Posted on 06/28/2009 9:50:57 AM PDT by Matt1975
'OLTL' Star Fired for Not Being 'Gay Friendly' Saturday, June 27, 2009 11:29 PM ET | By Scotty Gore -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Patricia Mauceri is fired by 'One Life to Live' for objecting to planned gay storyline (Photo: ABC) (SoapOperaNetwork.com) -- Patricia Mauceri, who has portrayed Carlotta Vega on "One Life to Live" since 1995, has been fired from the show for what is said to be her refusal to participate in the soap's upcoming gay storyline. Daytime Confidential broke the news of Mauceri's firing earlier this afternoon, claiming they were informed by a 'setside source' that the actress reportly flat-out refused to play a small role in the in gay-themed plot involving Oliver Fish (Scott Evans) and Kyle Lewis (Brett Claywell), which resulted in her dismissal by her "OLTL" employers. The show has subsequently hired another actress to take over the role.
Mauceri, who is also known to soap fans as Angie Perrini Frame on "Another World" (1977) and Andrea Andropolous on "As the World Turns" (1980), joined the cast of "One Life to Live" in 1995 as the widowed, overprotective Catholic mother of sons Cristian and Antonio Vega. In the beginning, Carlotta was employed by Dorian Cramer Lord as a maid, but managed to save up enough money over time to quit her job and reopen the family diner she had started years earlier with her late husband. She was bumped from contract to recurring status with the show in 1999, and has only been seen sporadically as Carlotta has been downgraded to a background character for much past decade. She was last seen in late March, during a farewell party for her son Antonio (Kamar de los Reyes), who left Llanview in search of the elusive mobster Carlo Hesser.
According to the source, "Carlotta was supposed to have a small role in the upcoming 'Kish' storyline. She objected to Carlotta's positive attitude about homosexuality, saying it conflicted with her personal beliefs."
Exactly how Carlotta will fit into the gay storyline remains to be seen, however, the show is alleged to be considering taking the plot in a different direction and going against the norm by making the Vega family matriarch a 'gay friendly Latina mom,' which apparently didn't well with the "One Life" vet.
Taking Mauceri's place as Carlotta will be Saundra Santiago, best known to "OLTL" fans for the role of Isabella Santi during the infamous summer of 2004. Outside of her previous stint in Llanview, Santiago has also appeared on "Guiding Light" as Carmen Santos, from 1999-2002. In addition, the former "Miami Vice" star took her character of Det. Gina Navarro Calabrese to Salem for an episode of "Days of Our Lives" in the mid-1980s. More recently, the actress appeared Jean Cusamano on HBO's "The Sopranos."
Santiago's first tape date was last Friday. Look for her to appear on-screen as Carlotta sometime in late July or early August. The role is expected to remain recurring.
Mauceri becomes the second soap star in recent weeks to have a falling out with the powers that be over planned controversial homosexual storylines. Just last month, Chris Engen quit the CBS daytime drama "The Young and the Restless" after learning that his character would become a possible love interest for another male character on the show, and that the two would soon be sharing an on camera kiss.
Actors need to get together and start a new Hollywood. The public would most likely support them and wash out the communists. Where’s McCarthy when you need him?
Stop hijacking threads.
I live in Hollywood and know some GOP members who are keeping their heads low in the biz. This is what they are up against and it is not easy to just say “let’s make our...” It’s better to screw the powers that be in a subtle manner like a SAG writer I know who had to insert “Atlas Shrug” phrases that manage to get on air for his TV series.
By the end of the Reign Of Obama The First we will be entirely ruled by racist blacks, militant Latinos and queers.
Whites and straights won’t be welcome in colleges and most professions. Those with jobs will be employed only in the less desireable jobs.
Don’t expect our new rulers to make attempts to be even-handed and non-discriminatory towards us as we have toward them.
They can get Perez Hilton to take her place. No big loss here. Anyone who watches that garbage becomes trash themselves.
At what point does this become discrimination?
I’m sure to get flamed for this, but actors and actresses sign a contract to play roles that are written for them. Soaps often have their characters doing unwholesome things - will she refuse to portray her character when there is adultery? Drugs? If an abortion is involved?
Many actors and actresses play parts where the character’s actions “conflict with their personal beliefs.” Otherwise no one would play Hitler in WW II movies, no one would play the murderer in a mystery, no one would have played the pharaoh in “The 10 Commandments.”
Get real - she signed on to an acting job in a medium known for sleazy plot lines. If she didn’t want to participate in something that conflicted with her beliefs, soap operas are the wrong business for her. Her employers may have terrible taste in plots, but it’s their right to fire an employee who won’t fulfill the terms of her contract.
You always have the right to say no.
In some cases it may cost you, depending upon the way your contract is written, but if your job requires you to do something you aren’t proud of, or if something that didn’t bother you yesterday starts to bother you morally, then at some point you have to say so, and if that costs you your job, so be it. You may be fired or you may have to resign, but so be it.
That can happen in any walk of life, construction, law, cooking at your local diner. As long as what you are asked to do in return for your paycheck is honorable by your lights, then no problem. The day they ask you to do something that crosses some red-line for you, you have to speak up even if it means you’ll never cook for Denny’s again.
Was that “Mad Men?”
I cant say on the open forum. DK and DU trolls might be lurking..
I’m a fierce warrior against the homo-agenda, but this story is hypocritical. Adultery and fornication abound in soaps - do you think she would have retained her job if she had refused to take part in any story line that portrayed these vices?
But this does go to show the inroads the homo-agenda is making in all areas of entertainment.
I think people are reacting against the hypocricy of the left. The leftists in Hollywood act like McCarthy was worse than Hitler and yet they themselves make blacklists and do so with an air of moral superiority. Also, people are tired of every other T.V. show having a gay storyline. Everything is disporportionally gay this, gay that as if gays were 50% of the population. No one is shocked by double standards. But people are tired of double standards even as they know that is what the system is and nothing will ever change it.
What, exactly, are her beliefs?
She's ok with the adultery, murder, backstabbing, gossip, sex outside of marriage, theft, alcohol and drug abuse portrayed on soap operas, but not gay people?
She'd like to pick and choose which sins she plays a part in glorifying.
Interesting.
I agree that that movies and TV are disproportionally showing “gay material,” possibly because it’s a new area for them. I don’t watch soap operas - if none of us watch shows we find objectionable, they won’t make money on it and they will stop showing it. I’m sure the soaps monitor viewership carefully - vote with your remote and encourage anyone you know who does watch soap operas to do the same.
Whites and straights won’t be welcome in colleges and most professions. Those with jobs will be employed only in the less desireable jobs.
Don’t expect our new rulers to make attempts to be even-handed and non-discriminatory towards us as we have toward them.
They have a problem though.
A lot of the things they complain about regarding those of West European extraction have a grain of truth. (Colonialism, imperialism, subjugation, the way they treat those who are not of West European extraction, etc.)
The problem they have is that if they tick us off enough, we might do it all over again.
She wasn't standing up for *her* beliefs. She was standing up for her character's beliefs. Her objection is that it doesn't make any sense for her holier-than-thou character, Carlotta Vega, to not object to homosexuality. And she's right. I watch the show. Carlotta Vega is about the most boring prude to ever cross the daytime screen. She disapproves of *everything*. For her to not have a problem with gays is ludicrous. That's all the actress was pointing out. Her mistake was thinking that tiic give a damn about consistency.
The last T.V. I owned was an old set given to me - so old it did not even have a remote, LOL. I have done fine without a T.V. for two years. Can't say I miss it. I might eventually get something so I can play movies. I know there are some creative T.V. shows. But the advertisers and powers that be know that many people will just turn on the T.V. to any old thing - no matter how bad it is.
Of course. All the things you list may happen on the show, but her character is not required to approve of them.
They are asking her character to approve of something she doesn't approve of, so she has drawn the line and said no.
Where ever you choose to draw the line in your profession, there are going to be people who think you waited too long to object, or you're not a team player, or you were too quick to object, or because you didn't object before you have no right to object now.
In fact thats one of the most effective hammers they hold over people, the idea that since you are flawed you have no right to uphold moral values, or the idea that since you gave in on something else you have no right to object now. But it always happens that way; most people will hesitate before finally digging in their heals. And most people have mistakes in their own personal history. And especially if there is a price to be paid, most people will try to find a way to coexist for a while before finally saying, this is too much. No.
Probably it would be different if she was playing a villainess, but she evidently plays someone who is considered moral. So she didn't want to play a moral character approving of what she considers immoral. That was her red line.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.