's sexuality being in question felt more like a plot device than a complex issue with which the character had been struggling. Representing the only long-term lesbian relationship on the show (on any show, for that matter) as an “8 ½ year aberration” isn't terribly revolutionary. If viewers wanted to see that, they could watch…anything else on network television." Season 4, her relationship with "the man" ends pretty much out of nowhere after she realizes that he is, well, a man and suddenly she appears to be attracted to Bette again. What??! Now, in Season 5, she is totally over the man thing and wants Bette back. Writers, get your act together.

3. Jenny Schecter
Along the line of character 180's, Jenny is one of the few characters that drives me crazy. In Season 1, she went through her sexual awakening. In Season 2, out of nowhere she went through some kind of nervous breakdown and became a cutter and we the viewers had to suffer through her crazy journaling and visions of carnivals and other crazy things. In Season 3, she became somewhat bearable, or as one reviewer put it: "Who would have thought that the self-obsessed little nut job whose dream sequences became the stuff of viewers' nightmares could grow up and win the Season 3 award for Most Unlikely Transformation Into a Sympathetic Character?" But, unfortunately it did not last and in Season 4, Jenny suddenly was a famous writer and did some crazy shit, like adoption a dying dog so that she could pretend to be someone else and seduce the veterinarian girlfriend of a journalist that gave her a bad review (following that?) Then she wrote a book called Les Girls in which she basically wrote about all the other women, hardly changing their names. Now Les Girls is being made into a movie and Jenny has transformed into a complete diva-bitch. It has actually gotten to the point where it is humorous, and thank God Mia Kirshner is a good actor. I might actually have to change Jenny to one of my favorite things about the show after season 5 has ended. But the writers have turned Jenny into like fifteen different characters, and we never know who she's going to be next.

Here is Jenny being crazy in Season 4, in a way that is actually quite hilarious:



4. Dana, Dana, Dana!
In Season 3, Producer Ilene Chaiken decided to explore the issue of breast cancer. In order to really make the storyline have an impact, she decided that it had to affect the character that viewers most identified with. Since Season 1, Dana was a viewer favorite. She was funny and awkward and people loved her. Her and Alice's relationship was fantastic, and their chemistry was so believable. Ilene decided that Dana would be the one to suffer from breast cancer. But not just suffer, Dana would have to DIE. Basically, this was the worst idea ever. The idea was to really have an impact on viewers, and Dana's death really did have an impact. But not in a good way. People (including many of the show's actors) were pissed off, and mostly didn't understand why it was necessary to kill off one of the most beloved characters in order to advance some type of social message. Many pointed out that it would have been far more inspiring to have had Dana go through cancer and survive. Erin Daniels, the actor who played Dana for three years, admitted to being devastated when she discovered the fate of Dana, and revealed: "It wasn't my decision to leave the show, and I was very sad to see Dana go." "I was pissed. I was really pissed off," Said co-star Kate Moennig on her reaction to discovering Dana would be dying in Season 3.

The show has gone on, we've now had 2 seasons sans Dana. But it really was probably one of the worst decisions that the writers made. Fans will tell you that it hasn't been the same without her. While the show has pulled through, the dynamics will never be completely the same.

Here is a short video that was put out by Showtime to try rationalizing this terrible decision (although the interviews with the cast kind of contradict the message they were trying to put out). This video is followed by a hilarious clip of Dana and Alice shopping for sex toys.





5. Adios, Carmen.
This is sort of a personal thing for me, because I just loved Carmen. I thought that she was smoking hot and had a great personality and her and Shane had fantastic chemistry. Most people didn't believe that Shane would really go through with marrying Carmen, and it might have been realistic the way that they had it end. But, really, do you walk out on a girl like Carmen?? As Karman from AfterEllen put it: "The resident heartbreaker pushed the needle too far this season when she cheated on and ultimately abandoned at the altar Carmen de la Pica Morales, aka The Sexiest Woman Alive. This plot development begged the asking of the big questions, like did Shane sustain a head injury while doing those rad skate moves? Did the hair care chemicals go to her head? What happened to Shane's character arc around commitment from last season?" There was something so real about the Carmen/Shane relationship. Carmen was the one person that really seemed to "get" Shane and the two of them were obviously really in love with one another. It would have been a good storyline to have the two of them ultimately come back together, after Shane went off and played the field for awhile again. But I guess leaving someone at the altar is kind of unforgivable. But even though the writers decided to end it, it would have been nice to see Carmen stay. People liked Carmen. They could have found something else to do with her.

Here are two scenes of Shane and Carmen together (the first a fight, the second a happy one)




6. The Disappearing Bisexual
In Season 1, Alice was presented to us as bisexual. And sure enough, she had relationships with both men and women in that season. Season 1 was also full of others, mostly Dana, teasing Alice about her bisexuality. This was probably realistic, since the relationship between bisexuals and lesbians has historically been tenuous. Bisexual women are frequently accused of being "fence-sitters" or of just trying to hold onto their heterosexual privilege. In Season 2, when Alice was falling for Dana, her bisexuality was explored a little bit as well, such as when Dana's fiancee Tonya tries setting Alice up with a man. But then after Dana and Alice get together, any mention of Alice's sexual orientation pretty much seems to disappear. Near the end of Season 3, when Tina is going on a date with a man, Alice says to Dana, "You're right. Bisexuality is gross. I see it now." She was pretty much kidding, just trying to get Dana to laugh. But still, it did send out an interesting message, especially since she has yet to sleep with a man since Season 1.

Jenny also seemed like she was going to be a bisexual character, since she was in a relationship with a man for many years. She even told a friend in Season 1, "I think I'm bisexual." After ending her relationship with Tim, she even dated a man for a while. But then she went on to identify as a full-on lesbian, promoting the stereotype that bisexuals are just in a transitional phase.

Of course, giving a male lover to one of the characters is likely to elicit a negative viewer response, as the relationship between Tina and Henry did. So the writers are in kind of a jam, but honestly? They never should have made Alice bisexual in the first place if they didn't intend on following through with it. The show has really propagated the invisibility of bisexuality and the idea that bisexual women are really just confused or not really serious.

7. "A Very Special Episode"
This goes along with the whole breast cancer thing -- the concept of using the show to explore some sort of "social issue." Unfortunately, when the writers decide that they want to put out a message about something like breast cancer or PTSD, it comes out sounding like a public service announcement or after school special. I have no qualms with a show exploring an important issue like cancer, but the writers have to explore the issue in a way that isn't so cheesy. For example, when Dana was going through cancer her and Alice went to meet with Dr. Susan Love. Scribegrrl, AfterEllen's L Word episode recapper, describes it best: "Yes, it's masquerading as part of the episode, but it's really just a random PSA that can't even get its message across because everyone who sees it will think "what the hell am I watching? I thought this was The L Word?""

The way that they have tried to explore the war in Iraq and the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the military is at times downright hilarious. Take this scene, as described by Scribegrrl, where they are I think trying to show that there are different opinions on the war:

"Max and Grace arrive at the Planet. Max introduces Grace, who's wearing a T-shirt that says "War is terrorism with a bigger budget." The group welcomes her; Jenny compliments her T-shirt. They all proceed to recite their favorite T-shirt slogans, which include "Kill one, and it's murder; kill thousands, and it's foreign policy" and "God doesn't take sides in war.""

Tasha (who is a soldier, on-leave from Iraq) is looking very uncomfortable. Their recitations of T-shirt slogans sounds unnatural and ridiculous. I'm sorry, but there are other ways to have done that. Something else that really was pointless was how they sort of tried to explore PTSD, by showing some terrible nightmares that Tasha had about serving in Iraq. When a really complex issue like that is just sort of touched on like that, it makes it come out seeming trite. In Season 5, Tasha is going to be investigated for homosexual conduct. Hopefully they will actually be able to deal with this without it just seeming like a political statement.

Other things that the show has tried to make statements about is censorship, funding of the arts and cutting. All of these have seem somewhat contrived in my opinion. The point is, it's a television show and it only reflects reality to a certain extent. I understand the desire of the writers/producers,etc. to want to use their power to make certain political/social statements. But most times, it just doesn't work out well and it reduces complex issues to something else while running the risk of having the show turn into a "A very special episode of The L Word."


8. Transgenderism and butch lesbians
I had to give the show props for including its first transgender character (and I did). But I also have to include the necessary criticism for the way that the storyline ultimately played out. In a something scathing article on this storyline, AfterEllen writer Malinda Lo states, "It's too bad that as soon as that “real butch” sauntered onto the scene, she transitioned from female to male in a clumsy storyline that reduced the complexity of transgender issues to a stereotypical war between the sexes. To make matters worse, Moira's transition into Max was written in a way that not only dismissed the possibility of butch identity, it ridiculed it."

Lo points out that the transgender issue is one that really did need to be explored, as it is an issue that is becoming increasingly prominent within the lesbian community. She gives praise to some of the sentiments raised on the show, such as when Kit says to Max/Moira, "It just saddens me to see so many of our strong butch girls giving up their womanhood to be a man." Lo explains that this is a sentiment probably shared by many lesbians. But ultimately she feels, and I feel this way as well, that the show made gender into a binary, either/or issue rather than exploring its fluidity. The character of Moira is portrayed as very kind and gentle, whereas after she transitions into Max she suddenly is portrayed as aggressive, hypersexual and angry. Among other things, this promotes the stereotype that masculine characteristics can only be seen in men. As soon as Moira arrives in L.A. she is consistently ridiculed by the other women. Bette comments that Moira came from a place where she probably had to define herself a certain way, as "either/or" while Tina finds it interesting that Jenny would want to "role play" like that. As Lo says, the show basically "conflates gender expression with role-playing" and by having Moira make the transition into Max, the show missed the opportunity to positively portray an authentic "butch" identity.

9. The Latina lesbians
This is something that I have mentioned before. I actually had a post back in December 2006 about the way in which The L Word cast South Asian actresses to play Latina characters. You know, maybe it isn't as big a deal as I'm making it out to be. But in my opinion, there is just something really strange about it. It sort of sends the message that people of color are interchangeable, like us white people can't tell the difference between someone from India and someone from Mexico. Don't Latina women deserve to actually see themselves represented, rather than getting someone who can't even speak Spanish well?

In addition to casting not one but two non-Latinas, the show also somewhat poorly represented Latino culture. In another article by Malinda Lo, the author describes the show's "brush with Latino culture" as "a well-intentioned but somewhat clumsy introduction to Latino culture, featuring overgeneralizations and an unfortunate reliance on stereotypes." She additionally notes that in the Carmen storyline viewers unfortunately get nothing "more than a cursory exploration of what it means to be closeted in a traditional Latino household in Los Angeles." Lo explains that "Latino" culture is extremely varied, and a particular family's view on homosexuality will be largely dependent on the particular country they come from, their awareness of LGBT issues, their degree of education, and many other things. The Carmen storyline unfortunately portends to speak for all Latino families, which is no more fair than making the Dana "coming-out" storyline speak for all White families.

But the show got another chance to represent Latina lesbians with the character Papi. But things didn't seem to improve at all. In Season 2, Carmen didn't speak about her ethnic identity very much at all, although we got more of it in Season 3. Papi, on the other hand, seems to identify much more as a Latina, hanging out at Latin clubs, peppering her speech with Spanish phrases, etc. It's too bad, though, that the character ends up being completely over-the-top and exaggerated. She seems like a caricature of a Latina, and that is unfortunate.

In this clip, Carmen comes out to her family:



10. Product Placement
The use of the TV show to promote Showtime's new website OurChart was embarrassing and annoying. OurChart was inspired by "The Chart", originally a web of sexual relationships within the lesbian community created by Alice and later turned into a radio show, hosted by Alice as well. In Season 4, "The Chart" evolves into "Our Chart", a website created by Alice. At the same time, it became a real website, which I mentioned earlier on in this post. The show's promotion of the site, however, was ridiculous:

"Jenny pulls out her MacBook Pro, supposedly in order to read her Publisher's Weekly review. Alice doesn't think that's a good idea, but Jenny says it's purely for informational purposes. It turns out to be purely for infomercional purposes: Jenny launches into a spiel about OurChart.com, otherwise known as LittleChickensBankbook.com. Leisha and Rachel and Mia all try to get excited and interested in the spindles and circles on the computer screen."

11. The THEME SONG
Season 1 didn't have a theme song, or really any much of an introduction at all. And you know what? I didn't mind that so much. What's so bad about diving right into the show? Who really wants to sit through two minutes of the same thing every week anyway? But, alas, in Season 2 we got a theme song and introduction. In a review of Season 2, one writer said, "There are also a few new disappointments, starting with the new title sequence. Perhaps responding to complaints they received last year about the lack of one, the L Word editors have introduced a kitschy, fun collage of the L Word cast in various poses to open the episodes. The sequence is entertaining; unfortunately, the theme song by Betty that goes along with it is, well, cheesy and cringe-inducing (both the lyrics and the music). It actually makes you long for last season's electronic dots."

But, you can decide for yourself.



Well, overall, the show really does have its ups and its downs. But it also has been revolutionary in its content, and hopefully it will pave the way for more representation of the gay and lesbian community on television. And I probably will keep watching for as long as Showtime decides to keep renewing it!

SEXUALIZATION IN ACTION: IN DEFENSE OF MILEY CYRUS

A part of me feels guilty for dignifying this story by analyzing it in a blog post, but there is something so unsettling to me about the latest Miley Cyrus "scandal" that I ultimately feel compelled to put in my two cents. Okay, so the story is that sometime around the Christmas holidays, some personal photos of the Disney Channel sensation and another girl were leaked online. The pictures, as one can see, are pretty tame and in all likelihood completely innocent. I'm sure that Miley never intended for the public to see them in the first place and she has defended herself saying that they are no big deal: "They're nothing bad! At first, I was really upset. It really sucks. [The girl in the pictures] was a friend of mine that's a normal girl. [Now] she has to go to school and deal with this crap. It's two girls at a sleepover, and if all of a sudden that's bad, then what is the world coming to?

"What I decided before I came out to LA and started working was the minute I didn't have fun was the minute I go home. I don't want to go home, and I don't want to not do what I do, because I love it, but this...it's Satan attacking."

Pretty much I first found the whole thing totally amusing. It's nice to see that the most scandalous thing about this fifteen-year-old is that she is pretty much just like every other fifteen-year-old. I would be worried if the girl weren't able to let loose and have a little innocent fun. Furthermore, this whole thing has resulted in some pretty hilarious headlines, such as "Miley Cyrus Defends Herself Against Shared-Licorice Lesbian Teen Romp Rumors." I mean, come on, it sounds like something out of fake news or maybe the cover of National Enquirer! And Miley's response itself made me chuckle, with the reference to "Satan attacking" -- spoken like a true evangelical! I know that when I think of what an attack from Satan would look like, Hannah Montana being accused of taking lesbian photos is definitely the first thing that comes to mind. But after I got over the amusement of the thing, there was something about it that was giving me a bad feeling and I couldn't really put my finger on what it was. So I've thought about it a lot, trying to tease out precisely what was making me feel bad about it.

First of all, there's the homophobia inherent in this whole thing. I mean, would people think it's scandalous if there were a picture of Miley giving her alleged boyfriend Nick Jonas a peck on the lips? That would be one hundred times more sexual than these pictures, but I doubt anyone would call it "sexual". So what is so provocative about these two girls? In the past I have analyzed the double standard between same-sex affection and male/female affection. What is so wrong about a little girl/girl affection? Everyone can relax because I'm pretty sure that Miley Cyrus is as straight as they come, and she was just goofing around in this photos. But if she weren't, would we really call these pictures provocative? They are no more erotic than a boy and girl holding hands, or as I said, a peck on the lips. Inappropriate behavior for a fifteen-year-old? Only if the gay thing makes you nervous. And this whole episode is showing me that, clearly, it makes a lot of people nervous! I guess no one wants their kid looking up to a lesbian pop star. But, actually, that's not really the biggest issue for me ...

This isn't the first time that Miley has had to deal with undeserved scandal. Just a couple of months ago, thanks to someone's photoshopping skills, she had to spend some time quelling pregnancy rumors. And reading comments following articles about the teen pop star, one gets the feeling that people actually want her to fail. Following a post on Perez Hilton where the celebrity gossip blogger praises one of Miley's songs, comments follow such as: "She's a skank ass hill billy and needs to get her little white ass out if Hollywood. She is a bad example and I am sure give her a year or so.", " Her father should really watch her with the way she dresses, maybe the next Britney or Lohan" , "Why would I want my children looking up to a spoiled little brat who is probably gonna be the next Lindsay Lohan?"

Yet nothing that Miley has done up to this point has indicated that she is heading in the direction of such former teen stars as Britney or Lindsay. Back in August I wrote about the positive images of young girls on TV today, and Miley was one of those I mentioned. I compared the way she dresses to the dressing style of Britney when she first burst onto the scene at age 15 (the same age that Miley is now). Miley's wardrobe looks like that of Laura Ingalls Wilder compared to the get-up that Britney wore back in the day, yet rather than ripping on Britney I seem to remember quite a few people getting titillated over her sexy schoolgirl gear. Miley has come out and discussed how important she feels it is to keep her clothing on the wholesome side: "I say what I'm comfortable in and what I like and nothing that's too out there. I like to look kind of like what girls would want to look up to, and their moms and dads will say, 'Hey, that's cool. That's different.' ... I look way young, and that's the way that's more comfortable for me."

Last month I brought my six-year-old sister to the Hannah Montana concert as her Christmas present (yes, I am the best big sister in the world and yes, I am also a masochist), and I have to say that nothing about this girl screams erotic. She projects the image of a young teenager, which is precisely what she is. While I think she's adorable on her TV show (which thanks to Emily, I have seen more times than I would like to admit), I actually find Miley to be kind of annoying precisely because she is such a young teenager. She's loud and a little bit crazy (just watch her music video that I posted below) with questionable music talent, she tells interviewers about how she put Ramen noodles in the microwave for 11 minutes and her views on purity reflect the development of a girl who clearly still has much more of the world left to see and a whole lot of her own sexuality left to explore. But those very things that make it difficult for me to watch her on Oprah are the things that make me want her to stick around. She acts precisely the way I think a fifteen year old girl should act! I think that, unlike some other child stars before her, her parents do not seem set on exploiting their child for their own personal gain. According to Miley, she gets grounded when she misbehaves or mouths off and she had her monthly allowance lowered and her credit cards cut up when she bought an expensive Prada bag. And her parents have promised her her own private area of the house if she lives under their roof until she is at least 20. While Miley's mom, Tish, is often at her daughter's side, you won't see her jumping in the spotlight like Dina Lohan or even Lynn Spears. I get the genuine feeling that Miley's parents want her to live her dream, but not at the expense of her integrity.

So I think I am coming to understand why this whole alleged "scandal" bothers me so much. It's like we are witnessing this young girl being sexualized before our eyes. It's like people want this wholesome, innocent teenager to be way more sexual than she is, so things are blown completely out of proportion. People try to turn innocent photos of two friends into something erotic. A ridiculous pregnancy story spreads like wildfire only because people actually believe that this fourteen-year-old is having sex! Miley goes shopping at Victoria's Secret and the press questions whether it is appropriate. The fact is, of course it isn't inappropriate! She was probably buying underwear or body lotion, not some lacy corset or pearl thong (Heck, I was shopping at Victoria's Secret when I was Miley's age!). But they want to put the story of a young pop princess shopping at a lingerie store out there because some nasty people are going to find something erotic about that. I find it really, really unfortunate. Here I am writing about how refreshing it is to see some positive images of girls that show the world that a young female can be strong and successful and beautiful without being hypersexual. Yet it would appear that the world doesn't know what to do with a pop star that doesn't want to be a sex symbol. That is what disturbs me.

I think that no matter how much she claims to love her job, Miley will only be able to take so much of this before she cracks and moves back to Tennessee. She has stated on several occasions that her parents have told her that as soon as the job stops being fun, the family can move back home. Either that, or she's going to be won over by the subliminal message that she's only interesting if she's promoting some type of sex appeal. Either way, the young girls looking up to her are going to be losing something. So my message is, people, get off of Miley's back! Unlike some people, I actually want my younger sister imitating Hannah Montana and not the Pussycat Dolls.

TEGAN AND SARA AREN'T "GAY ARTISTS" (AND WHY THAT'S A GOOD THING)

Okay, if you know me, you know that I am pretty much obsessed with Tegan and Sara. In fact, I have written about them twice before -- back in July and again in August. Just at the end of last month, I finally -- after two long years of waiting -- got to see them in concert again. The first time I saw them perform, it was at a small venue in Madison when they were still really only widely known amongst the queer crowd. That same year, in 2005, they had been touring with The Killers and playing at music festivals such as Lollapalooza, so they were getting to be a bit more well known within the Hipster scene. And now here we are almost three years later and they were playing at a large, sold out auditorium in Minneapolis with a diverse group of fans rocking out to their music.

They were fabulous, as expected. I was glad to see that although the intimacy of a smaller venue has been lost due to their now increasing popularity, they have not abandoned their chatty and adorable way of interacting with the crowd. While my concert buddy Mira and I were chatting about the pros and cons of a favorite artist going "mainstream", we delved into a discussion about the twins' sexuality.

Tegan and Sara, both lesbians, have always been open about their sexual orientations, but they have never made it a defining part of their identity as musicians. As Sara said in an interview “We’re a minority but we’re also a minority that is not necessarily always visible. It’s easy for us to project a heterosexual lifestyle. It’s important as a queer role model to be out, to be vocal about who you are … I think it’s important to break down the homophobic stereotypes … Even when we came into this industry there was a tendency for people to be like, ‘You don’t have to talk about it …’ Why was that such a big deal? I don’t need to talk for an hour about it. I just want to acknowledge that no, I don’t have a boyfriend and yes, I like girls.” Tegan notes, "Sara and I have seen points in our career when it's been extremely relevant for us to talk a lot about being gay, and then there's been other points where it hasn't seemed as relevant."

There was a time when a lot of people didn't even realize that they were gay. I used to watch clips of them on YouTube and there would be comments like, "Tegan and Sara aren't gay!" "Oh snap! I'd never guess they're gay!" and one that still seems to be circulating is that only one of them is gay. The point is, they don't project a stereotypical image of lesbian musicians -- no folk rock, dreadlocks, nose piercings, or even gender-specific lyrics. As Tegan and Sara become more popular, they are accomplishing a number of things. They are some of the first of their kind -- openly gay female artists that are entering into the mainstream of "young people's music". Other queer artists like Ani DiFranco (who is openly bisexual), the Indigo Girls and Melissa Etheridge may be wildly popular among certain subgroups of people, but it has been a challenge for lesbian musicians to find their way into mainstream youth culture. Tegan and Sara might just get there.

And the result would be something that is feared by conservative America and prayed for by us crazy progressives: basically, a normalization of homosexuality into mainstream culture. People hear their music and like it and they see them and think that they seem normal and cool. This isn't, as idiotic conservatives fear, going to make people run off and "become" gay. But it might make them wonder if gay people are really that strange. At any rate, the fact that Tegan and Sara are marketable to more than just a queer crowd means that there is increased visibility of lesbians in entertainment. And in my opinion, that can only be a good thing.

THE INCONSISTENCIES OF O'REILLY

In this country we're lucky to have folks like Bill O'Reilly, who are able to so well demonstrate the misguided and intolerant voice of the right wing. Now I'm being slightly sarcastic here, but I am also serious in a way because if we ever intend to win in the great debate against those who promote hatred and restriction of civil liberties, we must understand where they are coming from. Unfortunately, it turns out that the far right may be nearly impossible to debate due to their general irrationality, misuse of logic, and overall intolerance of anything that is not what they consider "normal."

Anyone who is familiar with Bill O'Reilly knows that the political commentator of Fox's The O'Reilly Factor promotes "traditional" American values. He also frequently contributes to the culture of fear that serves to maintain intolerance within our country. In July I wrote about The O'Reilly Factor's absurd story on "lesbian gangs" that was highly misleading, containing extreme distortion of facts for what seemed to be the sole purpose of portraying a sexual minority as dangerous and sexually aggressive.

Now, it's interesting to look at the history of O'Reilly's views on gay rights. A 2002 article in The Advocate gives a pretty good overview of his feelings. In the article O'Reilly admits to believing in antidiscrimination laws that include sexual orientation as well as supporting adoption rights for gay couples (although he admits that he's looking out for the kids, not the gays). Some religious extremists, such as the uber-Evangelical American Family Association have gone so far as to accuse him of promoting the "Homosexual Agenda." (As a side note, for more information on the "Homosexual Agenda", you can visit the AFA's special issues page) In a transcript from a 2002 airing of his show, O'Reilly comes up against "ex-gay" spokesperson for the AFA, Stephen Bennett. In the show, O'Reilly directly challenges Bennett's religious fanaticism by quoting areas of the Old Testament (such as Deuteronomy 22:20-21, which states that non-virgins should be stoned) to highlight the immediate contradictions that come with citing Scripture to advocate for certain social norms. O'Reilly said to Bennett, "You don't speak for God" and reminded him that we live in a secular society -- one which allows for religious fanaticism, but which prevents that fanaticism from crossing the line into public policy (at least theoretically -- I wonder if O'Reilly was perhaps feeling a bit delusional when he made this statement since these days it seems that religion -- Christianity specifically -- dictates pretty much every move of the Right).

Despite all that, O'Reilly is far from being an ally to the LGBT community. In fact, O'Reilly thinks that gays should pretty much just shut up about their sexual orientation. He tells The Advocate, "The basic tenet is, I want you to have a good life. It's easier to have a good life if nobody knows what your sexual proclivities are--hetero or homosexual or whatever--so keep it quiet unless you absolutely have to define it." This goes along with an earlier statement: "I've never understood why anyone, why any American, would want to tell the world what their sexual preference is. It's no one's business but yours." So what he ends up promoting is a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" point of view which tells gays that as long as they don't "express" their sexuality, there's no problem with it. Consequently, what you end up seeing is a massive double standard between what is considered sexual expression from a homosexual and what is considered expression of sexuality by a heterosexual. For the homosexual, the mere mention of a "partner" or of one's orientation is sexual. But, you certainly don't see O'Reilly or anyone else telling heterosexuals to not mention that they're straight ("What? You have a wife? Don't tell me that! It's none of my business! That's your private life!" -- Yeah right).

The basic inconsistencies in O'Reilly's (and many Americans') sentiments are exemplified in the November 7th broadcast of The O'Reilly Factor where he spoke to Dr. Laura Berman of Northwestern University about a poll in the yearbook of Waukegan High School in Illinois, which voted a lesbian couple as "Cutest Couple". O'Reilly was outraged over what he considered to be a vastly inappropriate promotion of sexual conduct in a school setting. Dr. Berman, luckily, held her own against the man and did her best at pointing out the error in his argument.

Bill O'Reilly - lesbian cutest couple
Uploaded by worldhappiness

The thing that is most frustrating about O'Reilly's point of view -- one which is shared by many individuals -- is that he makes ridiculous assumptions using faulty logic and false analogies. The two girls in the story were automatically accused of promoting sexuality in a school setting just by being "in love", as Dr. Berman stated. For all O'Reilly knows, these girls might not even be having sexual relations -- not all high school couples do. But there is something inherently sexually inappropriate about them being a couple that is not true for any heterosexual couple. In O'Reilly's view, the simple act of coming out is actually an issue of sexual conduct (or perhaps misconduct). Gays and lesbians mentioning their relationships (whether or not it has anything to do with the erotic aspect of those relationships) is automatically sexual, whereas a straight woman mentioning, "Oh my boyfriend and I went to the movies" would never be accused of acting inappropriately by discussing her private "sexual life." But of course, heterosexuality is normal behavior and homosexuality is deviant behavior (it's "what you do" remember and not "who you are") so therefore any attempt at normalization is automatically political, apparently.

Back to The Advocate interview, O'Reilly explained that gays should stop trying to "force" others to be tolerant of them, since the majority of Americans are never going to accept them. Basically, he implies that discrimination against gays is acceptable and understandable and average Americans should just accept it and get over it rather than be outraged that in a secular, contemporary and democratic society like ours it is still necessary to be "tolerant" of those who hate others based on their sexual orientation. For a long time religion was used as a basis for racial discrimination as well -- for example, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would not ordain blacks into the priesthood until 1978. One of the great leaders of Mormonism, Brigham Young, stated that black skin was the mark of Cain -- a punishment for the murder of Abel by Cain in the Old Testament. An article in The Salt Lake City Tribune shows that although official church doctrine no longer teaches these beliefs, many Mormons still hold them and interracial relationships continue to be taboo within the faith. The point is, nearly every type of intolerance throughout history has been justified by religion. Religious opposition is certainly, in my opinion, no reason to give up the fight in insisting upon a fair and just society that values the inherent worth and dignity of all its members.

I was made aware of this current O'Reilly broadcast on AfterEllen.com. As usual, the writers over there had several witty remarks to make about it ("The Waukegan Bulldogs are trying to make an issue of something — trying to start a revolution via yearbook poll. After all, that's tactic No. 43 in the Homosexual Agenda Handbook. Next on the list: stocking the soda machines with virgin mimosas and herbal teas!") But one thing that stood out to me were some comments made by European readers:

"I can't believe ... that this kind of debates are broadcasted on the american TV. Honestly... as a german (or european) I'm quite shocked about this. What's up over there?! This man and his point of view are completely out of question... I can't believe any channel gives him any airtime! Is he popular? He definetly shouldn't be! Wow... it's the 21st century and people are talking about this on national television?! Something is going waaay wrong..."

"I live in the UK and I cannot believe this crap is shown on tv! It's outrageous he can get away for being so homophobic. I am genuinely shocked that something like that could be televised. I feel sorry for any American teens who may have seen this and been in the process of coming out or have just come out etc because [understandably] they won't want to be open about who they are and they are with because of people like this guy."

"I live in Sweden and it's truly shocking to se this kind of blatant homophobia on american television. Our most conservative government party, Kristdemokraterna (basically the christian democrats) are liberals compared to this guy and I can honestly say that if a "journalist" like O'Reilley said anything like this, there would be an uproar. It's a shame..."

"Being European (from a very small yet quite well respected country boasting a semi-direct democracy in between high mountains) this truly is yet another confirmation of the bad picture of "America" we get every now and then. The America which is "running" and judging our Planet. Red States having way too much influence - and a society (i.e. those parts that get represented in the media and thereby kinda seem to form public opinion) who in a way still have to live in a medieval state of repression ... I truly feel for every one of you who has to cope with such an ignorant society who on the whole (for their negative aspects) seem to have much in common with a medieval one where fears were big and belief in nonsense was normal and reasonable thinking was not an option. ... Would love to see him taken to the European court in Strasbourg"

"Another European here shocked to see that something like this can be televised in the USA. If one of the hosts of any of our news programmes ever made a comment as homophobic as the ones this man has made, he or she would be fired immediately. I'm not saying we don't have homophobic people in my country, because we have a few, but luckily for us, they're not given their own TV shows to spread their BS on national television."

"I'm not sure about the entire European continent, but this would certainly never happen in Germany. It simply couldn't. So even though I sometimes hate this country, and I've always wanted to move/life in San Francisco, I'm becoming more and more repulsed by the way the American right wing agenda is not only getting shoved in our faces through the media, but also by how many people still fall for that. After seeing this interview, I am honestly scared of having to live in the US. I know that there are people who don't hate "us", but sadly the right wings fundamentalist seem to get more and more powerful."


Basically, we should never stop believing that we can have a just society. We should never fail to be outraged by acts of intolerance. And we should never accept that "tolerance" of homosexuality as long as it's kept "private" is progress.