Something shocking about Scootaloo

[heavens-champion 1,893]

Apparently, according to Ponyville Mysteries, Scootaloo has lesbian aunts. Here's a link to the Equestria Daily article about it: https://www.equestriadaily.com/2017/10/scootaloo-lives-with-her-lesbian-aunts.html#more

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 40,279]

Now this is very interesting. There are debates in the comments of course on whether or not they really are a couple based on this, but I think it adds up pretty well. Only one of the aunt's is described as a direct relation to Scoot's family, one of them kisses the other on the forehead and follows that up by calling her 'dear'. That to me seems pretty obvious. Interesting that it takes place in a book, but apparently the books themselves are canon. 

I can only hope that one day we see this exact thing in the show itself. Not because of 'representation', but for acceptance. To show that having an LGBT couple in a show isn't some horrible, child-corrupting crime. Other shows have done it already, so hopefully this show can do the same before it ends.

[Jeric 46,834]

Dude! Forget the lesbian shit ... the book talks about her parents neglectfulness and busyness! That's a bigger deal than what amounts to LyraBon level hinting. One is part character development, one is not! Maybe it's just me since LGBT stuff has been so normalized in my life for the better part of two decades that it's no big deal. 

 

[ggg-2 3,550]

This is a book. Books are hardly canon and can easily be retconned. (for instance, I believe one book stated that Granny Smith was their maternal grandmother, but ended up being their FATHER'S mother in Perfect Pear.) Besides, remember Derpygate? If they submitted to complaints that easily then, there's no way Hasbro's Standards and Practices department will let this pass in the show.

[Oleks 1,983]

For me the most important fact about this (although it's only semi-canon) is that Scootaloo isn't an orphan. I honestly don't care about her aunt's sexuality as long as she gets some parental love, at least from her aunts.

[AlbaTross 1,581]

Neat! I've only read the first book in the series so far, but I think it's one of the better MLP chapter books I've read, so I'll definitely keep reading.  Did the third one just release?  I have to keep up, lol.  I have the first two, mind you and I just overspent on spinoff media for the film.  Stuff that expands on the world and the characters is excactly why I read all the spinoff media I can (mostly the comics and chapter books), so I don't subscribe to the notion that B canon is non-canon.  This book series is great so far and certainly helps fill the void during the G.M. Berrow hiatus.

[cmarston1 5,951]

I am crossing my fingers that this gets shown next season.  Finally getting some much needed info about Scootaloo's family and possible LGBT representation in FiM, yes please.

[Libra 11,690]

3 hours ago, Kyoshi said:

Now this is very interesting. There are debates in the comments of course on whether or not they really are a couple based on this, but I think it adds up pretty well. Only one of the aunt's is described as a direct relation to Scoot's family, one of them kisses the other on the forehead and follows that up by calling her 'dear'. That to me seems pretty obvious. Interesting that it takes place in a book, but apparently the books themselves are canon. 

I can only hope that one day we see this exact thing in the show itself. Not because of 'representation', but for acceptance. To show that having an LGBT couple in a show isn't some horrible, child-corrupting crime. Other shows have done it already, so hopefully this show can do the same before it ends.

However, I'm going to agree with what @non-existent said, the book pretty much shares that scoots parents shrugged her off. It doesn't matter how many political points it scores in the books, its still a cruddy thing to do.

[Ganondox 899]

8 minutes ago, Ninetales said:

However, I'm going to agree with what @non-existent said, the book pretty much shares that scoots parents shrugged her off. It doesn't matter how many political points it scores in the books, its still a cruddy thing to do.

Her parents were confirmed to be cruddy in "Parental Glidence". 

[blackstarraven 142]

OK... I'm not going to make a list.. I'm not going to make a list.....

 

Right so I'm just going to be frank....

The Books and Comics are not Cannon. There not even Cannon B... There none cannon. Period.

 

Because the way the show is now (And has almost always) been produced. Anything not in the show proper will be ignored and countered by episodes without thought. The books even do this, They just tend to do it in areas that are never really going to be proven right/wrong.

We are most likely never going to get a in show explanation of how/why Cadence is a Alicorn... So it can't be proven wrong in the book.

 

There not going to tell us how/why Scoots seams parentless (We have seen her room, so we know she had a house)

 

Even if we DO see her parents... They will very likely literally just show them and act like they where always there and it was never a issue.

So really anything in the books, while interesting.. Can't really be considered shocking, until it makes it into the show.

[Libra 11,690]

1 minute ago, Ganondox said:

Her parents were confirmed to be cruddy in "Parental Glidence". 

Yeah, so pandering to politically active audiences-left or right, doesn't matter-means nothing to replace that fact.

[Babyyoshi309 1,829]

That seems kind of insulting to gay people. Because it is already known that Scootaloo's parents/guardians are bad parents. So it would be bad if the first LGBT couple in the show were deadbeats.

[BastementSparkle 20,312]

6 minutes ago, Babyyoshi309 said:

That seems kind of insulting to gay people. Because it is already known that Scootaloo's parents/guardians are bad parents. So it would be bad if the first LGBT couple in the show were deadbeats.

You misunderstood, the supposedly lesbian aunts that take care of Scoots in the book do so because of her deadbeat parents, so they're a separate pair entirely.

14 minutes ago, Ninetales said:

Yeah, so pandering to politically active audiences-left or right, doesn't matter-means nothing to replace that fact.

Well, it means that even if her parents are absent, there's at least some adults caring for her and raising her, so she's not totally alone. Also, I think it's a little ridiculous to call just having a lesbian couple at all "Pandering" to a political party.

[Libra 11,690]

20 minutes ago, BasementSparkle said:

You misunderstood, the supposedly lesbian aunts that take care of Scoots in the book do so because of her deadbeat parents, so they're a separate pair entirely.

Well, it means that even if her parents are absent, there's at least some adults caring for her and raising her, so she's not totally alone. Also, I think it's a little ridiculous to call just having a lesbian couple at all "Pandering" to a political party.

id rather not get into politics, but thats what I feel like.

but thanks for explaining.

however, the book isn't really canon.

[Ganondox 899]

It would be pandering to politics to NOT include any gay couples. Fact is when you decide to make something's existence political, there is no non-political way around it. 

[BastementSparkle 20,312]

Just now, Ninetales said:

id rather not get into politics, but thats what I feel like.

but thanks for explaining.

however, the book isn't really canon.

Hasbro's stance is apparently "It's all canon", so that's not really true. It usually doesn't affect the show though, as you shouldn't have to buy supplementary material to understand the show, and sometimes the show retcons stuff later anyway. Even if you view it as non-canon though, the writer's sometimes take things from the books and comics for show use anyway, so this could end up one of them.

 My point was that it wasn't about politics though, or rather that it shouldn't be, same way a straight couple like Shining and Cadance or the Cakes isn't about politics.

[Libra 11,690]

2 minutes ago, BasementSparkle said:

Hasbro's stance is apparently "It's all canon", so that's not really true. It usually doesn't affect the show though, as you shouldn't have to buy supplementary material to understand the show, and sometimes the show retcons stuff later anyway. Even if you view it as non-canon though, the writer's sometimes take things from the books and comics for show use anyway, so this could end up one of them.

 My point was that it wasn't about politics though, or rather that it shouldn't be, same way a straight couple like Shining and Cadance or the Cakes isn't about politics.

More of "its canon until we say otherwise." Because it can just be discredited in the next episode.

however, Im just going to say that LGBT is a very touchy subject, and I don't think Hasbro should be so willing to jump into the bloodbath hunger games slaughterfest that is american politics. But no matter, I will be interested in seeing where this goes.

[BastementSparkle 20,312]

1 minute ago, Ninetales said:

More of "its canon until we say otherwise." Because it can just be discredited in the next episode.

however, Im just going to say that LGBT is a very touchy subject, and I don't think Hasbro should be so willing to jump into the bloodbath hunger games slaughterfest that is american politics. But no matter, I will be interested in seeing where this goes.

Still makes it canon though, Canon is a weird term as it can mean different things for different series and what is or isn't "Canon" can change at a moment's notice.

 I agree that I think it's unlikely Hasbro would okay this kind of thing to be in the show, as they'd likely worry about angry parents potentially losing them toy sales. In that regard I can't really blame them, they are a business first. I just think this would be a perfectly fine thing for them to put in the show if they did so.

[Libra 11,690]

4 minutes ago, BasementSparkle said:

Still makes it canon though, Canon is a weird term as it can mean different things for different series and what is or isn't "Canon" can change at a moment's notice.

 I agree that I think it's unlikely Hasbro would okay this kind of thing to be in the show, as they'd likely worry about angry parents potentially losing them toy sales. In that regard I can't really blame them, they are a business first. I just think this would be a perfectly fine thing for them to put in the show if they did so.

Right. However, canon doesn't mean "its gonna last forever" but that I can agree ith. Also, Hasbro saying "alright, scootaloo las lesbian parents" as canon is pretty much opening the flood gates to a Katrina sized hell storm. And believe me, no one wants that.

[Xe__or 4,376]

Interesting... so she doesn't live alone? Can we consider this book as canon though?

[Jeric 46,834]

24 minutes ago, BasementSparkle said:

My point was that it wasn't about politics though, or rather that it shouldn't be, same way a straight couple like Shining and Cadance or the Cakes isn't about politics.

Ah to have that naivete. Must be nice.

Look, I'm all for LGBT themed in kids entertainment ... but you either do it or don't do it. Half measures on this issue are cowardly, and Vogels tongue-in-cheek comments about quilting are again ... cowardly. This isn't Hasbro's doing. The writers are being sneaky. This isn't something to celebrate. 

And until someone can source me how cannon is defined by Hasbro ... both arguments amount to little more than theory crafting. Basically ... prove it. 

4 minutes ago, I.T said:

Interesting... so she doesn't live alone? Can we consider this book as canon though?

If you want yes. Some won't. Doesn't matter because you alone have control over your interpretation. 

[Xe__or 4,376]

3 minutes ago, non-existent said:

If you want yes. Some won't. Doesn't matter because you alone have control over your interpretation. 

Well, I think there is a difference between what I want, and what the story is; canon is very serious and very strict

[PoisonClaw 8,153]

I think it's neat. Obvious you could make the argument that this could just be reading too far between the lines and seeing connections where there are none, but you could just as easily say that it was written like that intentionally so helicopter parents won't throw a fit about their child being exposed to "a gay agenda, blah, blah blah!"

The fact that it doesn't mention Lofty's relationship with Scootaloo's parents could be a sign that she's actually Scootaloo's Aunt-in-Law, giving further proof to support the idea that Holiday and Lofty are together. Add to that that they live together (possible if they are related) and that Holiday kissed her on the head and called her "dear", which is a VERY odd way for siblings are "just friends" to show affection to each other, and you get a very compelling argument to be made.    

Something I noticed though was that Holiday, the earth pony mare, is the sister of Scootaloo's father. Now, with the exception of the Cake Twins, all the parents and siblings shown so far were the same species: Fluttershy, Zephyr and their parents are all Pegasi, Pinkie, her sisters and their parents are all earth ponies, Rarity, Sweetie Belle and their parents are all unicorns, and so on and so forth. This could indicate that Scootaloo's father, maybe even her mother, are earth ponies, which could explain why Scootaloo has had trouble flying up until this point.

Thought, in the and, I'm just glad that Scootaloo is confirmed to not be an orphan. She has awful parents though, which would mean Rainbow has done a better job at raising Scootaloo than her real parents. 

 

Edited October 11, 2017 by PoisonClaw

[BastementSparkle 20,312]

Just now, non-existent said:

Ah to have that naivete. Must be nice.

Look, I'm all for LGBT themed in kids entertainment ... but you either do it or don't do it. Half measures on this issue are cowardly, and Vogels tongue-in-cheek comments about quilting are again ... cowardly. This isn't Hasbro's doing. The writers are being sneaky. This isn't something to celebrate. 

I know this isn't Hasbro's doing and is at best the writer's being sneaky, I don't really think it's cowardly on the writer's part as if they want to do it but Hasbro won't let them, I think it's more than fine to be a little sneaky. I'll be pleasantly surprised if they can stop being sneaky and Hasbro really let's them do it but I'm not really expecting it because angry parents don't buy toys.

 As for it being a political statement or not...It shouldn't be and doesn't have to be, some people are going to take it as one no matter what because people are that way, but that's more on them. A couple is just a couple.

[Jeric 46,834]

Just now, I.T said:

Well, I think there is a difference between what I want, and what the story is; canon is very serious and very strict

Not with this company it isn't. Again been waiting since 2014 for someone to officially state how canon is defined.