Talk:Shawn Pyfrom

Latest comment: 15 years ago by 195.249.187.176 in topic Andrew Van De Kamp's sexuality

Andrew Van De Kamp's sexuality edit

Wasn't Andrew Van der Kamp bisexual, not gay? In the episode where Brie made him talk to the priest he used an analogy for his sexuality that ran:

"Put it this way, I like vanilla ice cream, but now and then I'm going to feel like having chocolate"

to which the priest responded "I think God would prefer you to stick to vanilla".82.4.43.19 22:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

While we can assume that vanilla means straight and chocolate gay, there is no reason to think so. It could easily have been the other way around.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.33.108.135 (talk)
I think it's clear that vanilla represents girls. Do you think a priest would tell a boy, in God's name, to stick to boys?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.6.54 (talk)
Possibly. Is he Episcopalian, do you think?
Plus, nobody likes vanilla.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.80.123.4 (talk)
Even if he prefers boys, he's still bisexual. Zythe 14:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, but in one more recent episode he states he is gay to his mom Bree : "I knew you would be like this the moment I told you I was gay..."
Yes, recent episodes have made it quite clear that Andrew now regards himself as gay; there has been no further suggestion of bisexuality. The "chocolate" discussion with the priest may have been an earlier 'phase' of development in the character. DWaterson 21:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
If I remember correctly, at one point (it may have been with the priest) Andrew said/implied that he was simply wanting his mother to think he was gay. I live in Australia, where we get DH behind the USA so I don't know some of the more recent stuff & I certainly don't want to see an edit war so if anyone else can shed any more light... AussieDingo1983 03:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

So is the actor gay or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.9.80.216 (talk) 07:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sadly, no. 195.249.187.176 (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)Reply