Read The Prime Time Closet: A History of Gays and Lesbians on TV Online
Authors: Stephen Tropiano
The Prime Time Closet: A History of Gays and Lesbians on TV (2 page)
CHAPTER ONE
DIAGNOSIS: HOMOSEXUAL
HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE TELEVISION MEDICAL DRAMA
A
fter World War II, homosexuals had become a more visible minority in American society. Upon completing their military service, many gay men and lesbians headed straight to New York and San Francisco instead of returning to small town life. Gay bars and hangouts, open for business in many major cities and some smaller urban areas, offered their patrons a place to socialize and be part of a community.
fter World War II, homosexuals had become a more visible minority in American society. Upon completing their military service, many gay men and lesbians headed straight to New York and San Francisco instead of returning to small town life. Gay bars and hangouts, open for business in many major cities and some smaller urban areas, offered their patrons a place to socialize and be part of a community.
Consequently, increased visibility fueled society’s intolerance toward homosexuals or, as they were more commonly referred to,
fags, dykes, queers, deviants,
and
sex perverts.
As the American public became more vocal in expressing their hatred, fear and ignorance, the oppression of homosexuals became more widespread and extreme. Homosexual bars were subject to constant raids. Gay men and lesbians were continually harassed and interrogated by the police, and unjustly imprisoned by the judicial system. At the time, legal grounds for recourse were limited because homosexuality was illegal under state sodomy laws and public support was virtually non-existent. Even the American Civil Liberties Union wouldn’t take an official stand on gay rights until 1967.
1
fags, dykes, queers, deviants,
and
sex perverts.
As the American public became more vocal in expressing their hatred, fear and ignorance, the oppression of homosexuals became more widespread and extreme. Homosexual bars were subject to constant raids. Gay men and lesbians were continually harassed and interrogated by the police, and unjustly imprisoned by the judicial system. At the time, legal grounds for recourse were limited because homosexuality was illegal under state sodomy laws and public support was virtually non-existent. Even the American Civil Liberties Union wouldn’t take an official stand on gay rights until 1967.
1
The United States government also did its part to promote homophobia. As part of their Cold War campaign to protect the country from “subversives,” homosexuals were classified as a serious threat to national security. In the early 1950s, a Senate subcommittee recommended the purging of all government-employed “sex perverts” because of their emotional instability, vulnerability to blackmailers, and “corrosive influence” on other employees.
2
In 1952, Congress enacted a ban that would remain on the books until 1990 which prevented gay and lesbian foreigners from entering the country. The next year, President Eisenhower issued an executive order prohibiting the employment of homosexuals by the federal government. Consequently, thousands lost their jobs and were dismissed from the military, while others were put under surveillance by the postal system and the FBI.
3
2
In 1952, Congress enacted a ban that would remain on the books until 1990 which prevented gay and lesbian foreigners from entering the country. The next year, President Eisenhower issued an executive order prohibiting the employment of homosexuals by the federal government. Consequently, thousands lost their jobs and were dismissed from the military, while others were put under surveillance by the postal system and the FBI.
3
Amidst the oppression and hostility, The Mattachine Society, ONE Inc., and the Daughters of Bilitis became important sources of collective support for gay men and lesbians. The strategies employed by these and other self-identified “homophile” organizations to combat intolerance and discrimination sharply differed from the tactics later employed by gay rights activists in the post-Stonewall era.
4
The central goal of these early organizations was to create a more enlightened, gay-friendlier society by educating the public about homosexuality and maintaining a positive public identity for homosexuals. Through public lectures and publications addressing medical, legal, and moral questions surrounding the homosexual’s role in society, members were encouraged to assimilate into mainstream “straight” society by becoming responsible, respectable citizens.
5
Their respective monthly publications, the
Mattachine Review, One,
and Bilitis’s
The Ladder,
provided gay men and lesbians around the country, many closeted and isolated, with a forum to share their feelings and experiences.
4
The central goal of these early organizations was to create a more enlightened, gay-friendlier society by educating the public about homosexuality and maintaining a positive public identity for homosexuals. Through public lectures and publications addressing medical, legal, and moral questions surrounding the homosexual’s role in society, members were encouraged to assimilate into mainstream “straight” society by becoming responsible, respectable citizens.
5
Their respective monthly publications, the
Mattachine Review, One,
and Bilitis’s
The Ladder,
provided gay men and lesbians around the country, many closeted and isolated, with a forum to share their feelings and experiences.
While the homosexual community was establishing its post-war identity, medical science was displaying a renewed interest in understanding “the homosexual.” Since the late 1860s, homosexuality had been classified as a pathological condition. Despite the successful challenges against this position by psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, German sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld, and many others, homosexuality was still regarded in American medical circles as a mental illness.
Then, in 1948, Dr. Alfred Kinsey published his bestseller,
Sexual Behavior in the Human Male,
which, along with his subsequent
Sexual Behavior in the Human Female
(1952), presented some startling, never-before-heard statistics regarding homosexuality. According to Dr. Kinsey, 4 percent of the white males he interviewed for his study identified themselves as “exclusively” homosexual, while 3 to 8 percent of the unmarried white females (between the ages of 20 and 35) labeled themselves as “primarily” or “exclusively” homosexual.
6
Even more shocking were the high percentages of men (37 percent) and women (13 percent) who’d had an overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm.
7
On the basis of his data, Dr. Kinsey challenged the classification of homosexuality as a pathological behavior by conceiving human sexuality in terms of a continuum of behaviors, ranging, on a 0-6 scale, from (0) exclusively heterosexual to (6) exclusively homosexual.
Sexual Behavior in the Human Male,
which, along with his subsequent
Sexual Behavior in the Human Female
(1952), presented some startling, never-before-heard statistics regarding homosexuality. According to Dr. Kinsey, 4 percent of the white males he interviewed for his study identified themselves as “exclusively” homosexual, while 3 to 8 percent of the unmarried white females (between the ages of 20 and 35) labeled themselves as “primarily” or “exclusively” homosexual.
6
Even more shocking were the high percentages of men (37 percent) and women (13 percent) who’d had an overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm.
7
On the basis of his data, Dr. Kinsey challenged the classification of homosexuality as a pathological behavior by conceiving human sexuality in terms of a continuum of behaviors, ranging, on a 0-6 scale, from (0) exclusively heterosexual to (6) exclusively homosexual.
Kinsey’s findings sent shock waves not only through the medical community, but through all of heterosexual America. In the decades to follow, his controversial study would be refuted and supported, as researchers intensified their investigation into the etiology of homosexuality and, in some instances, even proposed possible cures. Although Kinsey and others offered evidence that homosexuality was not an illness and many homosexuals were, in fact, well-adjusted, the American Psychiatric Association included homosexuality on its official list of mental disorders in 1952, where it would remain for the next twenty years.
8
8
“LET’S TALK ABOUT HOMOS!”
When the subject of homosexuality was first discussed on the still relatively new invention of television, it was in a medical context. In the mid-1950s, locally produced talk shows were the first programs to introduce the taboo subject into America’s living rooms. The forerunners of
Donahue
and
Oprah,
early TV talk shows featured a panel of “experts,” usually engaged in a round-table discussion on a specific topic or issue that was facilitated by a host/moderator.
Donahue
and
Oprah,
early TV talk shows featured a panel of “experts,” usually engaged in a round-table discussion on a specific topic or issue that was facilitated by a host/moderator.
In response to the increased visibility of homosexuals in the United States, homosexuality was initially discussed as a social problem. Panelists debated if and how the homosexual poses a threat to American society and, in the process, answered the many questions supposedly on every American’s mind:
What makes someone
a
homosexual? Can he/she be cured? Is homosexuality immoral? Should it
[
sodomy
]
be legal?
The panel typically consisted of a legal expert, a clergyman, and a member of the medical community, often a psychiatrist, psychologist, or physician.
What makes someone
a
homosexual? Can he/she be cured? Is homosexuality immoral? Should it
[
sodomy
]
be legal?
The panel typically consisted of a legal expert, a clergyman, and a member of the medical community, often a psychiatrist, psychologist, or physician.
These early broadcasts most likely had both positive and negative effects on the public’s attitudes. Without question, both TV and radio talk shows brought a complex and taboo issue, previously limited to closed-door discussions, into the public arena. However, the designation of homosexuality as a
social problem
(a term consistently appearing in program titles), combined with the bias of certain experts, may, in some instances, have done more to strengthen than to alleviate the public’s growing fear. Therefore, homosexuality, as with any form of sexuality deviating from the so-called “norm” of consensual heterosexuality, became a prime target for exploitation and sensationalism by the media.
social problem
(a term consistently appearing in program titles), combined with the bias of certain experts, may, in some instances, have done more to strengthen than to alleviate the public’s growing fear. Therefore, homosexuality, as with any form of sexuality deviating from the so-called “norm” of consensual heterosexuality, became a prime target for exploitation and sensationalism by the media.
One of the earliest discussions of homosexuality on television was an April 1954 installment of the Los Angeles-based talk show
Confidential File,
entitled “Homosexuals and the Problem They Present.” Host Paul Coates, a tabloid columnist for the
Los Angeles Daily Mirror,
explained at the onset that his goal was to bring “the
problem
out in the open,” and not to offer any immediate solutions. After interviews with a psychiatrist and a police officer, who shed some light on the social aspects of homosexuality, Coates offered his viewers a never-before-seen glimpse into the lives of homosexuals living in Los Angeles. Viewers hoping to see Sodom and Gomorrah were probably disappointed by the footage of a Mattachine Society meeting, which showed men and women talking, drinking coffee, and eating cookies in someone’s living room.
9
Perhaps more revealing was a peek inside an actual gay bar, eloquently referred to in
Daily Variety
as a place where “sex deviates were known to hang out.”
10
Coates himself supplied an added shock by holding a male physique magazine up to the camera (but not
too
close) as an example of a publication catering to male homosexual readers.
Confidential File,
entitled “Homosexuals and the Problem They Present.” Host Paul Coates, a tabloid columnist for the
Los Angeles Daily Mirror,
explained at the onset that his goal was to bring “the
problem
out in the open,” and not to offer any immediate solutions. After interviews with a psychiatrist and a police officer, who shed some light on the social aspects of homosexuality, Coates offered his viewers a never-before-seen glimpse into the lives of homosexuals living in Los Angeles. Viewers hoping to see Sodom and Gomorrah were probably disappointed by the footage of a Mattachine Society meeting, which showed men and women talking, drinking coffee, and eating cookies in someone’s living room.
9
Perhaps more revealing was a peek inside an actual gay bar, eloquently referred to in
Daily Variety
as a place where “sex deviates were known to hang out.”
10
Coates himself supplied an added shock by holding a male physique magazine up to the camera (but not
too
close) as an example of a publication catering to male homosexual readers.
Daily Variety
not only commended Coates for treating the issue with “taste and dignity,” but suggested the program “could serve as a model for television’s handling of touchy and important subjects.”
11
By simultaneously playing to the curiosity and fears of its audience,
Confidential File
did, in many ways, become the model for the television talk show’s approach to homosexuality. The sensationalistic titles alone, such as “Homosexuals Who Stalk and Molest Children”
(Confidential
File, 1955) and “Are Homosexuals Criminal?” (WTVS-TV, Detroit, 1958) certainly did their part in perpetuating negative stereotypes. The issues addressed on these programs became more specific over time, yet their primary concern remained the effects of the increased visibility of homosexuals on society, particularly on children.
not only commended Coates for treating the issue with “taste and dignity,” but suggested the program “could serve as a model for television’s handling of touchy and important subjects.”
11
By simultaneously playing to the curiosity and fears of its audience,
Confidential File
did, in many ways, become the model for the television talk show’s approach to homosexuality. The sensationalistic titles alone, such as “Homosexuals Who Stalk and Molest Children”
(Confidential
File, 1955) and “Are Homosexuals Criminal?” (WTVS-TV, Detroit, 1958) certainly did their part in perpetuating negative stereotypes. The issues addressed on these programs became more specific over time, yet their primary concern remained the effects of the increased visibility of homosexuals on society, particularly on children.
The danger homosexuals posed to children was addressed by the New York-based talk show
Open Mind,
which devoted three shows to homosexuality during its 1956-1957 season. The first, an “Introduction to the Problem of Homosexuality,” featured a debate over whether homosexuality is a crime to be punished or a problem to be treated. Attorney Florence Kelley, representing the Legal Aid Society, suggested homosexuality could be legalized if the medical community could guarantee the successful rehabilitation of the homosexual child molester. Psychologist Dr. Robert Laidlaw explained there are several factors which cause homosexuality (environmental, psychological, and predisposition to homosexuality) and emphasized how a homosexual’s tendency to suffer from neurosis or psychosis is primarily a product of society’s negative attitudes. In the end, the panelists agreed a well-conditioned upbringing in a good environment with two parents serving as positive heterosexual role models was important to insure a child would grow up straight as an arrow.
12
Open Mind,
which devoted three shows to homosexuality during its 1956-1957 season. The first, an “Introduction to the Problem of Homosexuality,” featured a debate over whether homosexuality is a crime to be punished or a problem to be treated. Attorney Florence Kelley, representing the Legal Aid Society, suggested homosexuality could be legalized if the medical community could guarantee the successful rehabilitation of the homosexual child molester. Psychologist Dr. Robert Laidlaw explained there are several factors which cause homosexuality (environmental, psychological, and predisposition to homosexuality) and emphasized how a homosexual’s tendency to suffer from neurosis or psychosis is primarily a product of society’s negative attitudes. In the end, the panelists agreed a well-conditioned upbringing in a good environment with two parents serving as positive heterosexual role models was important to insure a child would grow up straight as an arrow.
12
The second installment, entitled “Homosexuality: A Psychological Approach,” examined how a male child’s relationship with one or both of his parents affects the formation of his sexual identity. A psychoanalyst and a pediatrician addressed the role of genetics (is homosexuality inborn?); the effects of a dominant and/or passive mother or father; the overall quality of one’s family life; and the danger posed by the adult male homosexual seducer. One doctor went so far as to suggest that a father could divert his son’s feminine tendencies by taking him to a baseball game. Rounding out the series was “Male and Female in American Culture,” which consisted of a discussion between anthropologist Margaret Mead and
New York Post
columnist Max Lerner about how society institutionalizes gender identity through clothes, language, and stereotypes.
New York Post
columnist Max Lerner about how society institutionalizes gender identity through clothes, language, and stereotypes.
While the conflicting opinions expressed by medical professionals and other “experts” may have added to the confusion of some viewers, talk shows did allow actual, real-live gay men and lesbians to speak on their own behalf. Yet, even a self-identified homosexual appearing on television in the 1950s needed to take certain precautions because he/she risked losing his/her job, housing, family, and friends. The 1954 “Problem” episode of
Confidential File
included a conversation with the secretary of the Mattachine Society, who, appearing under the pseudonym Curtis White, had his face obscured by a black rectangle over the screen. White scored some points by characterizing himself as a “well-adjusted” homosexual and by challenging popular misconceptions about gay men. He knew he could lose his job by appearing on the program (in fact, he did), though his participation did not go unrecognized. The gay journal
One
devoted a full-page ad in their next issue commending him for his exemplary courage.
13
Confidential File
included a conversation with the secretary of the Mattachine Society, who, appearing under the pseudonym Curtis White, had his face obscured by a black rectangle over the screen. White scored some points by characterizing himself as a “well-adjusted” homosexual and by challenging popular misconceptions about gay men. He knew he could lose his job by appearing on the program (in fact, he did), though his participation did not go unrecognized. The gay journal
One
devoted a full-page ad in their next issue commending him for his exemplary courage.
13
At first, the discussion of homosexuality was limited to prime time or late night talk shows, but the subject made its way to daytime television. On the New York-based talk show
Showcase,
host Fannie Hurst (author of
Imitation of Life)
addressed the problems of the male homosexual in a reportedly well-rounded discussion which touched on a variety of issues (homosexuals as a recognizable minority, laws against homosexuality, possible cures, etc.). The panel included an officer of the New York chapter of the Mattachine Society, Gonzalo Segura, Jr., who, like Curtis White, concealed his identity, appearing with a hood over his head.
14
The Mattachines considered the show “a major breakthrough in public education” and publicly thanked the show’s producers and participants “for the courage to pioneer in the task of public enlightenment on a too-often-beclouded subject.”
15
Showcase,
host Fannie Hurst (author of
Imitation of Life)
addressed the problems of the male homosexual in a reportedly well-rounded discussion which touched on a variety of issues (homosexuals as a recognizable minority, laws against homosexuality, possible cures, etc.). The panel included an officer of the New York chapter of the Mattachine Society, Gonzalo Segura, Jr., who, like Curtis White, concealed his identity, appearing with a hood over his head.
14
The Mattachines considered the show “a major breakthrough in public education” and publicly thanked the show’s producers and participants “for the courage to pioneer in the task of public enlightenment on a too-often-beclouded subject.”
15
Another important milestone in the early discussion of homosexuality on television is the September 11, 1961 premiere of
The Rejected,
the first made-for-TV documentary on male homosexuality. Produced by San Francisco public television station KQED-TV,
The Rejected
offered the most comprehensive exploration of the subject to date. In his proposal for the hour-long film, under the working title
The Gay Ones,
writer John W Reavis explained the documentary’s central goal:
The Rejected,
the first made-for-TV documentary on male homosexuality. Produced by San Francisco public television station KQED-TV,
The Rejected
offered the most comprehensive exploration of the subject to date. In his proposal for the hour-long film, under the working title
The Gay Ones,
writer John W Reavis explained the documentary’s central goal:
The object of the program will be to present as objective an analysis of the subject as possible, without being overly clinical. The questions will be basic ones: who are the gay ones, how did they become gay, how do they live in a heterosexual society, what treatment is there by medicine or psychotherapy, how are they treated by society, and how would they like to be treated?
16
16
Utilizing the talk show-style format, Reavis and director Richard Christian broke the subject down into subtopics. Each segment featured an expert or experts discussing homosexuality from a specific perspective (medical, anthropological, social, legal, etc.). The program’s tone was established by an introduction by KQED manager James Day, who read this statement on behalf of Stanley Mosk, the Attorney General of the State of California:
With all the revulsion that some people feel toward homosexuality, it cannot be dismissed by simply ignoring its presence. It is a subject that deserves discussion. We might just as well refuse to discuss alcoholism or narcotics addiction as to refuse to discuss this subject. It cannot be swept under the rug. It will not just go away...
17
17
Equating homosexuality with other “social ills” (like alcoholism and drug abuse) was common in the 1950s and 1960s and no doubt provided a rationale for devoting an entire hour of public television to the topic. Although some of the negative myths of the period were reinforced,
The Rejected
was the most comprehensive and progressive television program to date.
The Rejected
was the most comprehensive and progressive television program to date.
The Rejected
begins with an examination of homosexuality from both a cultural and a medical perspective. By means of an overview of the positive role homosexuality played in Ancient Greece and in Native American cultures, Margaret Mead demonstrated how it is society that stigmatizes homosexual behavior. Mead is followed by Psychiatrist Karl M. Bowman, former director of the Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute, who used the Kinsey Scale to explain why homosexuality is not a mental illness. Dr. Bowman expressed his skepticism about treating homosexuals as well as his support for legalization.
begins with an examination of homosexuality from both a cultural and a medical perspective. By means of an overview of the positive role homosexuality played in Ancient Greece and in Native American cultures, Margaret Mead demonstrated how it is society that stigmatizes homosexual behavior. Mead is followed by Psychiatrist Karl M. Bowman, former director of the Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute, who used the Kinsey Scale to explain why homosexuality is not a mental illness. Dr. Bowman expressed his skepticism about treating homosexuals as well as his support for legalization.
Advertisement for
The Rejected
from the September 1961 issue of the
Mattachine Review,
a monthly publication from The Mattachine Society. (Art:
Mattachine Review
/KQED-TV)
The Rejected
from the September 1961 issue of the
Mattachine Review,
a monthly publication from The Mattachine Society. (Art:
Mattachine Review
/KQED-TV)
Providing the gay male perspective were representatives from the San Francisco chapter of the Mattachine Society, who concealed neither their names nor identities.
Mattachine Review
editor Harold Call explained how one of the major goals of the Mattachines was “to dispel part of this stereotyped picture” through “education, research, and social work...we are calling for a change of law because we know the number of homosexuals is large.” Call also emphasized the Society’s belief that the acceptance of male homosexuality is contingent on the male homosexual’s ability to assimilate into straight society. “By and large, if these laws were changed, we might find that the homosexual is no different from anyone else,” Call explained, “except perhaps in his choices of an object of his love.”
Mattachine Review
editor Harold Call explained how one of the major goals of the Mattachines was “to dispel part of this stereotyped picture” through “education, research, and social work...we are calling for a change of law because we know the number of homosexuals is large.” Call also emphasized the Society’s belief that the acceptance of male homosexuality is contingent on the male homosexual’s ability to assimilate into straight society. “By and large, if these laws were changed, we might find that the homosexual is no different from anyone else,” Call explained, “except perhaps in his choices of an object of his love.”
The Rejected
received a generally positive response from the press.
Daily Variety
praised the documentary for dealing with the subject in a “matter-of-fact down-the-middle manner, covering it quite thoroughly and, for the most part, interestingly.”
18
Terrence O’Flaherty of the
San Francisco Chronicle
commended KQED for their courage in tackling “the most taboo of all subjects — homosexuality, the permanent underground.”
19
received a generally positive response from the press.
Daily Variety
praised the documentary for dealing with the subject in a “matter-of-fact down-the-middle manner, covering it quite thoroughly and, for the most part, interestingly.”
18
Terrence O’Flaherty of the
San Francisco Chronicle
commended KQED for their courage in tackling “the most taboo of all subjects — homosexuality, the permanent underground.”
19
Viewer response was also positive. 97 percent of the letters received by the station favored the program, with many viewers asking for more like it on the topic. Almost four hundred requests were received for a transcript of the program, which was subsequently published by Dorian Book Service of San Francisco.
20
The
Mattachine Review
also reprinted the positive newspaper reviews of the program, which subsequently aired in Tucson, Los Angeles, Portland, and New York.
21
20
The
Mattachine Review
also reprinted the positive newspaper reviews of the program, which subsequently aired in Tucson, Los Angeles, Portland, and New York.
21
Other books
Freaks in the City by Maree Anderson
The Delta by Tony Park
Priestess of the Fire Temple by Ellen Evert Hopman
Colby: September by Brandy Walker
Dirt Road by James Kelman
Siren Slave by Aurora Styles
Loving Venus (Sally-Ann Jones Sexy Romance) by Jones, Sally-Ann
The Cowboy's Reluctant Bride by Debra Cowan
Sexual Shift by Beverly Rae
Witches Protection Program by Michael Phillip Cash