The Bachelor's Juan Pablo Said Some Not-So-Nice Things About Gay People

By Tim Surette

Jan 18, 2014

Our nation has been rocked to its core! International diplomacy has capsized! Our very worth as human beings is being tested, and we're failing. In case you haven't yet heard, our country's most handsome male specimen, Mr. Juan Pablo Galavis, a.k.a. the Spanish-soccer-star-turned-Bachelor, is in some agua calor for some mouth diarrhea that erupted from his paella-hole on Friday night.

Here's one of the controversial quotes from an interview Juan Pablo gave to TheTVPage, in which he was asked whether The Bachelor should ever feature an openly gay Bachelor: 

I respect them, but honestly, I don’t think it's a good example for kids to watch that on TV.

Not only does the statement imply that Juan Pablo thinks it's okay for kids to watch him canoodle with two dozen different women and swap a bunch of spit in the name of finding the right mother for his child, he went on to dig his hole a little deeper:

There's this thing about gay people—it seems to me, you know, I don't know if I'm mistaken or not—I have a lot of friends like that, but they're more pervert in a sense. And to me, the show would be too strong, too hard,  to watch on TV.

Juan Pablo! Stop it! Stop talking! Just stop it! You're killing yourself here!

Here's the full audio from the interview:

After uproar ensued online, Juan Pablo himself took to Facebook to apologize:


I want to apologize to all the people I may have offended because of my comments on having a Gay or Bisexual Bachelor. The comment was taken out of context. If you listen to the entire interview, there’s nothing but respect for Gay people and their families. I have many gay friends and one of my closest friends who’s like a brother has been a constant in my life especially during the past 5 months. The word pervert was not what I meant to say and I am very sorry about it. Everyone knows English is my second language and my vocabulary is not as broad as it is in Spanish and, because of this, sometimes I use the wrong words to express myself. What I meant to say was that gay people are more affectionate and intense and for a segment of the TV audience this would be too racy to accept. The show is very racy as it is and I don’t let my 5 year old daughter watch it. Once again, I’m sorry for how my words were taken. I would never disrespect anyone.


Juan Pablo Galavis

But that didn't appear to be enough for ABC and Bachelor producer Warner Horizon, as they joined together for this statement: 

Juan Pablo’s comments were careless, thoughtless and insensitive, and in no way reflect the views of the network, the show’s producers or studio.

Where do YOU stand on the situation? Personally, I don't think I really put too much stock in the opinion of a reality star, so I'm just going to grab this tub of popcorn and watch the show from afar. 

  • Comments (81)
Add a Comment
In reply to :
  • linmik Mar 10, 2014

    Anyone who has been watching or reading about the bachelor knows Juan Pablo English is not perfect. Considering it was the last question I would bet it was planned. What better plubisity . Get the world involved. I'd say we all fell for it and Juan Pablo is the scape goat.
    As for gays , no problems from me.
    As for a gay bachelor or even bachelorette , why not . Everyone is looking for love. If it works in this forum , great.
    No kids should be watching any of these shows regardless who is on it.

  • UrzasRod Jan 19, 2014

    A lot of TV shows have a gay character to be provocative. They often don't treat that character like the other characters. They go out of their way to point out as often as they can that the character is gay. This is especially true for lesbians. If you want gay people to be accepted as no different than straight people, pointing out the difference constantly isn't really a good way to make that happen.

    I could give plenty of examples, but the first few that come to mind are Captain Jack on Doctor Who and Angela on Bones.

    Captain Jack hits on EVERY attractive man he sees. It's mentioned repeatedly by himself and others that he'll go to bed with just about anyone. This is very different from the way other characters on Doctor Who are treated. There is very little mention of sex regarding other characters. Rory, Mickey, Rose, Amy, etc didn't walk around hitting on everyone they came across.

    On Bones, many times when Angela's past is mentioned, it's done in the context of her sleeping around. When the story involves a man, her husband doesn't want to know about it. But when it's about a woman, he practically salivates at whatever few details she's willing to tell him.

    So if you're going to get angry at Juan Pablo for his opinions, perhaps you should get angry at the writers who think that someone's sexuality should be used to either titillate the audience or create controversy.

    That being said, I've never watched the Bachelor. And he's at least partly right. It's not a great idea for a show.

  • Ossie Jan 19, 2014

    I'm 100% against a gay Bachelor. But I'm also 100% against a straight Bachelor.

  • CJ42090 Jan 19, 2014

    His opinion is dumb and ignorant, but truthfully a gay version of the Bachelor isn't practical at all without some serious retooling (hehe). A bunch of hot, young, horny gay guys living together in a romantic getaway? Need I point out the gaping flaw?

  • JT_Kirk Jan 19, 2014

    Good point, but geez, a "gaping" flaw? Ugh.

  • CJ42090 Jan 19, 2014

    Poor choice of word, given the context.

  • TVMani Jan 19, 2014

    The most shocking thing about this piece is the fact that he's supposed to be Spanish? Did ABC try to find the whitest looking Spanish guy or what? Never seen the show, but if he's throwing around stereotypical phrases such as "Ay caramba" then I seriously would be raising my eyebrow at this dude.

    Oh, and isn't this show about fucking random women till you find "the one?" So who's the real pervert here?

  • tnetennba Jan 19, 2014

    It's offensive to me that this is considered news. He barely even qualifies as a celebrity. His statements weren't hateful, and didn't contain any opinions against gay rights. What he said was kind of ignorant, but he said very clearly that he might be completely wrong. That's the only part of his statement where it's clear that he meant what he said. His statements aren't anywhere near as vile as the statements made by a lot of top politicians...and this guy is a complete nobody. So I find it bizarre that this is getting attention at all.

    It irritates me that when these things hit the news, everyone seems to be judging the offending statements as if they had been carefully thought out press releases, rather than statements made in conversation. In this case, the statements were even made in a foreign language. It really doesn't make sense to assume that the person must have meant exactly what he said.

    This past week, we have also read about how some movie director described Jennifer Lawrence's workload as "twelve years a slave", and how Madonna used the n-word in a description of a photo of her son. It doesn't make any sense to me that someone could get offended by the slave comment. If anything, I'm offended by the apology, because it only encourages them. Madonna clearly didn't mean it in a racist way, so what's this really about? Are we supposed to be upset that someone who used to be a pop star doesn't know what will make people (pretend to be?) angry?

  • buildam2005 Jan 19, 2014

    Personally, an off-the-cuff comment that hasn't been thought out is more offensive/worse because it's just that--a person doesn't get to refine, retool, or reorganize their thoughts. It gives an actual insight into their gut response to something and what they really feel. The less polished and practiced, the more likely it is to be substantive and truthful.

  • tnetennba Jan 20, 2014

    Sometimes an unpolished statement gives a better insight into what the person is thinking, and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes it just gives you the wrong idea. So I would say that some caution is required when you examine someone's unpolished statements. But everyone always assumes the worst, as if the worst possible interpretation is always the only one possible.

  • buildam2005 Jan 20, 2014

    Okay, I will grant you that. Circumstances do dictate how reliable such statements can be. That's fair.

  • TVMani Jan 19, 2014

    I find the "12 years a slave" comment more idiotic than anything else, but that's white folk for you! And you're acting like the n word had just started being put in use recently, or at least to me, that's what it sounds like you're saying by saying she doesn't know what will make people angry. Madonna is a cultural appropriating idiot, who swears she's entitled to saying that word because she's slept with plenty of black men. But not only that, she's hated by numerous people of numerous races for a reason. She's the one that keeps putting her own foot in her mouth.

  • tnetennba Jan 20, 2014

    "...but that's white folk for you!..."

    That's racist! I'm only half kidding. I don't find your statement offensive, but it's interesting to me that if you had been famous and white, you wouldn't have been able to make a statement at this level of racism (or a corresponding statement about gay people) without making the news all around the world. This is the sort of thing I'm objecting to, and the only point I'm trying to make. A presidential candidate saying that there's something wrong with his country when gays can serve openly in the military should make the news, but a reality-show nobody who makes a slightly offensive but not hateful comment shouldn't be interesting to anyone.

    Regarding Madonna, even if she is an idiot, I would expect that she knows that most black people think that white people should never use the n-word. So what she did indicates that she doesn't respect that, and thinks that it should be OK to use it in ways that aren't actually racist. This is kind of dumb, but if she's already considered an idiot, that only makes it less interesting.

  • Sproxar Jan 19, 2014

    We, as a society, deserve every one of these "scandals", whether the comments come from interviews, blogs, tweets, or just overheard comments reported in the tabloids. We put too much stalk stock in following what famous people say and do. Just because this bozo was on a "reality" show, why do we insist on putting a microphone in his face and expect ANYTHING worthwhile to come out. Same goes for any other "celebrities", who, because we like the characters they play, or the songs they sing, get elevated to the status of gods to us. News flash: they're just people, and prone to the same stupid thinking as anyone else. Why we keep thinking they should be any better is a mystery to me.

  • JohnMangan Jan 19, 2014

    It's a very simple test. If you say dumb things about anyone, let alone gay people, then you're stupid. Being good-looking doesn't buy you a hall pass on this. Good looks fade but stupidity is forever.

  • JasonMelvil Jan 19, 2014

    There was a gay bachelor show... It was called Boy meets Boy
    And it was terrible, not because of the gay theme, simply because it was terrible.

  • FAssbenderiwy Jan 19, 2014

    talking about prejudice and stereoptype, the fact that his mother tongue is spanish doesn't mean that he comes from Spain, and also paella is a typical dish from a region in Spain, not its national dish (check your facts before making such generalisations). It is annoying, specially when you're discussing news about discriminatory remarks.

  • See More Comments (14)