I'm getting itchy-scratchy with the way Shell, Stu and Dan are being lumped together as "fence-sitters" (and it must've infiltrated the public consciousness, because it was on EFourum). It's a fair comment where Shell's concerned (her pathological fear of confrontation does indeed lead to prong-perching) and possibly Stuart too (although I suspect it's more that he's too young/intellectually paralysed to have strongly polarised opinions) - but Dan? I don't think Dan's been duplicitiously "nice" to anyone. Fair, perhaps, or reasonable (arguably too reasonable - I keep hoping he'll snap and swiftly dissect Jayboy with his blunt little (big) tool), but I don't think he's a panderer.
One thing that frustrates me even more is the apparent acceptability (within the Big Brother house/demographic) of a token poof, but not of a more generalised queerness. Looking at house sexualities longitudinally, it's notable that the early polysexual promise (in which, IMHO, Jaylord showed signs of Selfawarian blooming) has been steadily eroded/depleted until we're left with what is, essentially, a group of straight (or, at least, overwhelmingly straight-acting) people and a token gay man - doing the sort of things token gay men (who don't fit the Brian Dowling 'sexless jester' mould) do: combining paternal/maternal qualities as mediator; being simultaneously threatening(megacock)/non-threatening(not-male); being sexually unobtrusive. The wedding task will also, I suspect, act as a reminder that, within as outwith the house, it's a big ol' hetero world - but a suitably asexual homo can, if he's lucky (and not too threatening), play a supporting role.
Do we think this is entirely coincidental (out dyke then screamer being evicted early on; bi-guys retreating into "100% heterosexuality"), or is this the sexual equilibrium the housemates and Great British Public prefers/tolerates? |