The Prime Time Closet: A History of Gays and Lesbians on TV (2 page)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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:

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:

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
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.

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.”

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

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