Gilligan’s Island and the Birth of America’s Homosexual “Bear” Scene
The power that television programs had on the public psyche in the late 1960s and early 1970s is often forgotten in this era of internet dominance. Those were violent and confusing times. Racial problems and urban riots, dangerous war protests and political conspiracies made many question their faith and their understanding of American democracy. Shows like Little House on the Prairie, Gunsmoke, the Waltons, the Streets of San Francisco and CHiPs put these issues into context. Most importantly, they reaffirmed the necessity of the traditional family. The three national networks embraced moral responsibility when it came to programming and the best shows benefited from their dedication with a longevity that would be unheard of today. In turn, this gave individual shows the ability to spread positive Christian messages to wide and devoted audiences.
Certainly there were exceptions to this conscientious approach, but even the comedies from this period (the Brady Bunch, Diff’rent Strokes and Happy Days come to mind) were based on an ethical family structure that did not contradict the teachings of Christianity. Yet one show quietly took a different tact. The seeds of dissent that it so recklessly planted would only come to fruition years later.
Gilligan’s Island appeared to many as nothing more than a madcap and improbable sitcom when it was first televised. Originally airing from 1964 to 1967, it gained a far greater following in reruns in the after school hours of the 1970s. It sketched the idyllic fantasy life of seven castaways on a remote tropical island. They were not bound by any family structure. As an alternative, it offered characters living in a commune-style setting with shared labor and close-quartered same-sex habitation. For its young male viewers, this was a welcome escape from the harsh realities percolating outside their homes. Instead of schoolwork and sports, many curious boys were led to daydream about bunking in huts and lying around sandy beaches on sunny afternoons.

The characters themselves undermined the strong masculine role models on other shows, with Gilligan in particular presenting the antithesis of the responsible and strong-willed hero. Captain Jonas Grumby, also known as “the Skipper,” was the bumbling pater familias of this socialist living space. His role in dominating Gilligan both in the bedroom and on the beach seethed with unnecessary undertones. The two vivacious females, Ginger and Mary Ann, shared their small home so intimately that any facile suggestion of heterosexual love with the male cast members went unrequited. Traditional marriage, even between Thurston and Lovey Howell, was never a major element of the plots. Rather Mr. Howell exhibited all the signs of an indulgent bon vivant, a debauched libertine who merely accompanied his female companion as a comedic foil in their various escapades. Lovey herself was an exaggerated feminine creation, primped in elaborate gowns and deeply covered in makeup. It would not be hard to see this flamboyant character as little more than a secret nod to the cross-dressing elements of the homosexual community of the time.
The true impact of this show came to the fore with the arrival of America’s homosexual “Bear” subculture in the ensuing years. So named because these are large men who exude that raw wilderness smell, bears are experienced sodomites who celebrate their hairiness, weight and ability to “rough it” in natural settings. They enjoy dressing up in a rugged style that mimics masculinity. Bears have become the butt of much jest in contemporary culture, but a clearheaded view of their lifestyle will show there is nothing humorous in their habits.
The Skipper is the idealized role model of today’s gay male bear. Authoritative in his burly frame, he exudes the musk of a man who has fully experienced the world’s salacious ports of call. From swarmy bars a stone’s throw from the docks to long nights cramped below decks with his brawny, bare-chested crew, the Skipper has the persona of a scruffy, briny and not particularly well-bathed man. As was popular in homosexual circles at the time, he dons the cap of a sailor. One is reminded of the gay rock band The Village People, also successful during this era, which featured an overly libidinous sailor who performed in full regalia to the delight of many homosexual fans. Taken altogether, this helped create the mythic image of the promiscuous seaman and spurred the issues of same-sex relations that still plague our naval forces to this day.

Gilligan, also know as the Skipper’s “Little Buddy,” would be classified as a “Cub” in gay vernacular. A cub is slight of frame and a bit dimwitted. He is submissive to his master, both intellectually and physically. In practice, he is the feminine homemaker and recipient of sodomy during erotic intercourse. Gilligan’s lithe, hairless body fits perfectly against the Skipper’s hairy barrel chest. His goofy antics give his master ample opportunity to take control, to keep this boy’s juvenile nature in check with harsh commands and brute force. Clearly, Gilligan played his role as “First Mate” to Skipper to a T. It is not surprising, then, to see that each episode of Gilligan’s Island concluded with these two men retiring to the hushed privacy of their conjugal hut, far from the eyes of normal society, fumbling against each other with curious intent as the studio lights fade, suggesting the darkest exile of human indecency where any sort of sweaty violation might follow. Yet the show always quickly cut away from this sensual wonderland with a saccharine soundtrack in a simplistic attempt to reassure its heterosexual viewers that nothing untoward was intended.
The creators of Gilligan’s Island appear to be complicit in this salacious subtext, which is unsurprising considering the long influence of homosexuals in Hollywood’s media industry. Russell Johnson, the actor who played the Professor (and per the show’s biography was also a “scoutmaster”), even had a son in real life who was a prominent AIDs activist at the time. The homosexual agenda of the series has not gone unnoticed by media experts. Historian Matt Crowley has even written that, “Gilligan sleeping above the Skipper allows for the ‘comedic device’ of Gilligan periodically falling down on top of Skipper. Falling onto Skipper’s ‘big bone.’ However, some claim that Gilligan should be depicted sleeping in the lower hammock, as he was obviously the ‘bottom’ in the relationship. The issue remains a bone of contention among analysts.” Homosexual message boards discuss this topic openly and often. It’s unclear whether the boys maturing at the time where led into the same-sex lifestyle by the show, or if they were already suffering from the affliction due to maternal missteps and the locker room enticements of older schoolmates. It is apparent, however, that Gilligan’s Island had an intractable influence on the creation of America’s contemporary homosexual bear “culture.”
The unfortunate result can be readily seen in the boys who spent their delicate years during this show’s run. They are now men in their 30s, 40s and 50s. Not coincidentally, this demographic overlaps with America’s homosexual bear population. Today, they still hold dear to this queer fantasia of a Gilligan’s Island-style lifestyle.

Gay groups regularly stage “Bear Cruises” and “Bear Weekends” where outrageous simulations of this Gilligan-Skipper-type intimacy are faithfully reenacted. It is not uncommon for bears to dream of getting “lost at sea” and ending up at tropical vacation spots. They prefer remote locales with reed-covered huts and sandy pathways rather than sophisticated resort hotels. Small rustic bungalows with little electricity excite them. From Costa Rica to Fire Island, from Brazil to Spain, these bears seek out seclusion for their sexual explorations. Such isolation from concerned neighbors is so crucial for their loudest and most brutal sexual acts. They will delight in locally produced fruit concoctions and “fresh from the sea” meals. They spend the days bronzing their luxuriant bodies and drinking inexpensive beers, steeling themselves for the barbarity of nightfall.
When darkness comes, these places become bestial, carnal paradises. These men will sneak off behind palm trees to unleash their wildest natures. Phalluses will be exposed with prideful beckonings. Windy shorelines below the starlight encourage like-minded vacationers to join the intense action. The murkiness allows for surprise sodomistic encounters. Animalistic roars cut through the noise of waves crashing. Broad leaves are plentiful to scrape clean the crusting remnants of a fruitful encounter, preparing the bear for the next cub who unwittingly wanders too close to his meaty paws. The bushes grow heavy with hormonal pungency. Some island man, muscled and brown from his days fighting the surf, may mistakenly stumble upon the scene. Sadly, orgies of international implications often follow. This activity may occur over several nights, until the bear is satisfied with his hunt. His seed prodigiously spread, he then retreats to hibernate in the warm confines of a big city until his next excursion to the fervid Gilliganesque islands of homosexual desire.
After a groundbreaking report on the TV show Glee was released on the internet last year, many Christian groups including the American Family Association condemned that series for its role in promoting the homosexual agenda to young children today. Clearly, looking back on older programs we can see the long-term effects that morally maladjusted media creations can have on our nation’s youth. For concerned Christians everywhere, Gilligan’s Island should be taken as one of the most notorious case studies of this type of danger. It is a vital lesson to hold dear as we battle the next generation of immoral programs so intent on slipping dangerous messages of perversion and unrepentant sodomy into our homes.

- Excited
- Fascinated
- Amused
- Bored
- Sad
- Angry





Who agrees with me that Mary Ann was the most annoying character on Gilligan? Ginger didn’t really bother me, but there was something obnoxious about Mary Ann with her Skipper doll (Barbie’s little sister) looks, giant head and constant smile.
[img]http://ny-image0.etsy.com/il_fullxfull.140655308.jpg[/img]
Praise or Condemn:
9
5
Claire, could you put down your dolls for a second and go in the other room? Adults are discussing important issues here.
Praise or Condemn:
11
14
So because it had accidental gay undertones, you think that it was terrible? You do realize that only perverts think like that, right? If you want to get right down to it, EVERY show that had the two lead characters of the same gender had homosexual undertones, and even the BIBLE would have them out the ass. How many times do men tell other men that they love them? It’s supposed to be in a brotherly way, but fuck, if you wanna be a total pervert (like what you just did) you could easily make the claim that all the dudes wanted to bone each other.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
49
4
In the first black and white photo above, the Skipper has camel toe and Gilligan is hugging a fish. This is an obvious heterosexual subliminal message. STOP TRYING TO INDOCTRINATE OUR GAYBIES.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
27
0
I noticed the camel toe as well. Not an attractive look.
Praise or Condemn:
7
0
Mr. Billings – you describe these Bear Weekends and Cruises in such great detail, one has to wonder if you’ve been there. Also, you should proofread your article more carefully.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35
2
Please list any spelling or grammatical errors you imagine to exist within this article. My guess is that you simply fail to understand sophisticated prose work when you read it.
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
30
Bullshit is not prose. You might want to look up the definition of ‘prose’ once in a while.
Praise or Condemn:
23
6
No one “quietly took a different tact” A different tack, certainly. Poor form in an article about sailors.
Praise or Condemn:
11
2
The homosexual bear scene came about because of the many gay “straight” acting men that were tired of the gay “nancy boy” stereotypes in and outside of the gay community.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30
1
“The homosexual bear scene came about because of the many gay “straight” acting men that were tired of the gay “nancy boy” stereotypes in and outside of the gay community.”
And now we have what are currently known as “bear-queens” taking or have already taken over the bear scene.
Used to be the bear scene was as described: chubby hairy guys au naturel, often blue collar and couldn’t name more than eight colors or three fabrics on a bet.
Now the “bear scene” is full of guys who can psychoanalyze you, decorate your house or whip together some leather pants but who couldn’t tell the business end of a vice grips to save their life.
So, we will have to start the bear scene over from scratch now and make it queen proof.
Praise or Condemn:
10
6
This is rather fascinating. I may have to write about the issue of “Queen Bears”. It sounds like a raunchy subject, but an important one.
Praise or Condemn:
10
6
Stevie’s lickin’ his lips ‘n gettin’ excited about crusin’ his local gay bar again for ‘research’.
Praise or Condemn:
26
2
I think this is an example of gayonaise, the mixing of two unblendables – straight and gay.
That being said, I do wish the fashion of wearing high heels with swim-wear was more prevalent. It makes the derrière more taut and posture so much improved than flip flops worn today. Vacuuming in heels and a sweet apron is great cardio!
Praise or Condemn:
14
2
Hence the “quotes” when I used the word “straight”. I just meant that not all gay men are feminine. Perhaps I should have used the word masculine instead of “straight”.
Praise or Condemn:
5
2
Pardon? I don’t think I replied to your ill thought out babble, nor did I request a curtain call of gay “hysterical” theatrics.
Praise or Condemn:
5
5
Gayonaise…is this a new trend???
Praise or Condemn:
5
0
I believe some would like to spread it on toasted buns and hoagies across the nation.
Thank goodness we have brave men, such as yourself, to lettuce see through the layers of this onion. Cheeses is the only way to salvation.
(Forgive me, Tyson, I need a snack)
Praise or Condemn:
11
0
DO you think it’s goes inside a sandwich ?
Praise or Condemn:
0
0
Clearly, the person who wrote this article has homosexual tendencies. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
Dude, this stuff doesn’t even cross the minds of straight guys.
Seriously!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42
2
This is not news to me. I have long detected the homoerotic undertones of the rough love between the Skipper and Gilligan. The violence of their relationship is not just “slap stick comedy”, but is also an accurate portrayal of the horrific physical abuse that occurs in all gay relationships.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7
52
I’ll bet that just thinking about their “rough love” makes you hard as a rock.
“The violence of their relationship is not just “slap stick comedy”, but is also an accurate portrayal of the horrific physical abuse that occurs in all gay relationships.”
Oh I see, so you think it’s okay for a husband to smack his wife for overcooking the roast and to rape her every night in order to get her pregnant, but some “rough love” between two consenting men just shows that gay relationships are depraved?
Praise or Condemn:
24
2
Excuse me!?!?! “the horrific physical abuse that occurs in all gay relationships”? You obviously don’t really know any gays, but you seem to know the stereotype quite well (hmm…), Gays are NO different from you. As we all know, “all heterosexual men heap horrific physical AND sexual abuse on women”. Do you like that statement? No? Why? Because it is NOT TRUE, just as your statement about “all gay(s)” is NOT TRUE. I know, I, like many of my friends, have lived in a loving, long-term monogamous, ROMANTIC, tender, loving relationship based on trust and respect. There is no abuse of any sort in our lives.
Praise or Condemn:
10
1
Mr billings, great job exposing this homogay brainwash conspiracy.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10
39
The only brainwashing I’ve seen in my life was done by fundamentalist churches and G.W. Bush’s idiotic reign. Do you really believe that we LGBT folk have nothing other to do but sit around and cook up conspiracies? I’m sorry to disappoint you, but we are too busy working to put food on the table for our families, paying our share of taxes, and ferrying our kids to school, sports, and church.
Praise or Condemn:
10
2
Your name is an oxymoron.
Praise or Condemn:
6
1
Hallelujah and pass the peas!
Praise or Condemn:
2
0
Now I would like you to explain to me precisely how the stories about Jesus and his 12 dress-wearing, male disciples DOES NOT contain homoerotic content.
Jesus’s one and only “commandment” was “Love one another as I have loved you.” You call yourself a Christian while spreading nothing but hatred and ignorance.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37
5
It’s interesting. Christian zealots like to muddle male comredery with homosexuality. Do christians believe that two males can have an emotional bond and it NOT be homosexual?
Im sorry, all this article does is reinforce age old stereotypes that don’t apply anymore.
Looking for all these subliminal messages in the media… I’d say YOU have latent homosexual tendencies! You should go get that checked out.
Praise or Condemn:
20
4
I can testify that as a young cub I looked forward to seeing The Skipper’s “Bulging crotch of doom” in tight white pants every show.
Praise or Condemn:
19
2
I am so thrilled that members of the homosexual bear population have come out to testify to the veracity of this article.
Praise or Condemn:
11
13
Mr. Billings, I do believe you can’t understand sarcasm.
Praise or Condemn:
19
3
Mr. Billings:
I believe you are serious. A serious idiot with all the intellectual capacity of a retarded South African Tsetse Fly and all the insight of a man with his head up the north end of a south bound mule. Of course, you will read these comments as undertones that I like bestiality. Unfortunately, that is not the case, but you will most likely fantasize about it as such.
PS. Try greasing the mules anus. It’ll help your entry and exits.
Praise or Condemn:
14
5
Then again, I’ve never met a adult children’s party clown who didn’t want a cream pie to the face either. Oooo clown fetish!
Praise or Condemn:
9
1
I thought the same thing…would never let some fundamentalist psycho-conspiracist children’s party clown NEAR my niece, my future children or even any other member of my family.
I truly don’t know if this article is serious (truly sad if it is…and no wonder the fundamentalist/exclusionary belief system is dying and on the way out – thank God) or one huge joke!!! (not a very good one actually…especially reading Stevie’s responses…makes me think he’s serious.)
Folks…study up on your John Shelby Spong…early Christians were Jews and patterned their fledgling religion with huge Jewish over and undertones. So much to be learned and so many idiots spreading misinformation and outright lies. Good thing God forgives all…
Cheers!
Praise or Condemn:
5
0
Would you prefer that Mary Ann and Gilligan lived in sin in their own hut? Oh, c’mon, your fantasies are running wild here. Real life has never worked according to your ideologies. Just admit you’re gay and get on with it! LOL.
Praise or Condemn:
11
2
The ‘brutal sex acts’ that produce ‘crusting remnants of gayonnaise’ would make baby Jesus weep in his crib.
Dr Billings, is this why Grizzly Adams was banished, for the love of bear ?? Ben, why hast thou forsaken me?
“A merry heart maketh a cheerful countenance: but by sorrow of the heart the spirit is broken.”
Proverbs (ch. XV, v. 13)
Praise or Condemn:
3
1
How absurd. Again I reinforces for me that religion is stupid and filled with hate mongering control freaks.
The author seems like he wishes he was on the bottom bunk. And is he doesn’t want his ass sued as well as plowed be needs to remove those pictures of people he has no authorization to be using. I know one of them personally, and will be forwarding this to him.
Praise or Condemn:
10
3
You’re a dingbat.
Praise or Condemn:
4
22
Clinton, you are an unpleasant person. Do your friends tell you this often? I find your disgusting attempt to attack my article and its contents entirely immature but rather representative of liberals today. You demand the right to shout from your soapbox and shout the most perverse things possible, but once someone else expresses an opinion you do not agree with, you try to use the legal system to shut them down calling their words “Hate Speech.” How sad and shameful. This nation was built on people having an open debate on the issues. You should be grateful this wonderful nation allows phobic like you to exist.
Praise or Condemn:
5
22
“I DUN LIEK YOU! YOU MADE FUN OF MY BUOTYFUL ERT WORK!”
You’re a child Stevie, just admit it. You call anything that you don’t agree with ‘hate speech’, regardless of the fact that you want to commit genocide and force people to conform to your exact ways.
Praise or Condemn:
14
1
Stevie…you should run for Prezudent. There’s lots of them Southern states looking fer a representative jus like Yew!
Praise or Condemn:
3
1
Clinton did not mention anything about hate speech. That’s your own martyr syndrome. He mentioned using photographs without permission.
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
Me thinks the man doth protest too much
Praise or Condemn:
17
1
I see you changed the photos. Give up and just quit using other peoples photos dipshit I know these people as well. Remove them immediately. Maybe use your own photos this time…
Praise or Condemn:
4
5
Now any “professional” journalist wouldn’t use other people’s property without their permission and they most CERTAINLY wouldn’t change an article once it has been posted. Again, I must quote one of your “members”. “What has been seen can not be unseen.”
Now, you were saying Stevie?
Praise or Condemn:
6
3
take the plug out of your cunt clinton and try to have a little fun, okay. uptight much?
Praise or Condemn:
5
3
And your point would be? Some religious self righteous prick is spouting hatred and backing it up using photos of people be has no rights to use. I don’t think any part of that requires having “fun”. Maybe focus on your own cunt, dear.
Praise or Condemn:
4
5
You don’t get satire, do you?
Praise or Condemn:
7
1
We need to organize a class action lawsuit to shut these guys down. This is so fucking offensive. I see they’ve also linked to websites they have absolutely no permission to link to. They can be brought to court for this. Fuck the Christians, I’m with you Clinton, fuck them hard. Their hosting service can be be sued for distributing offensive/obscene material that incites violence. Depending what state Stephen Billings is in, he could also be arrested for some of these actions. You’re completely on point here Clinton. We could take this thing far. The financial damages for this sort of activity can be huge. ORGANIZE CLINTON ORGANIZE!
Praise or Condemn:
6
2
Someone also needs to contact the Gilligans Island people.
Praise or Condemn:
4
1
Sir Billings contacted the production team and was granted permission.
Praise or Condemn:
3
1
It is not amazing or surprising that an article such as this can be written. American freedoms of speech and the press guarantee it. What is amazing that an article like this can be believed, and that there are people arguing back and forth and spewing profanities about it. The alleged gay subtext of “Gilligan’s Island” went right past my gaydar, as I suspect it did for many other LGBTQ individuals.
Praise or Condemn:
7
1
sometimes freedom of speech can be a real bad idea
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
This is the funniest thing I’ve read in a long, long time! Thanks for the comic relief!
The way he wrote so passionately, I got the image of him masturbating to his own fantasies of the show….
Praise or Condemn:
17
0
Dear Professor Billings:
Thank you for this thoughtful work. I always knew that there was something sinful about Gilligan’s Island, but I was never able to quite put my finger on it until now. I will study it more closely in future so that I can better understand and combat homo loving. I think it was important, however, to point a factual mistake in your otherwise brilliant and inspiring article. Gilligan is not a “cub” – a “cub” is like a mini-bear in training. Cubs are furry and beefy. Gilligan was a “twink”. I know this from my forays into the gay “lifestyle” to learn more about their abhorrent and sinful ways. I would request that you make appropriate changes to this post, as it is important that we properly identify each “species” of homo so that they can be better identified by innocent Christians. Praise Jesus for your good work. You are going to a very special place in heaven for your dutiful efforts. Also, I think it would be a good idea if you did a similar analysis (OMG – that has the word anal in it!) of Fantasy Island and Wonder Woman – clearly these were public nuisances as well. God Bless You!!
Praise or Condemn:
10
1
Oh my… this article had me laughing so hard I thought I was going to wet myself. What a load of absolutely nonsense. Gilligan is by no means a cub, and cubs are not slight of frame and intellectually inferior. And The Skipper is not the quintessential bear. Bears almost exclusively have FACIAL HAIR. As do cubs. This article is laughable… and as such highly entertaining. There is absolutely no truth it in whatsoever. Thanks for a great laugh.
Praise or Condemn:
16
0
Well i would agree that Gilligan is no cub, i wouldn’t call him a twink by any means since twink is most associated with younger thin hairless gays, he would in the context of this article if he and the Skipper (who is classified as a bear, but could also be called a Daddy or a Chub) do have a gay undertone relationship would be called more so a Chaser.IMO
Praise or Condemn:
2
0
Listen, I understand this is an important issue and maybe in future articles I will explore this further. From what I understand, the cub is the submissive one and clearly this comes into play during sodomy. I believe Twinks are more like “Club Ravers” who use glitter and wear little clothing. They are extremely promiscuous, though not necessarily prone to sodomy.
And JP, I wish you would not discriminate against the Skipper by calling him a “Chub”. He may have had weight issues due to health concerns, but that is thoroughly outside the issue at hand. Many former athletes and construction workers, etc. built up large, muscled bodies that they can’t maintain so expertly in their elder years. It’s the Skipper’s leering proximity and his constant touching of Gilligan that makes me worry about his role model status.
Praise or Condemn:
6
9
Mr. Billings it was not my intent to discriminate, a “Chub” is another terminology in the gay community. In fact i have some friends who categorize them self’s as “Chubs” . I am sorry to say but apparently u had a narrow or should i say have a narrow vision on this topic and like i stated need to put more research in before u post articles without all the facts and knowledge to defend ur position on this topic. I am by no means saying u do not have a right to speak ur mind in this manner, i am just hoping in future articles that u interview some actual gay men so u can better understand the culture u are trying to reference. Also i do have Bear/Cub friends and not all Cubs are submissive or even the receptive partner. i have seen every mix and match of Bear/Cub relationship, u categorizing them as such is being stereotypical as well as offensive or in ur words discriminative.
Praise or Condemn:
8
3
Thanks for the apology, JP. Some people have mocked me for my weight in the past and maybe I’m a bit sensitive! Live and learn, I say. As for my experience, next to Peter LaBarbera, I am often cited as one of Evangelical Christianity’s leading experts on homosexuality. Peter runs a fantastic group that is equally committed to exposing the gay agenda. Also, Lou Dobson and Rev. Bryan Fischer come to mind. Many Christians in America are truly concerned with what happens in the homosexual underground. Again, I appreciate your support.
Stephenson Billings
Investigative Journalist
Praise or Condemn:
1
6
Ok i am replying to my own post cause u Mr Billings posted a non-replyable post. And i wanted the readers not to think i agreed with you. Cause i do not support ur idea of a gay agenda, u want to know my agenda, and im gay so i guess it would be the gay agenda… here i go… To help take care of my mother suffering from cancer. TO be a great uncle to my nieces and nephews. To be honest and kinds and caring to all those around me. To understand those have differing views then my own but to never loss myself in the process. To be with the person i want to be with and live happily into the future. That is my PERSONAL gay agenda. Now write an article of that MR. Billings.
Praise or Condemn:
7
0
That’s all great JP, but what does it have to do with Gilligan? I am confused. Again, I do love you,
Stephenson
Praise or Condemn:
2
2
Having just read Stephenson Billings’ non-repliable post, I felt I had to jump in:
“next to Peter LaBarbera, I am often cited as one of Evangelical Christianity’s leading experts on homosexuality.”
Doesn’t that say it all about what’s wrong with America – particularly Evangelical Christian America??
In the real world, you become an expert by understanding what’s going on, by doing research, by talking to people and trying to understand their point of view, by thinking in an open way about new ideas and by challenging your own beliefs
Alternatively, in Evangelism, you become an ‘expert’ by spouting the most insane drivel whilst standing at the podium with the speaker set at highest volume, patting yourself on the back, whilst completely ignoring what you’re actually saying (you have to, if you actually listen, you KNOW it makes no sense!)
Billings doesn’t have a clue when someone is being sarcastic, and is so focussed on finding gay overtones in a show that he HAS to be a closeted or clueless gay male. As suggested by an earlier poster, straight males just didn’t read that much into the show!
Whilst you’re congratulating yourself, Mr ‘expert’, you may want to check the approval ratings of those responding to your drivel.
If you want to write an article worth reading, you might, instead, have done what this blogger did http://blogcritics.org/video/article/gilligans-island-an-empirical-study/
He clearly WATCHED the show!!! (Shock, horror, the gall of him!)
His main conclusion was the incredible dodginess of the fact that they couldn’t get off the island. That sounds a LOT more legitimate and evidence-supported than your spurious claims!
Praise or Condemn:
7
2
Stevie, if you actually did the research you claimed to have done, you would know what a ‘chub’ is. Not ‘chubby’, but ‘chub’. In the world of sexual terms, they are vastly different.
Oh, and I love this bit you posted to JP:
//As for my experience, next to Peter LaBarbera, I am often cited as one of Evangelical Christianity’s leading experts on homosexuality. //
By who? Your mother? You know NOTHING about ANYTHING! You don’t do one iota of actual research, and you go to sites filled with propaganda and misinformation, and claim that they’re legit, then you go and hog the ‘glory’ of the misinformation you found! How many times have you been proven wrong about subjects you try to talk about? Not one god-damn time. Hell, you can’t even get your religion right, so how the hell do you think you’re qualified to talk about the lives and hobbies of people, especially when you have a seething hatred for them already? You’re biased as hell, but you just completely ignore any good points, and either focus ONLY on the bad, or make up things! Then you go and blame liberals for everything wrong when you’re just as guilty of that crap, if not moreso, as they are (or as you claim)!
Praise or Condemn:
9
2
great article have you ever thought about writing gay romance novels…certainly seems you know what your talking about
Praise or Condemn:
0
0
Okay 1st off let me start by saying that everyone is entitles to his or her own opinion. Next let me remind everyone that not ALL opinions are facts. With those being said i found this article quite interesting yet as the same time completely off base.
The Skipper would be classified more so as a bear, but also could have been refereed to as a Daddy or a Chub, referring to him as a “Daddy type” would have been most accurate (just so u know Mr. Billings for any follow up article. and perhaps u might want to interview some actual gay men or bears for research sake to make sure u are portraying ur opinion accurately).
I always saw the Skipper, Gilligan and the professor (yes i will include him) as a satire on a Fathers relationship with two sons, the one that could do no wrong (Professor) and the family screw up (Gilligan) much like the Howles were like the spoiling grandparents most of us grew up with.
But yet again this is just my option.
I mean in all seriousness u can find homosexual undertones in everything supposedly heterosexual. But Ive noticed Heterosexual undertones in my gay media. Does this mean the heterosexuals have a master-plan to try and turn us gays strait…. i wont comment further on that one tho….
Sometimes people look far to much into stuff like tv shows and commercials to find stuff that really wasn’t intended to happen but just did…. Mr. Billings in the words of Dr. Sigmund Freud, Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Praise or Condemn:
10
1
“When darkness comes, these places become bestial, carnal paradises. These men will sneak off behind palm trees to unleash their wildest natures. Phalluses will be exposed with prideful beckonings. Windy shorelines below the starlight encourage like-minded vacationers to join the intense action. The murkiness allows for surprise sodomistic encounters. Animalistic roars cut through the noise of waves crashing. Broad leaves are plentiful to scrape clean the crusting remnants of a fruitful encounter, preparing the bear for the next cub who unwittingly wanders too close to his meaty paws. The bushes grow heavy with hormonal pungency. Some island man, muscled and brown from his days fighting the surf, may mistakenly stumble upon the scene. Sadly, orgies of international implications often follow. This activity may occur over several nights, until the bear is satisfied with his hunt. His seed prodigiously spread, he then retreats to hibernate in the warm confines of a big city until his next excursion to the fervid Gilliganesque islands of homosexual desire.”
Ummm… Hot… Really hot! Could you please post the location of all this? I’m very curious… The summer is coming up and all… Or is this a flashback to the Fire Island Rambles circa 1975?
Praise or Condemn:
12
0
Thanks for the laugh… you can’t seriously believe anything that you put in this article?
Praise or Condemn:
18
0
[...] Apparently this schmuck thinks they did. My weigh in follows: [...]
Praise or Condemn:
0
0
I think you sir are smoking dope. I watched this show ALL through the 70′s and even as a young adult. I attend church and am a believer in Jesus. NEVER once did I EVER think that this show promoted homosexuality. Being gay is not for me so I do not believe that it has made it acceptable for me. I never even thought taht way. Perhaps with all of your references to and rants against homosexuality you are a bit attracted to men yourself. Where there is smoke…..
Praise or Condemn:
14
0
Wow man.. was this some fever-dream you had? Being a member of the gay community and having known many ‘bears’, I can assure you that you have NO clue what you’re talking about. For the record, Gilligan would be classified as an ‘otter’, but only if he was hairy. Do some actual research.. maybe talk to some actual gay people. Don’t be afraid, we won’t let the bears get you.
Praise or Condemn:
13
0
I’m a proud gay man who realizes that “there goes the neighborhod” in our case means, the rent has trippled, everyone wants to live near us and we throw THE BEST parties. I’m tickled at this “reporting” and expect to see its like on FoxNews some day. I’m excited about the massive progress the GLBT community has made in recent years. However, I’ve asked many of my gay friends, “Did you ever watch that crappy show?” The answer was ubiquitously, “Gilligan’s Island? Hell no! That show was crap.” So, I’m assuming the only substantial audience for this meaningless comedy was the Hee-Haw crowd. I’d be willing to be it turned NONE of them gay so, can’t really see where this article is going.
I would like to inform everyone from a “real” gay person of 46, we don’t need subliminal messages and manipulative smoke room diatribe through comedy sketches. We’re QUITE Out and About today. Equal Marriage is legal in eight (8) States now and within this year, will be legal in California (again) and New York State. Florida, where I live, is coming along very rapidly now. So, I’ll proudly tell you I’m just as good as you in a heartbeat and I don’t want your children, for any reason. I would submit that if more people wanted their own, you wouldn’t be looking to the GLBT community for cures in incest, teen pregnancy, abortion, divorce and single family homes. Honestly, the best gift you could give your marriage is a gay person to mediate between you. We understand both sexes and can help you keep your marriages together. We are NOT the enemy anymore than the black man who married the white woman was before 1974.
Praise or Condemn:
9
0
“Russell Johnson, the actor who played the Professor (and per the show’s biography was also a “scoutmaster”), even had a son in real life who was a prominent AIDs activist at the time.”
Facts: The show ran from 1964 to 1967. AIDS was first recognized by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1981. Can’t be an AIDs activist “at the time” which was 15 years before anyone was even aware of the disease.
And that’s just one of many distortions in this idiotic, delusional rant. Don’t get sucked in by this type of deliberately, manipulative, hateful propoganda.
People who are sincere in their efforts to improve our society don’t promote a devisive, negative agenda. They go out in the real world, meet and talk with the people, and speak of inspirational visions where everyday people work together for a prosperous and fulfilling future for all. Think about it.
Praise or Condemn:
10
2
Hi Greg, as I mentioned quite clearly, this show had a much larger cultural effect when in ran in reruns. I appreciate your attempt to comment but would suggest a reading my journalism a bit slower next time. Good luck!
Praise or Condemn:
2
4
Sorry, but no. If you write something and it’s so easily misinterpreted, then the onus is on you to fix your writing. The use of the phrase “at the time” is too general at best and deliberately misleading at worst (and just sloppy somewhere in the middle).
Praise or Condemn:
2
0
I’ve been laughing about this for hours now, especially the numerous factual errors, let alone the grammatical ones. And the idea of ‘Evangelical Christianity’s experts on homosexuality’ is just comedy gold. Seriously, this kind of rot would embarrass Jesus.
Praise or Condemn:
14
0
As a widely respected Christian Investigative Journalist, I take your accusation that there are grammatical errors in this article quite seriously. If you indeed feel so seriously about this issue, why did you not bother to point these imagined errors out? In any event, it’s always great to hear some support from a fellow journalist. Blessings on you!
Praise or Condemn:
2
3
*it should be ‘I take seriously your accusation that there are grammatical errors in this article.’ the ‘that’ isn’t necessary either.
Praise or Condemn:
2
1
It’s called style, my dear.
Praise or Condemn:
1
3
You have yet to provide proof of your “widely respected” claim. I have asked you several times in the past, and a simple google search shows that 99% of people are laughing at you.
Praise or Condemn:
3
1
You have yet to provide proof that you’re an American citizen of legal age.
Praise or Condemn:
0
2
While I would be happy to scan in my Massachusetts ID and birth certificate and email them to you, that has nothing to do with the issue. You, on the other hand, are providing wild claims when most of the evidence indicates otherwise.
Praise or Condemn:
3
0
I will be in Boston soon. Do you want to meet me for donuts? My treat!
Praise or Condemn:
2
2
Tell ya what buddy, you provide proof that you’re an investigative journalist and not some retard who lives with his mother, and Claire will prove to you that she’s an adult. If we have to take your word, then you have to take ours. It’s called treating others how you would want them to treat you.
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
No, you’re a widely hated fraud from a crack-pot corner of your religion.
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
I think that they have forgotten another TV show that truly lured us boys with desire sixed with me… Flipper… while some boys fantasized about Sandy, some of lusted after the father of on the show…. I know I sure did… I masterbated while I watched flipper more times than I can remember
Praise or Condemn:
5
1
This article is some of the most delish dish I’ve read in a long time. Thanks for pointing out the obvious. Had I known, I would have paid much closer attention to the Skipper and Gilligan, and not concentrated so much on Ginger’s gowns.
If we’re teasing the gay out of old TV shows, let us not forget for one minute, the tight pants, chaps, spurs, and leather vests from Bonanza…. If anything was the precursor to the Bear Scene, it was Hoss and Adam, with Little Joe as the supple and sublime cub-in-waiting.
Thanks Mr. Billings, you’ve opened my eyes to a new way to watch TV Land….smooch!
Praise or Condemn:
6
0
Much agreed. As a later to be heterosexual male, mostly what I remember in the sixties was being torn between the wholesome MaryAnn and alluring Ginger. Also a topic in gradeschool. Later, I realized the show was trash, but still reference the two archetypes in discussions of the female psyche and MaryAnn and Ginger. Somehow or other, never did see the Skipper and Gilligan as anything other than buddies. I will call my teenagers “little buddy” from time to time. I agree about the Bonanza cowboy fantasies. Afterall, they made Brokeback Mountain, not Brokeback Island right? No matter, we all saw the same crap and ended up just being who we are anyway!!
Praise or Condemn:
5
0
So many factual errors from someone that claims to be an expert!
Here’s another one: bear cruises are either a group on a regularly scheduled cruise or on a gay chartered cruise. Those cruises hardly ever overnight in ports and never in anything as remote and rustic as what Mr. Billings drools about. He should try his hand at writing gay porn – he has a vivid imagination.
Praise or Condemn:
4
1
Interestingly enough, no one has come forward to debate the sexual debauchery which I described in this article. Should I take it that you all agree with that aspect of my journalism? The other very, very minor points you people bring up are petty and distracting.
Praise or Condemn:
3
3
Stephenson, nobody has come forward to debate you because they all know that they simply cannot win. As everybody knows, you can’t win a battle of wits if you are unarmed. Most of your detractors appear to be unarmed. As you said, they bring up minor points that are petty and distract from the facts you are sharing. Keep up the amazing Journalism and God Bless you and your works.
Praise or Condemn:
3
6
Ar least our BRAINS show up for “the battle”, with or without wits.
This discussion is not subject to a battle of wits. There is absolutely NOTHING to be witty about.
You know, if you people spent LESS time on those porn sites, they’d sink down on the search lists. But NOOOOO. You have to keep clicking on them and bringing them back to the top. Again, nice work.
(perverts)
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
Interestingly enough, no one wants to keep hearing “Nuh-uh” every time they try to debate with you. Stevie, you never provide the proof that posters ask for. You just keep telling them to “read the article”. Why do you think people keep asking for your proof? They DID read your article.
Interestingly enough, if you were to put all the “very, very minor points” that WE people bring up, when lumped all together, outweigh any of the RIDICULOUS points that you may have…..produced. (hack)
No one has come forward to debate the “sexual debauchery” described in your…..article, because most of us don’t think that way. (Me thinks thou dost spend too much time with pornography.)
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
Pervert.
Praise or Condemn:
2
0
You’re just digging yourself deeper into a hole, Billings. How about you formulate a response instead of just saying “pervert”?
Praise or Condemn:
2
2
“Pervert.”
Classic. NOW, ask again why no one wants to debate with you, Stevie. I want to thank you for proving my point in such a……short manner (for once).
Oh and I’d like you you to copy and past the parts of my post where I said anything perverted. While you’re busy doing that, I’ll just get links to the majority of your very “graphic”, porn laced articles. We’ll compare and see just who is the pervert. K? K.
(pervert)
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
You want a ‘debate’ about your ‘article’? How about this: you’re wrong. Bam, debate over, you lose, go cry to your mother.
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
My wife mentioned that she wanted us to go on our first cruise, but now that I know what sinful hairy gays would be waiting for us there, we are just going to stay home for vacation.
Praise or Condemn:
4
0
I am sorry but your analysis and comparison of Gilligan and Skipper to bears and cubs shows your complete lack of knowledge of bear culture. There are many resources you could have consulted for your research and it is obvious that you didn’t. While some might agree with you that the skipper was bearish, the lack of facial hair, and if I recall chest hair would not make him a bear icon, especially in the early years of the bear community. Gilligan would never be considered a cub with his boyish looks and lack of body hair. Plain and simple, the origins of the bear community were more about rejecting the clean-shaven, smooth body, in-shape, boy look that was all the rage in depiction of gay men. It was a stereo-type that many gay men never related to and were never attracted to. Grizzly Adams would have been a much better comparison for your piece! But what is even more disturbing is your complete lack of understanding of sexual orientation which is developed way before children began watching Gilligan’s Island! There were plenty of beautiful women and traditional families depicted on TV in the sixties and seventies and we still were gay! I might also correct one of your responses that a “cub” is the submissive in a gay relationship. Cub is about his looks, again, plain and simple. And don’t get me started on that you believe that there is always a submissive in a gay relationship..simply not true. If you are gonna call yourself a journalist, you need to at least get your gay facts straight!
Praise or Condemn:
6
0
The ‘minor errors’ concern basic information and your getting even that wrong indicate that you are neither a journalist nor an expert.
I have no desire to debate your homoerotic fiction.
Praise or Condemn:
3
1
Well, thank you for trying. I do understand this is difficult and I admire a man who can admit defeat. Best of luck to you with your career dear friend.
Praise or Condemn:
2
1
Trying? What did I try? And how was I defeated: by not engaing you in conversation about your homoerotic fiction?
Your comprehension of the English language is as lacking as your journalitic skills.
Praise or Condemn:
2
2
Anyone who calls the Village People a “rock band” has no standing to make any claim about American culture whatsoever, be it gay, straight or unconcerned.
Praise or Condemn:
3
1
Mr.Billings, I am kind of appalled by that article. It read more of a how to manual for the curious than serious journalism. You want to really research an abomination please tell me how folks can call themselves good Christians and eat cheeseburgers. That really is a hell worthy abomination and yet constantly gets overlooked by evangelistic journalists.
Praise or Condemn:
4
0
“I will be in Boston soon. Do you want to meet me for donuts? My treat!”
NO! How many times in the past have I told you and your creeper self to stay away from me? Too many to count. Now please provide proof of your claim of being “widely respected”.
Praise or Condemn:
3
0
I’ll bring it to our little meet-up.
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
Not good enough. You can easily transmit it via email or the internet.
Praise or Condemn:
1
2
Everyone realizes that this site is satire, right?
Praise or Condemn:
4
1
Apparently not. Nor are they noticing the ads around the article, which would also give further clues it is satire. What a load of hopeless readers. I’ll buy the donuts, Steve, brilliant fun here!
Praise or Condemn:
3
0
Gilligan always seemed to squirm away from the advances of Ginger when she sidled up next to him in one of her diaphanous gowns in favor of swinging suggestively over the Skipper in a hammock. If my church organist wore dresses like that I wouldn’t be able to keep St. Peter in the pulpit for long.
Downright Unnatural!
[img]http://www.orgoneresearch.com/backscratch%5B1%5D.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.orgoneresearch.com/gilligansthree01%5B1%5D.jpg[/img]
[img]http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldwfqxUm5T1qzkeoeo1_500.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.wtv-zone.com/dpjohnson/gingergrant/relaxation.jpg[/img]
REPENT!
Praise or Condemn:
4
0
this has been my subject of today.. and it seems i was very oddly brought to this page for a reason.. TO SHARE some bigger THOUGHT…
-David Icke- Do You REALLY Want to Know This?? http://t.co/AaO82gf
by they way.. in case you dont click the link – because you are not ready on your journey yet….
[are you serious??!!!!
you actually spent time preparing, then writing & editing & organising this onto internet.. without once saying to yourself.. could i be using my time more wisely.. is this article really going to save the world, or just continue to delude my ego]
Praise or Condemn:
1
2
What a joke. Is that guy for real? He’s an idiot.
Praise or Condemn:
4
3
Says the manchild who believes that the Golden Girls lead to gayness.
Praise or Condemn:
4
2
Never thought about it before… and I never missed an episode. I thought I could blame my ‘gayness’ on the crush I had on Wally from ‘Leave it to Beaver’ (talk about a suggestive title!)
Praise or Condemn:
4
0
OMG, you TOO? Wally was just too D R E A M Y….. I was going gay long before I had an idea I wanted my boyish posterior Wallyized…. I mean, I’d take me some Beaver if I HAD too, but a little one-eyed Wally Wonder Worm??? Oh yeahhhhhhhhhhhh
Praise or Condemn:
0
0
I am curious, sir, why the pictures of the hairy men on cruise were changed shortly after the publication of this article?
I have been ministering to one of those men who was in the original pictures and was so pleased to see him pictured here.
I will pray for you.
Praise or Condemn:
1
0
You have to remember that the guy who wrote this is an antique soda bottle collector. As far as the whole theory of the Bear Scene,,,,, HE MISSED IT BY A MILE!
Not even close,,,,,! Gilligan a cub? yea right
Cubs submissive,,,,,,thats a good one,,,,,
Just do a LOT more research, next time you write a piece like this. Did you have a deadline or something,,,,,seriously?
Praise or Condemn:
0
0
You want GAY? Watch the Brady Bunch. I think Alice was Butch. I know that 3 young hot girls in the same house had to have experimented. And you think the boys weren’t beating that meat in a circle-jerk thinking about their step sisters? Oh! And Batman! Gay as a 5 dollar bill! Look at that hot, tight, suit wrapped around that load of manhood in a bat mask… If that didn’t make you gay, then Robin buffed out in his little green,red and yellow suit would! I mean “Meat me in the Bat Cave?” You didn’t have to read between the lines to know what THEY were talkin’ about.. Oh and THE LONE RANGER! Out on those big ol’ prairies with nothing but a buckskin-wearing native American who could cook the hell outta a buffalo???? OMG. They GAYNESS there…. and OH MAN! Daniel Boone! A lone father raising a young boy and all he head around him was hunky pioneers? And that code “I Kilt Me a BEAR”! If that doesn’t reek of Gay, I just don’t know what does. By the time lil ol Gilligan was just learning to do a reach-around, there had been SO many paving the way before him……
Praise or Condemn:
0
0
are you guys fucking retarded? I mean..seriously. Quite imaginative, if you spent half the effort actually presenting yourselves as Christians and being good and loving and accepting people for who they are, then you would really be changing the world. You guys at christwire are no better than the Westboro Baptist Ministry. You probably embarrass a lot of good christians with your filth.
BTW… I’m a gay, and a bear, and yes, there are parties of debauchary, they are few and far between, and things of that nature, but you’re forgetting that straight people do this too. One other thing you may not know is that most of the bear events i have gone to aren’t sexual at all, just guys getting together to eat, drink, make new friends (they probably won’t have sex with..but even if they did, so what? 2 consenting adults) and socialize, like other HUMAN BEINGS do.
Praise or Condemn:
0
0