my child as she grows up, not TV...at least not horribly bad TV.

I like to watch mother nature, live and in person.

I like to be with friends, instead of staring at an electronic device.

See ya!

Jack needs to be put in his place by a sassy, swaggering, big-boned woman. Jack needs a modern-day Katharine Hepburn, except with a little less class. And a bigger ass. --HH

A much bigger ass, Heather. Maybe he'll also find lactation a turn-on?

And you wonder why, behind your back, your friends talk about what a humorless, preening asshole you are, IAHAL,T? Or haven't you heard?

HH the new Wonder Showzen,

and petulant letter the new temper tantrum.

But why?

Why do the columns always have to end?

To "I already have a life, thanks":

Good for you. Now post your address, so that we know where to send you your medal.

She got the first four episodes of "24" and, by gosh, she didn't bust the release date. I know she won't have anything relevant to say about the series, but at least she learned one bit of professionalism, and so won't be banned from any other future goodies from NBC and Real Time Productions.

Of course, anybody that cares about the series, and who knows that the Internet is more than just "web sites," has already downloaded those four episodes. Others know that the series is being relaunched with two nights of double episodes, to try to make a splash against the other returning shows like "Lost" and "Heroes." And to show that I have at least the minimal professionalism of Havrilesky, I won't comment either.

In the meantime, what is this about Showtime's attempt to establish itself as The Gay Network? Besides "The L Word," they ran "Queer As Folk" and the terrible Internet cartoon "Queer Duck." I've only seen these shows when travelling, on hotel TV; I dropped the Showtime network years ago.

Back then, Showtime tried to establish itself with original shows, most of which betrayed a New York/theatre attitude that was refreshing. They made a series based on the play "Steambath," about the afterlife being a locker room, with God as a pissed-off Puerto Rican towel attendant. They were the last venue for "SCTV," with only a fraction of the show's original energy - making it twice as good as any other sketch show. "It's Gary Shandling's Show" was one of the few wiseass takes on the standard sitcom that actually worked. They let John Byner and Bob Einstein have a free comic hand with "Bizarre." And they had the first entertaining show about gay life, "Brothers."

None of those shows had legs. They didn't bring in droves of people to subscribe to the network. Aside from "Shandling," the shows weren't syndicated to broadcast TV. About the only thing Showtime had was slightly lowered censorship standards about sex and nudity, compared to HBO. And slowly, the network started emphasizing that aspect, with the revenge (with nudity!) show "Red Shoe Diaries," the romance (with nudity!) "Love Street" and assorted junk movies (with nudity!)

The non-sex shows that Showtime has, like "Jeremiah" and "Dead Like Me," haven't gained any legs; I think only "Dead" is running on basic cable now. The sex shows can't make it to other cable networks; it isn't simply a matter of covering up obscenities and nudity like the censored "Sopranos", since the obscenities and nudity are all that's in those shows.

It's a good question why Showtime has decided to chase a niche audience of gays and lesbians, with programming that isn't any more vital or dramatic than, say, a Polish polka party show or an old-style country and gospel music show. And why Showtime has decided this programming slate will bring them any success. Not that you'll see that question asked in this column.

WTF does "on-the-nose" mean?

Well, my son's a royal brat--that's why I LOCK HIM IN THE CLOSET ALL DAY WHILE I WATCH REALLY BAD TV!!!

General Jack O' Neil could wipe the floor with those sissy Jacks any day of the week.

Your line of questioning sounds a little....homophobic to me. Who cares why Showtime has produced THREE (gasp!) shows about gay people?

It's not only gay people who watch these shows, by the way. I'm white and I've watched shows about black people, single and childless and watched shows about families, not an office worker and love The Office, etc., etc.

Anonymous, I don't think our armchair cultural critic Tomreedon was being homophobic. Why is it when criticizing anything to do with race or sexuality there is suddenly an "ist" or "obia" attached? I think all he was saying was, heck, Showtime can't nurture anything but lame, culturally irrelevent shows about gay people that use dirty words and graphic sex in place of meaningful dialogue. I noticed that too. (even though the new Showtime serial killer show seemed so good it almost made me subscribe. Almost.)

I can't wait for the new episodes! I love this show--I wish Showtime would create a series for bisexuals too!

Well, I don't quite pick-up on Showtime's gay agenda, but I do notice their agenda to start producing quality original TV shows. Mary-Louise Parker's deliciously non-lesbian legs and alluring concealed breasts, not to mention her delicious, alluring eyes and non-lesbian (I don't know what that means either?) wit make Weeds a real pleasure. Dexter is a truly interesting and very non-network type of show that actually could be syndicated someday without too much editing. And I'm looking forward to the Tudors, a challenging and, I'd assume, mostly not-gay period drama with Jonathan Rhys-Myers, and, if it ever makes it into the lineup, the long-promised television version of This American Life, which, unfortunately for Tom Reed, may or may not feature that super-gay gay boy David Sedaris providing occasional pretty, witty, and gay observations on his outrageously homosexual life--and other funny, touching stories about, well, this American life.

My Showtime subscription has actually treated me fairly well, recently. Even if they seem intent on showing me the worst of the mid-90s romantic comedies (the pre-Brad Pitt Jennifer Aniston is in heavy rotation) every time I flip past.