The Making of Me...

[fajrdrako]

I watched The Making of Me with maaseru this evening. That's the show in which John Barrowman sets out to learn why he is gay and what made him that way. He specifically hopes to show that the cause of homosexuality is genetic or prenatal.

With John Barrowman, we had a unique situation: a celebrity who is gay, and interested in such a study, and who lives in the spotlight; TV producers with the resources to make such a show, which involved scenes in Cambridge, Chicago, London, California, and various other far-flung locations; and the cooperation of experts in orientation research in top universities in both the UK and the US.

Of course there are limitations on what the answers will be: nobody has definitive answers yet. But this show was far more interesting than I thought it would be. It'll have you staring at your fingers, for sure.

Perhaps of necessity - and the desire to stay on topic - sexual orientation was presented as an either/or thing: you're gay or you're straight. It's an easy dichotomy, but being bisexual, I am well aware that it doesn't reflect reality. Orientation isn't necessarily so cut and dried. I'd have liked to see the word 'bisexual' used somewhere... But then, they can't cram every aspect of a huge subject into one short TV show. Barrowman isn't bisexual, so it's beside the point.

Favourite details:

• I love the way, as soon as he starts to talk to his parents, John immediate switches to his Scots accent.
  
  
• The scenes with Scott were great. Endearing. It was fun to see their house in (I believe) Cardiff - yes, I'm an incorrigible fangirl, hadn't you noticed? There's a wonderful scene where Scott goes to the airport with John. "Where are you going this time?" Scott asks. "Toronto? Chicago?"
  
  "You have a copy of my schedule," said John.
  
  "You think I read that?"
  
  ...Too bad we didn't get to see the dogs.
  
  
• The whole Barrowman family seems so nice. Good people. Good-hearted.
  
  
• I turn the map around when I'm trying to read it in transit, too. Seemed natural to me!
  
  
• John gets nervous before a concert? Who'd have guessed? And going by the evidence of this show - he's even more gorgeous than usual when nervous.
  
  
• I was a bit surprised how much he wanted to prove that gayness in innate. I would add that I don't believe there is any plausible alternative: all the evidence implies that sexual orientation, like personality, is with us from birth and before. And extremely complex. A matter of biochemistry. masseru mentioned that fear that if a certain gene or hormone can be shown to cause sexual orientation, then people will try to manipulate that to change their children.
  
  Alternately, I was reminded of a story I heard at a convention: How a speaker had talked eloquently how if we could prove that being gay was a matter of genetic biology, no one could be prejudiced against gays. A black man in the audience muttered: "Good luck with that."
  
  
• I most enjoyed the bits about childhood personality: male twins in the same environment who have diametrically different personalities - the one likes trucks and guns, the other likes dolls and teddy bears.
  
  
  
• There was a horrific bit about a man named Paul who had once gone to a mental hospital to be 'cured' of homosexuality. He suffered badly, was given drugs that made him horribly sick, and then was going to be given electroshock therapy. He refused, and left. Then some years later, met his psychiatrist again - at a gay bar.
  
  A story almost as awful was of an ex-gay man who had married and now had children. He said he did it to be a good Christian, and because he saw how his parents had suffered when he was gay. Had he really changed? No. But like a smoker can given up smoking, or a sweet-lover can give up chocolate, he'd given up homosexuality for the sake of others.
  
  
• John said that until 1980, homosexuality was illegal in Scotland. That's... shocking. Sometimes I forget how close the past is. But then... gays still can't marry in Scotland. And don't even get to have civil unions in most of the US.
  
  Funny world.

Comments

[laurab1.livejournal.com]

It was a great piece of TV, yes. And won its timeslot, too.

Dogs? The three John & Scott have lost were in the picture from the civil partnership which John had as wallpaper on his computer. We didn't see Charlie, their Cocker Spaniel, but CJ, the Jack Russell, was in John's arm, towards the end.

And that hug between John & Scott was the sweetest thing I've seen for ages :)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

And won its timeslot, too.

Quite rightly! I think it was a good show for everyone to see.

CJ, the Jack Russell, was in John's arm, towards the end.

And he is so very, very cute.

that hug between John & Scott was the sweetest thing I've seen for ages :)

They manage to be adorable together. In a very human sort of way.

[gaycrow.livejournal.com]

Good post ... I was going to make an entry in my own journal, but I didn't think many people on my flist would be interested. I did write a comment on the the barrowmanfans community entry though.

I found this whole programme fascinating ... not just for the John love, but for the actual processses he went through. Unfortunately, nothing absolutely conclusive, but enough evidence to prove there are biological differences.

I loved seeing Scott, and their conversation in the taxi was hilarious. Such an old married couple! And when John arrived home, he seemed more excited to see his dog! :D

Loved his parents ... they're such a sweet couple.

Loved John's giggling fit when he had to sit in the little paper-covered chair and look at erotic pictures.

The more serious moments were good as well. Interesting that John had a panic attack while undergoing the CAT scan, but was able to calm down and continue.

I could see John's frustration with the "converted" gay man. He changed because his parents were upset at his lifestyle, and because he felt it was harmful? He linked it in his mind to being as bad for him as smoking? I could see John boggling at that. John is nothing if not true to himself, which is one of the things I love about him.

Overall a very good piece of TV viewing. No wonder it rated its socks off.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Good post ...

Thank you! I'll have a look for your comment on barrowmanfans.

not just for the John love, but for the actual processses he went through.

Yes. It was really quite fascinating all the way - partly because he kept it interesting, partly because of his obvious caring about the subject, and partly because it went so many directions, all of them pertinent.

Such an old married couple!

Aren't they just! In the most adorable way.

Interesting that John had a panic attack while undergoing the CAT scan, but was able to calm down and continue.

Considering how much physical and artistic control he has, it's interesting that he has this phobia - and also the phobia about having his face touched.

Loved the scene where he was showing off his Barbie doll collection with such enthusiasm and pride! You could tell how he loved it.

I could see John's frustration with the "converted" gay man.

Yes. I felt the same frustration. Because he made choices I wouldn't make, I wanted to shout at him that he was wrong - but of course we all have to make our own life choices. I was also thinking how lucky John was to have parents who were happy with his sexuality and so sane and sensible.

John is nothing if not true to himself, which is one of the things I love about him.

I agree absolutely. The more I see him, the more I admire him.

[jackarono.livejournal.com]

I've had many MRIs (neurological disease) and it's pretty horrific without being the least painful. It's very loud. It's like having your head inside a steel trash can and Babe Ruth is hitting it with a baseball bat. You can't move for 90 minutes. My eyes always water, and the tear just itches all the way down, and then the salt trail itches, and you can't reach up and scrape it off...

And I didn't even have to look at porn while I was in there. Hey, maybe that would have made it more bearable?

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

... gays still can't marry in Scotland.

I suspect that a lot of Canucks (especially out West) would rather go back to those bad old days too. It's the kind of mind-set I particularly associate with neo-cons; yet, a lot of Westerners (especially those from Alberta) have it in abundance too.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I suspect that a lot of Canucks (especially out West) would rather go back to those bad old days too.

Hopefully it won't happen. With any luck, more people will see TV shows like this one and realize that gay people aren't different from straight people and shouldn't be treated as if they are.

John Barrowman is happy with the civil partnership deal.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

I am fascinated. ...More, later.

(However, at this point in my life and intellectual/emotional evolution, I have no understanding how people can still cling to a simplistic binary model of human sexuality/gender-identity. Alas!)

Still. How amazing that such a program exists. It did, of course, have to be John Barrowman who did it. I quote Madeleine Kahn's character from Blazing Saddles: What a nice guy.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I have no understanding how people can still cling to a simplistic binary model of human sexuality/gender-identity.

This from people who should, you'd think, know better. And who probably do know better, but wanted to make it snappy for television.

I am equally baffled by the equally binary causation factor that the look for: nature or nurture... As if it's necessarily the same in everyone, or the same degrees of causation in everyone. Or as if the answer makes a difference to the outcome.

It reminds me of those TV shows who ask something like: "Stonehenge, temple or calendar?" without questioning any of the other things it might have been. And without wondering if it couldn't have had more than one use.

But "The Making of Me" was extremely interesting and entertaining anyway. And yes, John Barrowman: what a nice guy.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

The research that starts out trying to determine which of two binary points has the more influence... they are never going to find the real answers, and it always makes me wince to encounter such research. As it does for me to try to read anything Stephen Pinker writes, exploring the mysteries of how humans think: he is NT, and he comes at things as if everyone on the planet thinks in words, is visually-oriented, and so on... well, we aren't. I got through about a chapter and a half of one of his recent books and had to put it down because I'd found so many holes in his ground-level premise that I just couldn't see spending any more time trying to see what he eventually tried to come up with as answers. The entire thing seemed so clearly off-target ... well, hey, but I'm not at Harvard and I don't have letters after my name! (Well, I do, but not a lot of them.)

Back to John Barrowman, the great guy -- I expect that this program was done well, and had a lot of heart. I'll hope to see it someday!

[meret.livejournal.com]

Then some years later, met his psychiatrist again - at a gay bar.

This makes me nauseous and filled with homicidal rage at the same time.

John said that until 1980, homosexuality was illegal in Scotland.

It was illegal in many (I don't remember if it was illegal in the majority of them or not still) US states until a supreme court ruling in 2003.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

This makes me nauseous and filled with homicidal rage at the same time.

I did think - probably in denial about the awfulness of the whole thing - that perhaps he was just there for research. But no, that isn't what Paul was saying. It was so totally disgusting what they put him through, and it's clear that it scarred him for life - as it would anyone. Like those who undergo horrors in war, or torture in prison, or other such things - only this was supposed to be from people who were supposed to be helping him.

It was illegal in many ... US states until a supreme court ruling in 2003.

My mind boggles. I knew that. But it seems so improbable - so wrong - that I have trouble processing and remembering it.

[jackarono.livejournal.com]

"Sodomy" is still illegal in most US states.

I was a bit taken aback by how happy he was that it's innate. I mean, isn't it okay no matter what? Does sexual identity have to be like, I don't know, cystic fibrosis so we can say, "Oh, sweetie, it's not your fault"? We ought to think about it more like, athletic talent or eye color or something. I have a bit of a problem with the idea that a gay man is somehow a FLAWED man and a gay woman is a flawed woman.

Maybe I'm too wussy. But really, if we just say that it's all okay, do we have to be obsessed with how it came to be?

And yes, there really wasn't much discussion of what makes a bisexual. And if lesbians are different than gay men. In contemporary culture, I suspect that women are much more able to have more fluidity in their affections and expressions. No one would blink an eye to see two girls holding hands-- wouldn't be shocked or assume they're gay. And girls always wear "boy" clothes -- pants and t-shirts. I wonder if the greater flexibility makes it less important to differentiate "all gay" from "all straight" in women?

And I've always heard that thing about the ring finger being longer than the index being "male". Mine, like John's, is much longer than the index finger, and I'm a straight woman. Go figure. :) But then, he's a pretty "masculinized" gay man.

Interesting about how many big brothers a gay man has (I gather gay women don't much count... I mean, yes, even in this, sounds like the MALE is what gets studied most!).

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

"Sodomy" is still illegal in most US states.

But not a hanging crime, I would hope, as in the British Navy c. 1800.

"Sodomy" as a crime is an interesting word because it has been used legally to mean different things at different times. Sometimes it means one thing and sometimes another, depending what sexual sin the law wants to pinpoint as worthy of punishment. So how is it defined in the US today? I have heard (but I don't know if it's true) that it's been used to mean any kind of anal sex, especially penetration, even if between a man and a woman.

I was a bit taken aback by how happy he was that it's innate.

Yes, so was I.

I mean, isn't it okay no matter what?

Yes, isn't it? If some scientist told me tomorrow that I was bisexual by choice, I'd say, "Great, let's hear it for making choices in my life!" Moreover, if they told me I was straight - whatever their motives for saying it - I'd just laugh because it doesn't matter what descriptive words you use, I am as I am. (As John so eloquently sings.)

Does sexual identity have to be like, I don't know, cystic fibrosis so we can say, "Oh, sweetie, it's not your fault"?

Yeah. It's as if... being gay isn't entirely all right, if it's optional. I can see he might not want people to say "it's all your father's fault because he put you in a bikini once and that turned you" because then John would want to defend him - "no, no, he did nothing wrong." But if John realized he was gay at 8, and never regretted it, what does it matter if it's something he just decided and chose, or a pre-natal tendency, or a biological imperative?

We ought to think about it more like, athletic talent or eye color or something.

Yeah, that's the way I see it. Or like being someone who likes to read in contrast to someone who likes to play volleyball. It's just the way people are. *Not* comparable to a bad habit like smoking, or a disease, not even a problem.

And yes, there really wasn't much discussion of what makes a bisexual. And if lesbians are different than gay men.

I'd have liked to have heard that mentioned, even if just to say, "nobody knows". The only lesbian mentioned was the woman who liked a truck, and like smashing stuff, as a young kid. Which made me think, too: you could act like that, and still be straight. One of the most butch-appearing friends I've ever had is absolutely heterosexual, though a lot of people find that hard to believe when they meet her.

I wonder if the greater flexibility makes it less important to differentiate "all gay" from "all straight" in women?

Quite possibly. And I've heard - but have no idea whether it's true, or how it could be proven - that it's easier and more common for women to be bisexual, or sexually fluid, that they tend to be less caught up in orientation roles and less extreme in their orientational self-definitions. Which isn't to say that a lot of women aren't purely lesbian, but it's numerically less cut and dried for them.

part 2

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Oops, sorry, my comments there somehow escaped me.

Ring fingers: my ring fingers are both longer than my index fingers, but not by a huge amount, and on my right hand they are almost equal. What does that indicate? Something? Nothing?

he's a pretty "masculinized" gay man.

Except for his enthusiasm over those Barbie dolls!

I gather gay women don't much count... I mean, yes, even in this, sounds like the MALE is what gets studied most!

Either the male has been more studied - which is likely - or studies of women haven't indicated the same thing. Which is a different kind of interesting.

[jackarono.livejournal.com]

He sure has blue eyes.

Oh, yeah, it was fascinating, yada yada. But he really is sort of absurdly handsome!!!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Absurdly and amazingly good looking. What kind of fairy godmother did he luck into?

It was easy to stop listening, and just feast the eyes!

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

John said that until 1980, homosexuality was illegal in Scotland. That's... shocking. Sometimes I forget how close the past is. But then... gays still can't marry in Scotland.

No, but you can have a civil partnership: that's a UK-wide law.

One of the problems in Scotland has been that the Scottish Labour Party (for various historical reasons, such as the Conservatives identifying themselves as 'Conservative and Unionist Party) has been dominated excessively by people of Irish Catholic descent, especially in the most-densely populated Central Belt of the country. Whenever there were stirrings on various issues such as gay rights, abortion, & c, the Catholic Church (despite representing a minority of the population) would wheel out its bishops and have them make threatening noises, and some of the MPs would turn chicken.

However, one of the best moments in recent history was when the Scottish Parliament abolished Clause 2A (Scottish equivalent of Section 28) of the Local Government Act – the notorious one that had stifled debate by preventing the "promotion of homosexuality", before England and Wales did.

What concerns me at the moment is that SNP, now in the ascendancy, is also smarming around the Catholic Church, and is now generously funded by the bus-magnate, Brian Souter, who is a member of a small, fundamentalist Protestant church, a homophobe who bankrolled the campaign against the abolition of 2A.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

No, but you can have a civil partnership: that's a UK-wide law.

Yes, and I think that's great. But I like it being called a marriage, implying equality and symmetry for gay and for straight couples. Otherwise it looks like a double standard to me: one set of rules for one set of people, another set for the others.

I think in all countries where the controversy arises (and are there any where it doesn't?), the anti-gay prejudice is mostly spearheaded by the church. And that's sad because not all churches are anti-gay, and our nations are not supposed to be ruled by religious fiat, but there you have it.

There are people who still want to raise the debate in Canada, but I think enough people are happy with it, and the Church not powerful enough, to get same-sex marriage revoked.

Or so I hope.

Re Brian Souter: ouch. How awful. And he seems to be the kind of person who gravitates to significant politic roles.

[aresnz.livejournal.com]

Love everyone's comments and heartily agree. John is so open, down-to-earth. very affectionate, etc.etc.... gorgeous, wonderful, kind, loving, good hearted...Okay, I could go on. Love the scenes with Scott and especially love the hug John and Scott share upon his return home. Very good documentary and to me it did what John was hoping for. It blew away the competition in the ratings meaning people watched it. The word got out. To me though, in the end, what's really important is the love and relationship John and Scott have with one another; the love they share IS the most important aspect of everything.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

John is really amazing and I'm not just a besotted fan - well, of course, I am a besotted fan, but his words, actions, talents and commentaries always go so far beyond what I would expect. He was joking in the show that sometimes he thinks he doesn't have a brain, and it's clear he isn't an intellectual, but he is really extremely astute and insightful, and I do love his values.

I think seeing him and Scott just so normal together, as a couple, like any het couple only both male, that this did as much to defuse a sense of homophobia than any of the 'facts' presented by the scientists in the show.

[moonchildetoo.livejournal.com]

Hi. First, let me say how sorry I was to hear about your dad {hug}. My mom was born the same year as your dad. She is, thankfully, still with us.

I really hope we get to see this program in the US - probably on PBS, if we get to see it at all. I've heard about the program, and thought it was a great idea to have JB involved.

On a related topic, and though I'm sure you're not interested in yet another fandom ;-) - I don't know if you will have seen season two of Inspector Lewis yet - it hasn't aired in the US, only season 1 has - but if you want to see a fannish, slashy ep which deals with the topic of the anguish people go through tryiing not to be what they are, for other people - or trying to be something they're not, for other people - and denying one's nature, as well as the self-loathing and confusion - watch Life Born of Fire, from season 2 of Inspector Lewis. The ep is brilliant from a script and acting POV, fannishness aside, and as far as a slashy ep...my gawd!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the kind words about my father.

Chances are that "The Making of Me" will be shown in the US - I certainly think it should be.

I'm sure you're not interested in yet another fandom

Always interested! - even though I run out of time. And I haven't seen Inspector Lewis yet at all. I totally loved Morse back when it was on. "Life Born of Fire" - I'll make a point of finding it.

[auriaephiala.livejournal.com]

Did you notice, during the Barbie doll scene, how there was ALSO a big Scrabble box there? So does that correlate to gay men as well? I was amused.

I thought it was a well-done documentary, and that John provided a great anchor to get people thinking about issues that they might not otherwise deal with. It was unfortunate that it was presented as either gay or straight, and nothing in between, but perhaps that might have added a complexity they couldn't deal with in an hour.

It was interesting how emotionally important it was to John to show that he was born gay. Perhaps it's so that no one can try to change him? Or because of bad experiences in his past?

I think John can get away with being out better than Rupert Everett because John does more stage roles and musical comedy, where the leading men have been more frequently gay. But Hollywood lost out by not casting Everett in more leading-man roles: he was wonderful in them.

So having several older brothers correlates with being gay? So is a seventh son of a seventh son (who supposedly has magical and healing powers) also likely to be gay?

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Did you notice, during the Barbie doll scene, how there was ALSO a big Scrabble box there?

Yes, and I loved it. I wish I could play a game of Scrabble with John Barrowman!

So does that correlate to gay men as well?

It might be fun to find out. Some things don't, in ways you wouldn't expect. When I was in Legion of Super-Heroes fandom it became clear that though most male comic book fans are straight, LSH fans were very largely non-straight, and in the Legion apas, straights were very clearly in the minority. Which led to a joke that "reading Legion makes you gay" - patently not true, but there was some sort of rationale there. Some theorize that Legion (like X-Men) has more female fans than most superhero comics do, because it's team-based and largely about relationships. This might also appeal to male gay readers. (X-Men is also said to appeal to gay readers because the heroes are victims of prejudice and become outcasts, but that isn't true of the characters in Legion.)

It was unfortunate that it was presented as either gay or straight, and nothing in between, but perhaps that might have added a complexity they couldn't deal with in an hour.

I thought that too. And it is going to be a series - an irregular series, I think - though the other episodes won't feature John Barrowman, but they might go into other aspects of the subject.

It was interesting how emotionally important it was to John to show that he was born gay. Perhaps it's so that no one can try to change him?

Maybe. It doesn't seem like such an important point to me. Interesting, yes, but not of much personal significance.

Hollywood lost out by not casting Everett in more leading-man roles: he was wonderful in them.

I agree. And I don't think I've ever seen a performance by him that I haven't enjoyed.

So is a seventh son of a seventh son (who supposedly has magical and healing powers) also likely to be gay?

We'll have to do a study!