![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
psocoptera"SOAP OPERAS OFFER STRAIGHT WOMEN A BETTER SHOW THAN SHOWTIME'S'QUEER AS FOLK'
Editor -- While Neva Chonin's comments in "Live! Rude! Girl" (Sept. 12) on the television series "Queer as Folk" were wickedly funny, I must take issue -- affectionately, of course -- with a point or two on women and gay sex. Even as a staunch supporter of parity between the sexes, I find it patently absurd to put straight women's interest in gay sex on a par with the obsession of straight men for girl-on-girl "action." Clearly the majority of women are not seriously aroused by scenes of sex between men. Female sexuality just doesn't work that way. Additionally, Chonin's high praise for the comeliness of the "QaF" cast has me wondering whether we're watching the same program. Judged by the pumped-up "looks-ist" standards of Hollywood, these guys are disappointing at best. In fact, it is the soap opera that fits the straight female libido. The soaps present an almost embarrassing abundance of male pulchritude, and they dish it up in the context of an indulgent kind of storytelling, swollen with intimate character development and "hetero-erotic" plotlines. How can "QaF" compete?
Paul Alley, San Francisco
What, do you think, was the goal of this letter? Does (Mr.) Paul Alley want to -- affectionately, of course -- enlighten the confused (Ms.) Chonin with his superior grasp of female sexuality, or does he seek to guide the female viewing audience, who may be misled by Chonin's review, on where their viewing (and other) interests really lie?
"As a straight man, I think soap opera guys are way hotter than those guys on QAF - but only 'cause I'm thinkin' about what chicks would like! Really! That's all!"
Editor -- While Neva Chonin's comments in "Live! Rude! Girl" (Sept. 12) on the television series "Queer as Folk" were wickedly funny, I must take issue -- affectionately, of course -- with a point or two on women and gay sex. Even as a staunch supporter of parity between the sexes, I find it patently absurd to put straight women's interest in gay sex on a par with the obsession of straight men for girl-on-girl "action." Clearly the majority of women are not seriously aroused by scenes of sex between men. Female sexuality just doesn't work that way. Additionally, Chonin's high praise for the comeliness of the "QaF" cast has me wondering whether we're watching the same program. Judged by the pumped-up "looks-ist" standards of Hollywood, these guys are disappointing at best. In fact, it is the soap opera that fits the straight female libido. The soaps present an almost embarrassing abundance of male pulchritude, and they dish it up in the context of an indulgent kind of storytelling, swollen with intimate character development and "hetero-erotic" plotlines. How can "QaF" compete?
Paul Alley, San Francisco
What, do you think, was the goal of this letter? Does (Mr.) Paul Alley want to -- affectionately, of course -- enlighten the confused (Ms.) Chonin with his superior grasp of female sexuality, or does he seek to guide the female viewing audience, who may be misled by Chonin's review, on where their viewing (and other) interests really lie?
"As a straight man, I think soap opera guys are way hotter than those guys on QAF - but only 'cause I'm thinkin' about what chicks would like! Really! That's all!"
