Has there ever been a more homophobic premise for a sitcom than "Three's Company?"

It was a different time, OP. Gays were laughed at or ridiculed, but you’re right.

No, he isn't. Being uninterested in women doesn't make Jack a "eunuch". No one ever forbade him from entertaining other men or having a gay sex life. Roper made fun of him but everyone knew Roper was an asshole and everyone knew Furley was a clown. Jack and the girls never made fun of gays. The show stopped short of featuring gay-positive characters but that doesn't make it "homophobic". The fact that Jack would be willing to be seen as gay showed an openness and lack of disgust or insult. The show wasn't intended as a show that dealt with homosexuality, it was incidental to the premise.

It was an accomplishment just to be recognized - in any way. Most gay kids had no idea what gay was in the 70s. My 10 year old mind was constantly searching for any reference to effeminate men like myself and what it meant and if there were others like me.

Lighten up op. It wasn't homophobic.

It was certainly homophobic if only for it’s narrow association of gay males as limp-twisted, flamboyant weirdos.

Blame it on the British. The show was based on the British show "Man About The House."

Does the GOP Convention count as a sitcom?

The point was that Mr. Roper and Mr. Furley were complete idiots--they were so blinded by their stereotypes of gay men they had no idea that Jack wasn't gay, and they were both sent into a panic if Jack would pretend to be attracted to them to shut them up. Mrs. Roper, who was far more cool, had no problem with jack's pretense of homosexuality.

[quote]It was an accomplishment just to be recognized - in any way. Most gay kids had no idea what gay was in the 70s.

In the mid-1970s, when I was about 10 or 11, we went to the local county fair. At the fair, local businesses and civic groups set up booths to get customers and people to join the civic groups. At one table was a gay rights group. They had a man sitting at the table with a paper bag over his head and a sign in front saying, "This gay man could be your neighbor." Being an out gay person outside of a big city was a huge deal. Nobody in suburbia "knew" a gay person.

your points are taken, but they were willing to show a supposedly gay character on TV and he wasn't tossed in the streets because his landlord thought he was gay.

at a similar time, nearly all black shows portrayed them as poverty stricken domestics. the Jeffersons was a big, but only counterexample.

they were on TV, getting those of us who didn't face these realities familiar with their existence.

You are right. I don’t remember being offended back when I was a kid. I ran across it a few months back and realized how nasty they were being and changed the channel. Two women living together, no problem, they are hot chicks! One man living with them? FAG! Let’s make fun of him cuz that’s cool. There is a difference between laughing at someone and laughing with someone.

[quote]at a similar time, nearly all black shows portrayed them as poverty stricken domestics.

Which is a shame. My white family used to watch Julia and enjoy it. Although your point is taken, while Julia was a nurse, she certainly wasn't upper middle class.

What’s Happening, Sanford and Son, That’s my Mama, and Julia did not portray AAs as poverty-stricken or domestics

Just shows to go ya, it's never too late to be offended by something that occurred 40 years ago.

By the time Three's Company came around, All In The Family had already had Archie make a gay joke or two. I'm not sure of the timing with regards to Three's Company, but they did have a drag queen make two or three appearances. And of course, Edith was very understanding but Archie was bigoted.

Fred Sanford lived in a junkyard in Watts. I wouldn't call that successful. The Jeffersons were the first successful black family on a TV show.

Yes, the show “Friends” is just one show that has more homophobia and gay-panic content than 3s Company.

Three's Company was an insult to comedy. Plus it was homophobic.

[quote]What’s Happening, Sanford and Son, That’s my Mama, and Julia did not portray AAs as poverty-stricken or domestics

You've never watched Sanford and Son, have you? They were definitely considered lower class, closer to poverty than wealth. That's why Aunt Esther was so funny because she was in a higher class than Fred Sanford.

Well OP, believe it or not it's all we had in 1978 (unless you want to count Billy Crystal on "Soap", whose character was actually transgender). We were glad to have Jack; he made fools of the homophobes and we cheered.

Mrs. Roper seemed pro-gay, if that's any consolation.

Homophobia from forty years ago MUST BE STOPPED NOW!!!

It’s so easy to gaze back at the past and make entitles judgments from where we stand today. I just saw an early “Law & Order” episode where they compared a woman to an ape! I really think in the rush to judgment we are making dangerous assumptions about the original intentions of writers and storytellers that lived, loved and came to age in a very different age, and like Seinfeld predicted there may be no comedy in the future because of SJW’s

We stand to lose something by correcting or sanitizing entertainment.

While the Sanford were junkyard dealers, they lived comfortably and didn’t seem stressed about economic matters. They often or sometimes went out to eat, went on vacation, and flew on airplanes. They were business men

R22, you make a good point but I agree with OP that Three’s Company really was pretty homophobic compared to its peers.

I was a closeted teen during the run of the program, and I didn't consider it offensive then or now, but when I was a teenager it made me cringe to watch or have it on in the background with other people watching. The only reason is that the show would prompt and encourage homophobic remarks and "jokes" from my family while they were watching it. So yes, it made me very uncomfortable.

[quote]Lighten up op. It wasn't homophobic.

It was a little, but it was the sort of light amusement at someone different that everyone has exhibited now and then. Gay men were considered funny because they were different, and let's admit we all feel that way about others to some extent. We may get our backs up about it, but then we turn around and do it to others. It's human nature -- in fact, the overwrought political correctness of callout culture warriors against any such response makes them a subject of ridicule, and IMO rightly so.

Seen from another perspective, it was actually being portrayed on television, even if as a form of mild disparagement, and the fact that a tenant was only accepted if he WERE gay meant at least that the landlord wasn't getting the lynch mob assembled! It's gentle humor, and not hurtful unless you're way too sensitive.

[quote]You are right. I don’t remember being offended back when I was a kid. I ran across it a few months back and realized how nasty they were being and changed the channel.

I've had the same experience rewatching movies that I loved as a kid in the 80s. Teen Wolf, Sixteen Candles, Weird Science, Adventures in Babysitting, Footloose, Night of the Comet, etc., etc. All of those movies have a character calling someone a "faggot." It's even more depressing when you realize that at the same time these movie were released, the gay male population was being almost completely decimated by AIDS. I mean, talk about kicking people while they're down.

I get where r22 is coming from, but I'm really glad those days are fucking over and movies today don't use homophobic slurs for laughs.

Soap was funny but I don’t remember they gay guy being made fun of by all the men in the show. So there were no lesbians during threes company? I mean if you heard of 2 women living together for years just working and living today you would assume they are straight? And with a gay man? Two men living together with their one female friend. You’d assume the woman was the gay one?

The mother on "What's Happening" was a maid, R13.

R28. There were a couple of lesbian jokes in 3'sC.

The first one I remember was a guy thought Janet & Chrissy were an item because Chrissy (I think) turned him down. He says something like I read about this in a book once & Janet says I'm surprised you could read a book or something similar to that. Both characters were shown more to be offended by the rude guy's behavior than the accusation of being lesbians.

I also seem to recall Lana briefly thinking Janet & Chrissy were a couple when she first met them.

The last one I recall was when Terri was proposed to & she reenacted the scene to Janet & they both hugged after an overjoyed Janet said "yes I'll marry you"(during the hug, the girls realized how it might be perceived to others & broke off the "sismance" abruptly). They had more of a shocked look on their faces afterwards than one of disgust.

In one of the first couple of seasons, I recall Janet casually saying (to Jack?) that there was a gay couple in one of the other apartments in the building which was also big step forward for the time (I think she refers to them by their first names but there is no mistaking that they are indeed a couple).

Maybe someone with a better memory can name these episodes for ya.

They also had a 3's C. "reversal" in one show with Jack dating a girl who lived with 2 guys.

R14 right on dude! MAGA, back when it was sooooooo cute when gramma used the entire n word and nobody corrected her. Nobody had a problem with the gays as long as they kept their “lifestyle” behind closed doors not in our face, just funny shows making fun of them. Those were the days! Nobody was offended by those things except for the ones being called names for their heritage and sexuality, you twit.

R30 you clearly liked 3s company way more than I ever did. Did you find out what the premise of the show was? If it was based on the funny times of crisssy it should have been called the ditsy Chrissy show or something other than what it was called. How did that reversal 3s c show go? Making fun of gay men is funny but lesbians are HOT and straight guys want to fuck 2 women but that doesn’t make for a very long lived comedy show they way making fun of a limp wristed man was. Now, not so much.

[quote] I just saw an early “Law & Order” episode where they compared a woman to an ape!

I don't see what's wrong with that.

Three’s Company was one of Lucille Ball’s favorite shows.

Or so Lucy said when she hosted a "Three's Company" clip show. I suspect she was just trying to seem "hip."

[quote]It was certainly homophobic if only for it’s narrow association of gay males as limp-twisted, flamboyant weirdos.

You’re a self-loathing mincing moron.

There was a brilliant parody of Three's Company called 3C, writtin by David Adjmi. The play got hit with a cease-and-desist but the case was later resolved in the playwright's favor. It played all the homophobia (and slapstick) as hyper real.

THE MILTON BERLE SHOW.

In high school, John Ritter used to entertain his schoolmates with his mincing, lisping, wrists flapping routine.

Later he said it was one reason he decided to do Slingblade, as a sort of apology.

R37, apparently that show has full frontal male nudity. Was it wonderful?

Jake Silbermann alert at R37!!!

[quote]Or so Lucy said when she hosted a "Three's Company" clip show. I suspect she was just trying to seem "hip."

At the time, Lucille Ball was the biggest television star in its history. I doubt she would even agree to host a clip show if she didn’t truly enjoy the show. I mean, why would she? It wasn’t even on “her” network.

Lucy was a big fan of John Ritter's physical comedy and when she got him on her terrible sitcom LIfe With Lucy he broke her to the point of having to cut a scene because she could stop laughing and said it was only the third time in her career that she had to do that.

Lucy had unusual tastes.

R29, not only was Mama a maid, there was this really insightful exchange.

Shirley: I though you could get me some work as a maid until something else comes along.

Mama: Once you start working as a maid, the only other thing that will come along is another house to clean.

BTW, this took place with both of them sitting on the love seat. Mama used to sit on the arm of that poor sofa.

R29, not only a maid. A gorgeous woman. Even old racists people would claim it was too bad about her weight with that face. NOT A SOUL ever entertained the idea of her race. People aged 45-65 all grew up with these shows and it shows. The recent propaganda about American media touting race wars is wasted on us.

Stop analyzing and start living.

I think only portraying gay men as effeminate and flamboyant is homophobic because it reinforces the widespread Belief that being a gay man is inherently unmanly and weirdly unlike other men. When Jack Tripper wanted to portray himself as a gay man, he exhibited extremely exaggerated mannerisms and speech that society often mocked or ridiculed. Apparently, John Ritter later realized it was wrong.

OP as hard as it may be for you to believe this, back at that time it was taboo for men and women to share an apartment without the benefit of marriage. It just wasn't done. I was living with my future husband in 1976 and we had to go to absurd lengths to prevent the landlord from knowing we were not married. And it was practically a military exercise to prevent my parents from finding out we did not live separately.

That is why they made Jack gay. But I don't remember anything in the plot ever being homophobic for that time.

It's just like I wrote in another thread last week: I was watching a Beverly Hillbillies episode on MeTV, which was only 6 years earlier the Three's Company, on which Granny was apoplectic over the prospect of anyone from back home in the hills finding out that Ellie May was still unmarried. "A girl is plumb over the hill if she don't have a husband at 14." Can you imagine such a line today?

It was not homophobic. Jack "pretending to be gay" was mostly Jack being his normal self but hiding that he dates women. The only time he did the limp-wrist caricature was when he antagonizing Roper or Furley--the joke being THEIR uptight discomfort was something to be ridiculed. It was always done in response to them making some snide or offensive remark. There was nothing about his routine behavior or dress that stereotyped "oh, this is what a GAY GUY would do!"

I watched several reruns today and John Ritter was truly brilliant as his character. Such a great physical comedian.

SJW is a term fascists use to dismiss the idea of treating people fairly.

No, many liberals deride sjws as well. Sorry Miss False Opposition Bish, YOU LOSE!

I think some of you commenting are trolls who've never seen more than one episode of the show.

Three's Company wasn't homophobic; Ralph Furley and Mr. Roper were. That was what so many of the "gay jokes"revolved around, of watching these two morons squirm every time Jack did something innocuous. All he had to do was give a smile or stand close to them, and they'd flip out as if he was two seconds away from grabbing their dicks or something. The point of that wasn't to laugh at gay stereotypes; it was to laugh at how stupid and out of touch Mr. Furley and Mr. Roper were.

[quote]Granny was apoplectic over the prospect of anyone from back home in the hills finding out that Ellie May was still unmarried. "A girl is plumb over the hill if she don't have a husband at 14." Can you imagine such a line today?

Team Granny here!

To illustrate my point at R50: skip to 6:50. Roper wants Jack to take his niece out and show her a good time (because she'd be "safe" with him). When Roper comes in, Jack doesn't suddenly act differently or change his voice, mannerisms, etc. He's just his same self, even with the jokes about him and Roper being alone. And when Roper starts saying ridiculous things about gays, Jack retaliates by "flirting" with him--again, not overly flamboyant, just enough to put Roper on edge. Roper is the butt of the joke, not gays or Jack being gay.

Mr. Roper and Mr. Furley were from an older generation, so it's not surprising that they would have been shown to be more out of touch. Didn't Mrs. Roper know that Jack was straight and kept that secret from her husband? It seems like she was always flirting with him.

People that make a point of seeking things out to be offended by piss me off.

I loved how Helen was always horny and deprived of Mr. Roper’s cock.

What r8 and r54 said. The joke was on Roper and Furley.

And actually TC holds up better than most shows of its era - which I’m sure is not something most at the time would have predicted.

Supposedly the best selling DVDs (pre Friends era when DVDs were released simultaneously ) are Lucy, Golden Girls and Three’s Company.

At least he made it ok for straight men to wear a speedo without being called gay.

This is a very odd thing to get indignant over considering it was more than 40 years ago. It’s the equivalent of being offended by June Cleaver wearing pearls and high heels while housecleaning.

Mrs. Roper brought the DL Kaftans and Earings

Nick at Nite reruns of 3C during my childhood and my fascination with Mrs. Roper was when I realized I was gay.

Straight men didn’t wear speedos after Threes Company. In fact it has been more reviled after the show than it was before.

John Ritter always had a bit of a gay accent. I think he was batting for the gay team.

Eh, I don’t see it as being homophobic.

Speaking of Lucy, I saw one episode of ILL where one of the wacky situations was Lucy and Ethel and a lingerie salesman in his hotel room that could be misunderstood as a threesome. It was kind of shocking.

"While the Sanford were junkyard dealers, they lived comfortably and didn’t seem stressed about economic matters. They often or sometimes went out to eat, went on vacation, and flew on airplanes. They were business men"

R23 back in the early 70s that's how it was. Poor people could still live a decently humane dignified life, unlike today. There was no war against the poor, and the poor weren't yet reviled like they are now. That began under Reagan in the 80s, and continues to escalate to absurdity.

Jack Tripper. Gay icon.

[quote]Mr. Roper and Mr. Furley were from an older generation, so it's not surprising that they would have been shown to be more out of touch.

Yeah, that was the whole point of their characters. Jack and the girls were supposed to represent the hipper, more freewheeling 1970s generation. Roper and Furley were the out of touch reactionaries who thought all they were doing was having orgies. They were so out of touch that they thought it was impossible for men and women to live under the same roof without banging their brains out, which is why Jack had to pretend to be gay. Them flipping out around Jack for being gay was another side of how out of touch they were. They were stupid about straight singles (thinking they were screwing like jack rabbits) but they were stupid about gay people, too.

And, once again, it was only Roper and Furley who reacted stupidly to gay people. The episode when Roper winds up in bed with Jack, there's a scene where an effeminate guy is dancing at the party. Roper starts insulting him and Jack says, "Hey, he's a nice guy." You can see the scene below at the 7:30 mark. Roper keeps harping about him ("He's a beauty! Why don't you do each other's hair?") and Jack deflects and says, "Look, just have a few drinks and relax."

I'm not sure but I also think that the guy in the blue shirt is also gay.

[quote]Poor people could still live a decently humane dignified life, unlike today.

No, no, a thousand times no!

I 100% agree with you that life was much worse under Reagan and we should vilify him as much as we can. But things were pretty shit if you were poor and living in the inner city in the 1960s and 70s. Back in the 1970s, areas of NYC literally looked like Beirut after the bombing--literally acres of rubble, empty lots, boarded up buildings, garbage, etc. The generation that grew up in this era became the gang bangers and crack addicts of the 1980s.

- Since channels like DECADES and COZI show an endless cycle of retro programming, no, rediscovering a show from 40 years ago and critiquing it in terms of how far we've come is absolutely valid.

- One could argue that the show is the REVERSE of closeting -- a straight man has to pretend to be something he isn't. If he is discovered, he could be thrown out of his apartment. In that instance, the show could be seen as pretty revolutionary.

- Yes, the idea of making fun of the homophobic Ropers and Furleys of the world could be compared to making fun of the bigoted Archie Bunkers of the world ... if there were ever an underlying social message. If there was one, though, it got lost in the shuffle.

[quote] Yes, the idea of making fun of the homophobic Ropers and Furleys of the world could be compared to making fun of the bigoted Archie Bunkers of the world ... if there were ever an underlying social message. If there was one, though, it got lost in the shuffle.

Huh?

The underlying social message of Three's Company is that the older generation was completely out of touch and old-fashioned about the new generation and their ways. They thought straight singles were whores who were pulling trains on each other all night; they thought gays were such horny perverts, they wanted to sleep with any man they saw, even if the guy was an old fug like Roper.

The show was not supposed to be some hard hitting polemic on sexual orientation at all, like something out of Maude or All in the Family. It was about laughing at the paranoia about the Sexual Revolution and "kids these days". That's what so many of the misunderstandings were based around, of people always jumping to the worst possible conclusion because of how perverted the kids of the Sexual Revolution were. Someone would be hearing Chrissy say something like, "Is it in yet?" then Jack would say, "Just the tip," and then someone would scream, "You perverts stop what you're doing right now!!"

TC holds up, R60? Surely you're joking. It's probably one of the lamest shows ever. The only reason that it still gets shown today is it wisely stayed away from a political stance that would date it. But, really, if you've seen one episode, you've seen them all.

Ya know what, R74, you are NOT invited to the Regal Beagle with us for the DL happy hour.

Sorry, not sorry.

I agree with most of what R70, R71 & R72 said.

I think what has been forgotten about Mr. Roper & Mr. Furley is that they were nice to Jack many times on the show.

I recall Mr. Furley telling Jack he was like the son he never had (I doubt many bigots like Falwell would've ever done that) & I also enjoyed their "locked in a freezer" episode during the Terri years.

I'm pretty sure the DL could post a few times of each landlord being nice or helpful to Jack as they weren't always condescending to him about his "sexuality".

Jack gets some resume help from Mr. Furley (granted it's not 100% respectful)...

Jack gets more help from Mr. Furley...

Another time Jack got help from Mr. Furley...

R71 that's true, but poor people had a decent social security network, that allowed them to buy enough food to feed themselves and their families and not go hungry, pay rent, which wasn't astronomically high, and pay bills, with some left over to have a decent although not extravagant life. Their medical needs were met as well. They weren't villainized by society. You cannot say that today.

R71 also, back then, even the working poor had benefits at work. Poor people weren't on the verge of homelessness constantly like they are now.

Three's Company was rather progressive in a way. Jack only played it up to get a ridiculous reaction from Mr. Roper or Mr. Furley, and we were laughing at their overreactions. A lot of the time Jack was accepted without question and a confidant to those guys. It was never an issue with Mrs. Roper or others.

Is Ritter’s Emmy win up on YouTube anywhere? I’ve never been able to find it.

I wonder if Donn Knotts had a hand in turning Furley into a more supportive and sympathetic character. He always seemed like a decent guy.

If anything Three's Company was unrealistic in that no real harm came to Jack for pretending to be gay (other than the occasional inconvenience to his love life). No one bashes him, no one fires him, no one calls him a pervert who should be locked up or kept away from children. Jack NEVER laments that "oh, if word gets out that I'm gay people are going to think horrible things about me" etc. Anita Bryant did not exist in this world.

This was party due to the show being set in Santa Monica, the idea being this is free love CA and this is the sexual revolution generation. And all of that was presented as a positive thing. If anything, the show was still regressively sexist in that the women of course couldn't sleep around the way the show suggested Jack did.

Hands-down the most lovable character on that show was Helen Roper. She was certainly not sexually uptight and repressed like Stanley and she genuinely loved the roommates. She figures out quickly that Jack isn't really gay, and keeps his secret from Stanley, but it's obvious she would have adored Jack either way. And that's one of the reasons she's so lovable--you know she doesn't judge and she really truly would have embraced him even if he was really gay. Skip to 10:00 for the reveal.

Thanks for posting that, R86. Someone upthread asked if Mrs. Roper knew and I couldn’t remember for the life of me.

[quote]There was a brilliant parody of Three's Company called 3C, writtin by David Adjmi. The play got hit with a cease-and-desist but the case was later resolved in the playwright's favor. It played all the homophobia (and slapstick) as hyper real.

I saw it in Chicago, and, yes, the homophobia and misunderstandings were played completely seriously and nastily.

The mostly elderly audience was puzzled. At one point the Mr. Roper character stuck his hand under Janet's shirt and fingered her pussy for an uncomfortably long time. Larry and Jack also end up fooling around on the couch without knowing why they're compelled to do it. Janet is a bulimic and a secret alcoholic.

"I'm off to the Regal Beagle!" the Chrissy character says at some point. "Hope I don't get raped!"

[quote]At one point the Mr. Roper character stuck his hand under Janet's shirt and fingered her pussy for an uncomfortably long time.

Since you’re gay, I understand how you got this wrong, but under a woman’s shirt is not where her pussy is.

Since you're not familiar with the length of Janet's shirts on the show and the fact that one of the plot points was she wasn't wearing underwear, I understand you got this wrong, r89.

Of course it is homophobic. Look at all the stereotyping. Not only pandering to the whole brutal vs feminine bullshit but also linking sexual orientation to presentation and basing jokes off all that. Even the whole thing where an effeminate man is presented like a version of a sexist vision of a woman.

I grew up watching Three's Company as a straight woman and I think that straight people were laughing at Jack far more often than you think. It was very homophobic and I am glad we don't have shows like it anymore.

Gay people were almost invisible then. The WORST thing is to be invisible so actually the acknowledgment in "Three's Company" that gay people exist was, in some ways, a step forward within the context of the time.

R93 I don't agree. A lot of the old stuff portrays LGBT people in such dumb ways, I'd prefer to be invisible rather then be linked to those images/characters and perceived as similar.

I'm not gay though, I'm bisexual. But even a lot of old timey gay culture makes me cringe, in the "I don't know them" way. Straight people's views and ideas--those are mostly just ugh.

R94, in really homophobic society (let's say Uganda or somewhere in the Middle East), you wouldn't even hear a joke about a gay person. I think that's actually worse.

I'm wondering if Suzanne Somers is a homopobe. She totally seems like it.

For what it's worth, Suzanne's BFF is Barry Manilow.

Suzanne also said she thinks Trump is doing a great job.

Suzanne is chummy with Laura Ingraham and those cunts over at Fox News.

Suzanne is a greedy pathological liar… no wonder she admires Trump.

Have you seen Priscilla Barnes recently?

I had such a crush on her, R101. I don't know why.

R102 I think a lot of people did. She was a down-to-Earth beauty compared to Suzanne Somers. Without the bleached hair and all the make-up Suzanne was not an attractive woman.

of course Suzanne didn't appear on the reunion. She's too good for that.

Even as a teenager I found that show incredibly stupid and vapid and never watched it. I I felt that there was no way that culture could become more deplorably stupid – well, I sure was wrong about that.

R104 notice the size of Jenilee Harrison compared to everyone else.

I find a lot of the stereotypes of gay characters in current shows very homophobic. "Modern Family" for instance. I didn't find Jack's pretending to be gay as offensive.

R91/R92 are full of crap. Everyone laughed at Jack because of the physical comedy. The amount of actual gay stereotyping that went on in that show was minuscule.

Watch R86 beginning at 5:30 and how Jack handles Stanley making homophobic remarks.

I love this show and am watching it now on LOGO, you know the gay network and TC has always had a BIG gay following, I even saw the TC drag show a few years back.

The show isn't homophobic at all, we're supposed to LAUGH AT Roper and Furley and Jack, whom is "gay" to them, always gets the upper hand

Also when Teri first comes on the show, she thinks Jack is gay and says something like "Oh I understand, I have no problem with that" and goes out of her way to be sweet to him in a way she wouldn't of if she had thought he was another straight guy

"It’s so easy to gaze back at the past and make entitles judgments from where we stand today. "

Bull-fucking-shit! I was a teenager during the show's run and I fucking hated it because of the homophobia.

Anybody who makes excuses for homophobia is an asshole.

R110 Again the show is not homphobic, I've seen shit on Will and Grace that was more homophobic and portayed gay men in the worst light possible. Jack Tripper was much better role model than any "gay" characters on TV at that time despite being straight

Roper and Furley were homophobic, but like Archie Bunker, the joke was on them. The show wasn't homophobic. And even Furley told Jack that he loved him like a son and that was when Furley still thought he was gay!

And also the foremost authority of Three's Company, Chris Mann, who wrote a book on the series, is a gay man and he said the show changed his life as a bullied teen in school, to make people laugh and fit in, he acted like Jack Tripper and became the class clown.

Ellen DeGeneres, Andy Cohen, Sean Hayes, Neil Patrick Harris , RuPaul etc are among the out entertainers who've said they are big fans of the show. Hayes said he studied John Ritter as Jack Tripper, it was his favorite show

Again TC has a huge gay following, which LOGO was aware of when they picked it up , it's campy and cartoonish and farce. It's very broad , exaggerated comedy, gay men tend to like that

There have been drag shows based on TC as well

Fuck off and die OP. You SJWs have no right to judge shit from the past.

Luckily for me, neither Ellen DeGeneres, Andy Cohen, Sean Hayes, Neil Patrick Harris nor even RuPaul does my thinking for me.

Let alone some rando throwing out random bullshit celebrity crap on the internet.

Go figure!

As for Chris Mann, not really sure how turning himself into a clown for straight people's amusement is considered a postive, but if it worked for him, that's nice I guess.

Meanwhile, did you know a study was done that more often than not "class clowns" turn out to be gay? That didn't begin with Jack Tripper in Three's Company.

Didn't end with him either.

Again, random cherry picked anecdotes aren't actually proof of anything.

Whatever you thought about the show, you can't say John Ritter wasn't brilliant. And very sexy.

John Ritter always seemed GAY to me.

R116 yes! I'm watching reruns now on a marathon on LOGO and he has gay voice so bad, especially the earlier episodes when he said, "Chrissyyyy"

This episode on now is when he dresses in drag as Grandma Tripper to win a female only baking contest, it's hilarious!

I think John Ritter's asshole was gay but he was straight.

He always said Missster Roper, Missster Furley. Chrisssy. He always had a MAJOR LISP. The early episodes from 1977 I could picture him in a gay bar in Weho or The Castro.

Along with The Brady Bunch, Three's Company has to be one of the campiest, kitschiest shows with all straight characters

Both shows have big gay followings .

Even Mr. Furley's facial expressions are pure camp.

Lana, Mrs. Roper, Chrissy...

CAMP

Most homphobic? My Three Sons. A house full of men and Dad wasn't fucking any of them.

Totally repressed. Totally homophobic. Tim Considine and Don Grady were both ripe for picking. But nuthin'.

It's funny how in season 6, Priscilla Barnes' first season, they put Jennilee Harrison FAR away from the rest of the cast in the opening when they're at the zoo, she waves like "Hi guys, I'm over here, remember me"

They dropped her at the end of the season

They were already being shady with Cindy

[quote]him in a way she wouldn't of if she had thought

Oh, dear!!

whoever had 3/4's of their brains removed to watch this piece of shit got what they deserved.

That's like saying All in the Family was a racist show because the character of Archie was a racist. Yes, he was racist, and he was also something of a buffoon. While Archie could at times be sympathetic, his racism, homophobia, anti-semitism, etc. were always presented as being totally wrong.

Similarly, the characters of Mr. Roper and Mr. Furley were homophobes, and also buffoons. None of the characters who were considered even slightly intelligent - hell, not even Chrissy! - were homophobes. Those two characters were homophobic, the show itself was not.

R125 exactly and there were two.instances were the characters were extremely pro gay, which was unheard of for that time period

In 1979 when cougar Lana wanted Jack, she had a misunderstanding and thought that Jack and Larry were lovers, she confronts them and says. "So you two are boyfriend's?, I'm not upset I just want to get in on this action!"

Another time in 1981 when Terri was introduced on the show, she is trying to bond more with new roommate Jack and Furley tells her he's gay so Terri goes out of her way to be extra nice and sweet to him and to let him know that she's a gay ally and goes. "Oh I understand, I get it now, poor Jack must of been tough for him growing up".

Terri actually seems upset and bummed out when she finds out he ISNT gay!

The producers of this show, Don Nichol, Michael Ross, and Bernie West, were the original producers of [italic]All in the Family[/italic] and [italic]The Jeffersons[/italic].

R127 and Maude too, which is why Richard Kline was hired, he had a recurring role on Maude

In fact, when producers were looking for "names' to replace The Ropers they originally envisioned the same older husband/wife dynamic and wanted a " Bea Arthur type" married to a "Don Knots type", there were actually talks with Bea's people about joining the show but the producers realized that that she probably wouldn't take a Supporting role and that they probably couldn't afford her salary anyway so they dropped it to Furley being a swinging, but very gay acting, single

Don and Bea as a married couple on TC would of been... Interesting

Mr. Furley was such a self-loathing queen. He couldn't accept himself, so he didn't want anyone else to have fun, either.

Would HAVE! Would HAVE been interesting, you nincompoop!