Lesbian TV kiss is latest of many

The Sun ^ | January 18, 2003 | GIOVANNA IOZZI and SARA NATHAN

[MadIvan]

HERE is the latest lesbian TV kiss – and it is set to leave Friends fans gobsmacked.

Blonde Aussie stunner Melissa George, who plays Rachel and Ross’s new “hot nanny” Molly, embraces her girlfriend Tabitha in front of Joey, who quips: “This is my ultimate fantasy.”

But the scene — which will be shown on Channel 4 on March 21 — is not the first girl-on-girl action in Friends. In 2001 Rachel snogged an old college pal played by Winona Ryder.

In fact sometimes it seems it is difficult to turn the TV on without seeing two women snogging.

TV lawyer Ally McBeal had a 25- second clinch with rival Ling Woo.

Then last year in Sex And The City Carrie Bradshaw locked tongues with Dawn — played by singer Alanis Morissette.

And British TV has had its fair share of lesbian smooches too.

In 1994 Brookside’s Beth Jordache kissed nanny Margaret in the doorway of her home. Six years later Brookie was at it again when Lindsey Corkhill snogged neighbour Shelley.

In 2001, Emmerdale followed suit, when gay vet Zoe Tatekissed ex-hooker Charity Dingle after months of feuding.

Then in last year’s BBC2 Victorian drama Tipping The Velvet, Nan and Kitty snogged and enjoyed steamy romps in bed.

[MadIvan]

You tell me - what's the difference between supposedly "mainstream" entertainment and pornography these days?

Regards, Ivan

[MadIvan]

Bump!

[Support Free Republic]

There's no need to be mean spirited !
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[Terridan]

No difference... and that is why none of my family ever watch these shows... best wishes!

[savedbygrace]

You don't get arrested for watching TV?

(Just a guess. What do I win if I'm right?)

[Happygal]

You tell me - what's the difference between supposedly "mainstream" entertainment and pornography these days?

You have to pay to see Melissa George take her clothes off? ;-)

[Free_at_last_-2001]

Oh come on we must be tolerant- it's a TV program promoting the liberal agenda, and we must worship it - when Chandler wakes up with a young boy form the local school it will be funny - not shocking.. and ..and ..normal..really it will... they are our friends they would not lie or try to hurt us...honest...</ liberal rant>

[DoughtyOne]

For a while there, I watched some of the dating programs that pop up around 5:00 p.m. locally. There are about four or five of them now. Two things stand out with regard to these programs. Morals are nearly non-existant, and woman on woman kissing and fondeling are mentioned continually, shown not too infrequently on the programs themselves. One would just about think that here isn't a woman alive in our nation that doesn't fanticize about other women, after watching a few of these shows.

The woman on woman aspect of these shows is so priminant that it's rather obvious that this is being promoted to young kids in our nation. And if women can do it...

Through our education system and what passes for culture all too often, it seems as if oen day soon it will be taboo for heterosexuality to exist.

My wife and I watched an NBC repeat of a program about polygamy this evening. Wow how they damned the folks who participated in this. The core focus family did present some problems that needed to be addressed. What I found ununsual was the vitriol of those addressing this issue. In a nation that winks at just about any type of behavior between men/men women/women adults/children humans/animals, you name it, a man with multiple wives was regarded as the devil's spawn. The women were categorized as abused or brainwashed. There they were on camera with hubby in prison, defending their choices and lifestyles. Course it wasn't their fault. It was his.

I'm not necessarily defending polygamy. I just find it interesting that these man/women relationships although outside the norm, are much closer to the ideal that some of the other shenanigans smiled upon these days.

This nation has many indications of going to hell in a hand basket. Society winks at them and goes off on other things that you'd think would get a pass in this day and age.

[DoughtyOne]

Generally speaking MI, it's the dollar amount the movies raise, and if the actors are SAG members or not. That's my take on it. The stuff they pipe into my home these days would make a sailor blush. I guess I'm not qualified to comment on it, since I haven't watched, but the homosexual programs gross me out in general principles. I NEVER thought I'd see the day when this activity would be deemed so mainstream that it would be piped into everyone's home who has cable.

[MadIvan]

I think much of the reason why the "girl on girl" stuff is being put on television is that script writers simply aren't creative enough to come up with anything else to attract an audience. Similarly, the music industry has also become more "stripped". Sex sells, it's easy to exploit, and much simpler than doing anything new.

Regards, Ivan

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with you. Then there's also the mistaken idea that shows like Friends are ground-breaking. They want to be known as the first to do something. Well, this is Friends claim to fame. Twenty years from now we'll see them sitting around a table talking about the wonderful things they brought to the American public.

[MadIvan]

Friends is the most brain-dead programme in the history of television. You can get record audiences even these days, with stories of courage and decency - "Band of Brothers" for example, based on the Stephen Ambrose book. It was so good, I had to pick it up on DVD before leaving America.

But have the TV people woken up to this? Not really, no.

Regards, Ivan

[DoughtyOne]

As long as we're talking about this industry, I am shagrined to see what they put out for children these days. Every single movie has some filth in it somewhere along the way. 99.99% of the movie satisfies the kids, so why do they have to throw in the 0.01%?

[Lockbox]

I agree, it seems that the only reason the Media attacks the practice of polygamy is because of the Religion aspects. To the Media, it seems that you can have sex with any one or any think, but keep God out of the mix.

[dogbrain]

Yeah, ain't it wunnerful?

The first time I saw "The Shield" I thought it had some promise.
Then I saw 2 fags homosexuals (which is an "alternative lifestyle", entirely within the acceptable realm of social behavior for an advanced, progressive, modern, free society) sucking face.

Other than "Mail Call", there isn't much worth watching.

Until the "gay gene" is discovered, it's a choice.
End of story.

[cajungirl]

You do make a point that is interesting,,some things are fine to the liberals, others anathema. But somehow I think seeing two Lesbians or non-Lesbians or Lesbian dabblers kissing is not that shocking ,,it does exist and kissing is pretty benign given what we see daily on tv. But some dude marrying a passel of young women and getting all of them pregnant without benefit of legal marriage is not just illegal but creepy beyond any lesbian kiss to me. Somehow that is the obscentiy to me but I guess our levels of what offends us the most are different for some. I do not like others trying to brainwash me into holding their view. I wonder, why do we have to see any of it at all.

[drew]

BINGO! It's so offensive, and not for moral reasons but because it's so juvenile, like teenagers trying to shock mom and dad. It's like that movie The Hours. Hmmm, I can't think of anything original, so I'll put in a lesbian kiss. Then all the critics fawn all over it. Wow, what innovation! Puh-lease!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

You tell me - what's the difference between supposedly "mainstream" entertainment and pornography these days?

One of 'em isn't scrambled...

By the way, just to clarify, just what kind of kiss is a "snog?"

[tm22721]

How can the BBC channel show 'Wives and Daughters' then turn around and show this trash ??

The British are f@cked up.

BUMP