Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [torchwood] Re: Jack's sex life

Expand Messages
  • Elizabeth Holden
    I changed the subject line because this isn t about Gwen at this point. Stuart said, ... Depends on how you count. I would like to think that the issue is left
    Message 1 of 2 , May 11, 2007
      I changed the subject line because this isn't about
      Gwen at this point.

      Stuart said,

      > I think the statistics show Jack leaning towards
      > men..

      Depends on how you count. I would like to think that
      the issue is left open. Jack isn't counting heads by
      gender. "Quaint categories".

      > Only 1 former girlfriend (Small Worlds)

      I take it you don't count Rose? Besides, the word
      "only" here is loaded!

      > Obvious onscreen attraction to the real Captain Jack

      Oh, no doubt there. Our Jack was in love.

      > Affair with Ianto

      Yes.

      > Reference to a previous boyfriend - "one of a set of
      > twins - acrobats
      > actually. Damn, I must get round to writing that
      > book - illustrating it even!"

      Yes, but no indication of the gender of the other
      twin. No indication of the gender or genders of the
      executioners. The 'gorgeous' previous owner of the
      Chula ship was female.

      It also makes a difference here how you interpret
      Jack's attitude to Gwen, whether you see it as
      sexualized or not.

      Moreover, we have presumably only a very small
      sampling of Jack's sex life. What was it he said in
      "Day One" about his long list of previous sexual
      liaisons - ? Can't argue statistics when you have
      only a fraction of the whole to look at.

      Looked at another way... I think the writers of both
      "Doctor Who" and "Torchwood" are working very, very
      hard to make it clear that Jack doesn't abuse or
      misuse women or treat them shabbily. So if we should
      get his casually lascivious tales of simultaneous sex
      with two women, it might well be interpreted by
      viewers as sexist (or even callous) in a way it
      doesn't if all three can be assumed to be male. If he
      talks casually about sex with "two executioners" or
      "twins, at least one of them male", it sounds less
      like something out of sexploitation porn and much more
      like something of equal consensuality/status.
      Undestand that I'm not saying it *would* be that way
      or should be that way, just that they're being very
      careful about how these lines are written. And that
      it has nothing to do with orientation and a lot to do
      with presentation of the character.

      As pointed out, they are happy to be sexually explicit
      in het situations, but much, much less so with
      same-sex relationships. They're showing a lot of care
      in what they are doing here.

      I've often thought of this as the bisexual paradox:
      have a same-sex partner and people think you're gay;
      have a different-sex partner and they think you're
      het; but you really haven't changed at all.

      namaste,
      Elizabeth
    • psionycx
      It pays to remember that actors, even very good ones, still often let a little of the own personalities leak into the characters they play and John Barrowman
      Message 2 of 2 , May 11, 2007
        It pays to remember that actors, even very good ones, still often let
        a little of the own personalities "leak" into the characters they
        play and John Barrowman *is* gay. While he certainly does a lot of
        roles opposite women there's no question that on a personal level he
        may let a little of himself show in Captain Jack. I've noticed that
        in real life John is a lot like Jack in that he often muses aloud
        about matters sexual. I also think that it's funny because John is
        mostly talk, since he's actually married (civil partned, whatever)
        and claims his relationship is not an "open" one.

        Likewise, for all his talk, Jack so far hasn't really lived up to the
        hype about his wild sex life. No on-screen shagging of aliens so
        far. We're pretty sure he was doing Algy back in 1941, appears to be
        into something with Ianto now and obviously wanted to do something
        with Jack Harkness, also in 1941. How far things got with Estelle
        given her youth and mores in the 1940's is unclear. Jack certainly
        flirts a lot, but so far he hasn't lived up to his repuation.

        No wonder he loves the 40's so much. That was when he really had his
        mojo on.

        But again, this could be actor effect. Fans have spent decades
        speculating about whether or not the Doctor and Romana had something
        going on based on the on-screen chemistry between Tom Baker and Lala
        Ward, who were in fact (briefly) a couple. Likewise, talking about
        men probably feels more "natural" to John Barrowman and requires
        less "acting" and so Jack may come across as more gay.

        I've always suspected it's harder to play bisexuals as opposed to
        either straight or gay because the actor's instinct is to favor their
        own orientation and if they are straight or gay they may lean that
        way in their portrayal. At least when you're playing one of the
        extreme orientations they can lock the role in more clearly in their
        mind.

        (Reposted to align with new thread)

        --- In torchwood@yahoogroups.com, Elizabeth Holden <azurite@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > I changed the subject line because this isn't about
        > Gwen at this point.
        >
        > Stuart said,
        >
        > > I think the statistics show Jack leaning towards
        > > men..
        >
        > Depends on how you count. I would like to think that
        > the issue is left open. Jack isn't counting heads by
        > gender. "Quaint categories".
        >
        > > Only 1 former girlfriend (Small Worlds)
        >
        > I take it you don't count Rose? Besides, the word
        > "only" here is loaded!
        >
        > > Obvious onscreen attraction to the real Captain Jack
        >
        > Oh, no doubt there. Our Jack was in love.
        >
        > > Affair with Ianto
        >
        > Yes.
        >
        > > Reference to a previous boyfriend - "one of a set of
        > > twins - acrobats
        > > actually. Damn, I must get round to writing that
        > > book - illustrating it even!"
        >
        > Yes, but no indication of the gender of the other
        > twin. No indication of the gender or genders of the
        > executioners. The 'gorgeous' previous owner of the
        > Chula ship was female.
        >
        > It also makes a difference here how you interpret
        > Jack's attitude to Gwen, whether you see it as
        > sexualized or not.
        >
        > Moreover, we have presumably only a very small
        > sampling of Jack's sex life. What was it he said in
        > "Day One" about his long list of previous sexual
        > liaisons - ? Can't argue statistics when you have
        > only a fraction of the whole to look at.
        >
        > Looked at another way... I think the writers of both
        > "Doctor Who" and "Torchwood" are working very, very
        > hard to make it clear that Jack doesn't abuse or
        > misuse women or treat them shabbily. So if we should
        > get his casually lascivious tales of simultaneous sex
        > with two women, it might well be interpreted by
        > viewers as sexist (or even callous) in a way it
        > doesn't if all three can be assumed to be male. If he
        > talks casually about sex with "two executioners" or
        > "twins, at least one of them male", it sounds less
        > like something out of sexploitation porn and much more
        > like something of equal consensuality/status.
        > Undestand that I'm not saying it *would* be that way
        > or should be that way, just that they're being very
        > careful about how these lines are written. And that
        > it has nothing to do with orientation and a lot to do
        > with presentation of the character.
        >
        > As pointed out, they are happy to be sexually explicit
        > in het situations, but much, much less so with
        > same-sex relationships. They're showing a lot of care
        > in what they are doing here.
        >
        > I've often thought of this as the bisexual paradox:
        > have a same-sex partner and people think you're gay;
        > have a different-sex partner and they think you're
        > het; but you really haven't changed at all.
        >
        > namaste,
        > Elizabeth
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.