I sincerely hope they don't go the LGBT route

[Trinitron Keys 89]

If a certain major religion I'm not a member of had gone bye-bye in 2000 like I foolishly thought it would,

I'd be down for a new-character LGBT pair, just no shipping existing characters. Could retroactively

disrupt the space-barn-time pontinuum.   

 

Sadly it didn't go bye-bye, it got even louder and more annoying and I REALLY don't want to listen

to all those rabid republican parents going off about "This wasn't okay two millenia ago, and it's not

now! huh? WHAT other countries?!" and whatnot. Chaos would reign, and not funny-Discord style either.

 

Let's let sleeping dragons lie; let's make off with their gems and DVD box sets instead!

 

What Would Daring Do?

[Gestum 2,493]

How would having one gay character ruin the show? Okay, maybe a few parents would complain but that would be it.

[Castle Bleck 19,383]

Exactly, with both Steven Magnet and Lyra/Sweetie Drops they left it ambiguous enough for people to project or interpret however they wish to see it, all without making an unnecessary fuss about it.

 

Sometimes ambiguity is actually better writing than explicit confirmation.

[Concerned Bystander 2,903]

Sometimes ambiguity is actually better writing than explicit confirmation.

 

That's certainly the case when whatever character trait is in question has no bearing on the narrative.  Let the viewer/reader make of it what they will and come to their own conclusions.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Concerned Bystander

[Trinitron Keys 89]

@Gestum

 

Well, MAYBE it could go that well if the writers were really careful. It's not having an openly gay character I'd oppose, I'm just not looking forward to all the static we might catch. I'd be bummed to tune in 10 years from now and find out G5 went all boiled-cabbage because those parents got all their friends from the Billy Graham audience to flood Hasbro with complaint mail.

 

@Concerned

Steven Magnet rocks. Paying it forward like he did recently=brohoof worthy and a half.

[StitchandMLPlover 930]

LGBTQ is a political thing so I want them to keep politics out of the show. I have nothing against gay characters at all and I'm sure MLP would handle it beautifully like Scootaloo's disability but MLP works best as non political and non religious. It is the only thing in our culture that is not concerned with whether it is PC enough or not and therefore it is the only thing that gives me peace!!! 

[TheSqueelyOne 157]

I don't see there being any problem with LGBT ponies in the show. The creators have handled other things pretty well, so I think it would be fine.

[Guest]

My only other concern is this.

 

People are complaining all the time that gays do not get enough representation, but the truth is... Gays only make up 10% of the population, so like... How much representation do they REALLY need? I'm bi, and I don't feel I need to be represented in EVERY piece of media available. So yes, while gay representation is lower than straight representation, the key word is "representation". We don't need gays in 90% of media to represent the 10% that exist. Representation should be realistic, because truthfully: gays are rather uncommon, so not having them in a ton of shows should be considered "the norm" because statistically speaking... That's the norm.

 

 

LGBTQ is a political thing so I want them to keep politics out of the show.

 

 

It's only political because people make it political. Truthfully it's just people who are saying they love people of the same gender/etc. who just don't want to be treated like shit for that. The political part is the other party going "well we are against treating them not like shit."

[Slice0Pie 815]

This is probably just me thinking this, but how is having an LGBT character 'political'? The show had heterosexual couples, like Mr. and Mrs. Cake, and that isn't considered political. Why is it political when an LGBT character is involved? I just don't get it 

[Lucky Star 972]

I saw people opening a huge barrel, because of the scenes between Bon Bon and Lyra in Slice of Life, especially the bedrooms eyes they did.

 

 

No matter how you do it, people will rage about it.

Lyra is clearly the only one doing bedroom eyes.

Bon Bon is smiling after a twelve hour shift at the office. Damn she tired.

Too tired at the moment for bedroom eyes, you dang horn dog Lyra.

 

[Steve Piranha 29,443]

I think MLP should raise the stakes but having a blatantly gay character is not one of them. It would feel WAY too preachy and cause chaos among viewers. It's always been a politically neutral show and doing something like this would ruin it.

I agree. I'm not against homosexuality, but I feel introducing it in the show like many expect would feel forced . I'm fine with Lyra and Sweetie Drops/Bon Bon being VERY close and Octavia's suggestive look towards Vinyl Scratch in S5 finale, but I still think going further is forced 

[AlbaTross 1,586]

I think it's ok if the show has characters or pairings that could be construed as LGBT in various headcanons, but it's never going to have an openly gay or trans character (Orchard Blossom is as close as we'll get to the latter), nor do I think it should. This may not be a perfect comparison since LGBT is not a disability, but like how some characters may have qualities associated with certain disabilities but will never be outright confirmed as disabled, it's ok if some characters display qualities of belonging to a different demographic than what is perceived as "normal" or "accepted". It gives people who do belong to those categories a character they can identify with. On the other hand, there are risks associated with outright confirming a character as gay. MLP is a series that's perfect for leaving things open to the imagination, so they don't really have to. If you want Lyra and Bonbon to be lesbians, then you can view them as such, but if you don't, then you can just view them as really close friends. You're not wrong either way.

[Justin_Case001 4,907]

Okay, here's how I see it.  The OP says the show should stay "politically neutral", and that having a gay character would ruin it.  I believe this to be an inherently flawed way of thinking.  LGBT people are just people like everyone else.  We need to get to a point in society where we needn't specifically include or avoid LGBT simply because it's LGBT.  We need to think of it the same way we think of hetero people.  I.e. not at all.  They're just people, and we shouldn't go out of our way to treat them differently.  The ultimate goal is to be able to treat all minority groups the way you'd treat anyone else--with the same respect that any human deserves.  No more, no less.  It shouldn't be necessary to single LGBT out, even if it's in a good way, as in you're catering to them to try to be nice and represent their community.  That shouldn't be necessary.  It often is, but it shouldn't be.  This shouldn't have to be a discussion.  We shouldn't need to be here.  It's completely fine if they have a gay character on FIM.  All they need to do is not make a thing out of it.  Just have the character, and have the other characters react to that character's orientation in a completely nonchalant way, and you're good to go.  I see no problem with that.  For instance, you could have some background mare who wants to ask another mare to the Hearts & Hooves Day dance, and she's nervous.  So she gets the idea to see if Twilight might have some advice, just because she's the Princess of Friendship, so she has some experience with relationships.  So she goes to the castle and tells Twilight, "Hey, I really like this mare and I want to ask her to the Hearts and Hooves dance, what should I do?"  And Twi could just go, "Oh, okay.  That's great, go for it.  Just be honest and blabbity blah.  Yadda yadda."  See how that works?  It just shows that there's no difference; they're just ponies.  It would not come off as preachy.  You don't need any more than that.  You don't need Twilight to give a speech on how it's important to accept different orientations.  You just show by mission of action that there's no need to really think anything of it at all.  That's that place we want to get to.

This is probably just me thinking this, but how is having an LGBT character 'political'? The show had heterosexual couples, like Mr. and Mrs. Cake, and that isn't considered political. Why is it political when an LGBT character is involved? I just don't get it 

And that's because you're already there, my friend.  Kudos.

[Guest]

Know what I would like to see more? And is something that still gets treated like crap? Some characters with tattoos and piercings that are treated like normal characters and not just like "hardcore" punk rocker crap. Like we live in a world where you can't be denied a job for your gender or sexual preference, but it's perfectly fine to say someone is unprofessional because they have a nose ring. And it's only considered "unprofessional" because the people who control jobs decide so.

 

Hell people with tattoos are still assumed to be either gang members or drug users to this day, but no one is rallying for them to be represented, even though far more people have tattoos and piercings than are gay and it's still something people are unfairly denied things for. To this day, people still find it acceptable to tell people to their face how "gross" their piercings are, but it's "not okay" to tell someone who is overweight how bad being overweight makes them look.

 

So as much as I am all for gay representation (key word: representation, AKA a realistic amount) why are we not doing crap about this? Why are shows doing nothing to show people that having a tattoo doesn't make you a white supremacist?

[Steve Piranha 29,443]

My only other concern is this.

 

People are complaining all the time that gays do not get enough representation, but the truth is... Gays only make up 10% of the population, so like... How much representation do they REALLY need? I'm bi, and I don't feel I need to be represented in EVERY piece of media available. So yes, while gay representation is lower than straight representation, the key word is "representation". We don't need gays in 90% of media to represent the 10% that exist. Representation should be realistic, because truthfully: gays are rather uncommon, so not having them in a ton of shows should be considered "the norm" because statistically speaking... That's the norm.

That reminds me, I'm hispanic american most shows have rarely any people of my ethnic group in them, but  I don't really care of having characters "representing" me or liking them just because they belong to my same ethnic group. Do I like Marco Dias (From Star vs the Forces of Evil) because he's one of the few hispanic americans main characters? No, I like him because he's also a good source of the show's humor 

 

When did they confirm this?

 I think he was referred as "gay serpent" by the writers back in his debut in the show opener  

[QuirkyUsername 1,576]

As long as the character comes first I don't see an issue. If the character is interesting, well thought out addition to the world rather than forced in for diversity's sake alone I could get behind it. If the whole character is "He/she is gay." and there was nothing else too them yeah I could see how it could be preachy but the show has done a great job on characters so far so should this route be taken I believe they could pull it off without it being too forced.

[SilverStarApple 849]

It'd only be blatant and preachy if they draw attention to it and make a big deal of it. If they can casually slip it in, a la Ruby and Sapphire, I think it could work. Of course, I don't think it should be between any main characters, and I don't think the episode should revolve around it. It's something better seen than heard. Just show a relationship, but don't make it a focus. No need for Twilight or somepony else to say, "Those two mares love each other so much, and that's perfectly acceptable." Just show that it's a normal occurrence in Equestria and it's not any different from seeing a straight couple.

Casually slip it in? Dude, the entirety of Ruby and Sapphire's characters is that they love each other, they have the Red Oni Blue Oni thing going, and they're lovers. Together, they make Garnet. That's it, that's the entirety of their existences. Hell, that's 40% of all Steven Universe is: Gay stuff. The entire show is super super gay, to the point where I, as a Bisexual male, feel like it's too gay sometimes. The other 40% is anime references, and the remaining 20% is 19% is great music and 1% original ideas. Which is better than Glee, which is just 100% gay and 100% trash.

[Glike 487]

Casually slip it in? Dude, the entirety of Ruby and Sapphire's characters is that they love each other, they have the Red Oni Blue Oni thing going, and they're lovers. Together, they make Garnet. That's it, that's the entirety of their existences. Hell, that's 40% of all Steven Universe is: Gay stuff. The entire show is super super gay, to the point where I, as a Bisexual male, feel like it's too gay sometimes. The other 40% is anime references, and the remaining 20% is 19% is great music and 1% original ideas. Which is better than Glee, which is just 100% gay and 100% trash.

What I mean by slip it in is the characters aren't saying "They're both so gay for each other, but that's okay!" When have they ever drawn attention to the fact that it's a homosexual relationship? They haven't, it's treated as any other ordinary relationship (minus the whole being alien thing). Their interactions are never forced and are shown the same way any other relationship would. The emphasis is on how their relationship makes up Garnet, not on their sexual orientation. They don't once blast you with "this is a gay couple. I mean, they're really gay, look how gay they are." I can easily see their interaction being exactly the same if it were a heterosexual relationship. If their whole character was built upon the fact they were gay, sure it would feel forced and unauthentic, but it's not. The main focus is their care for each other and how they want to protect each other.

 

The rest of your views on the show are just a matter of opinion, really.

[darkwingmare 1,321]

I saw people opening a huge barrel, because of the scenes between Bon Bon and Lyra in Slice of Life, especially the bedrooms eyes they did.

 

 

No matter how you do it, people will rage about it.

These two were obviously a hint... For those who didn't get that, well, they're just in denial. xD I've also seen several hints between ponies in general, even among the Mane 6. To make it official would probably cause a bomb among all the short-sighted parents but that's all. I think putting some lgbt in the show wouldn't hurt anybody but some viewers. Those viewers might as well back off anyway, they shouldn't watch the show if they're that awful.

[Guest]

 

 

That's it, that's the entirety of their existences. Hell, that's 40% of all Steven Universe is: Gay stuff.

 

 

I don't necessarily believe that much of the show is gay stuff. I've seen a bit of it, my issue is that when I ask someone what's good about the show, they insist that it's the LGBT stuff, body positive stuff, etc. No one really talks about if the quality of the show is any good.

 

 

 

Which is better than Glee, which is just 100% gay and 100% trash.

 

100% untrue. 

[SilverStarApple 849]

 

 

I don't necessarily believe that much of the show is gay stuff. I've seen a bit of it, my issue is that when I ask someone what's good about the show, they insist that it's the LGBT stuff, body positive stuff, etc. No one really talks about if the quality of the show is any good.

 

 

 

 

100% untrue. 

 

Oh, right. I forgot about the 70% money-hungry corporate greed that forces them to shoehorn in bad covers to try and make itunes money.

 

Also, I keep seeing that phrase. What the hell is "Body positivity"?

[Guest]

 

 

Oh, right. I forgot about the 70% money-hungry corporate greed that forces them to shoehorn in bad covers to try and make itunes money.

 

Glee has a story, and their covers are supported by the original artists.

 

 

 

Also, I keep seeing that phrase. What the hell is "Body positivity"?

 

Fat acceptance and whatnot. 

[Glike 487]

Oh, right. I forgot about the 70% money-hungry corporate greed that forces them to shoehorn in bad covers to try and make itunes money.

 

Also, I keep seeing that phrase. What the hell is "Body positivity"?

Not 100% sure but I'll take a crack at it. I think it's just being comfortable in your own skin. Not caring about how you look or your weight. For example, a guy who's above average weight may swim without a shirt on if he doesn't care how he is perceived.

 

That's just my take on it, though.

[StitchandMLPlover 930]

My only other concern is this.

 

People are complaining all the time that gays do not get enough representation, but the truth is... Gays only make up 10% of the population, so like... How much representation do they REALLY need? I'm bi, and I don't feel I need to be represented in EVERY piece of media available. So yes, while gay representation is lower than straight representation, the key word is "representation". We don't need gays in 90% of media to represent the 10% that exist. Representation should be realistic, because truthfully: gays are rather uncommon, so not having them in a ton of shows should be considered "the norm" because statistically speaking... That's the norm.

 

 

 

 

It's only political because people make it political. Truthfully it's just people who are saying they love people of the same gender/etc. who just don't want to be treated like shit for that. The political part is the other party going "well we are against treating them not like shit."

 

What you said about "Representation" is exactly what I mean by political. Ethnic,disabled,or gay characters are simply added for a false sense of PC rather than just happening to be said thing. I have a best friend who is a homosexual disabled person but to me she just is {insert name here}. I respect that her homosexually and her disability are part of who she is but when these things are in media they are often forced into the moral or lesson for political reasons and instead of just being a natural part of life it becomes unnatural because of how media handles it. I think if MLP wants a gay character they should do it in a way that is similar to Scootaloo. Up until Flight to The Finish we knew she had a flying problem with visuals and the ponies saw her as just Scootaloo and still do. You can do the same with gay characters. 

 

That reminds me, I'm hispanic american most shows have rarely any people of my ethnic group in them, but  I don't really care of having characters "representing" me or liking them just because they belong to my same ethnic group. Do I like Marco Dias (From Star vs the Forces of Evil) because he's one of the few hispanic americans main characters? No, I like him because he's also a good source of the show's humor 

 

 I think he was referred as "gay serpent" by the writers back in his debut in the show opener

Yeah just like I don't need to have disabled people in every form of media just because I am disabled. Just enjoy the characters. 

As long as the character comes first I don't see an issue. If the character is interesting, well thought out addition to the world rather than forced in for diversity's sake alone I could get behind it. If the whole character is "He/she is gay." and there was nothing else too them yeah I could see how it could be preachy but the show has done a great job on characters so far so should this route be taken I believe they could pull it off without it being too forced.

 

Exactly what I am saying! Character first!!!

[Silverwisp the Bard 2,353]

It would feel WAY too preachy

How exactly would aknowledging the existance of lbgqt individuals be preachy?

How would having a handful of non-straight characters in a cast of hundreds ruin the show exactly?

 

I think MLP should raise the stakes but having a blatantly gay character is not one of them. It would feel WAY too preachy and cause chaos among viewers. It's always been a politically neutral show and doing something like this would ruin it.

 

What viewers exactly?

People, who, after five years of watching a show about tolerance, acceptance and inclusion, can't handle the idea of havingg non-straight horses in their cartoon?

Call me cold-hearted, but I wouldn't exactly cry after these people.

 

 

It's always been a politically neutral show

Not gonna go into detail on this one, since politics is a can that reALLY doesn't need opening here (PM me if you want), but the show is clearly, if not explicitly, leaning towards the left, or what American's consider left anyway.