Should Gay Ponies be allowed?

[Jeric 46,851]

I’m rather vocal on this topic.

Trypical set-up and caveat. If you’ve paid attention to my posts in debates and LGBT threads, I’m obviously one who doesn’t shy away from advocating rainbow rights. Keen observation also shows that my entire family, including myself or gay or transgender or both. But at the same time, I’m not very vocal about my own identity. It doesn’t define me. I understand that it is absolutely critical for others, but seeing as that we all tend to view these topics through our personal lens. So while I understand the desire for inclusion, I don’t start from a need to see my life validated on screen. I have other ways of validation that are more personally enriching. 

Now, that the setup is over. I agree with @~C. Discord~. As a fan of writing, characterization, story, and leaving an opening for audience to take some personal emotional ownership or connection to a fictional creation ... I’m not particularly going to advocate the use of gay for the sake of gay. Nor am I going to advocate for them suggesting that it’s not something that happens. Both are completely unneeded in this show. In other shows and films and literature, someone’s gender, orientation, race should be an element of characterization and NOT to the sale of filling a slot. Most writers do this organically naturally, but when they create a character that is inherently gay as their primary characterization it is rarely a genuine feeling character. I want character not tokens. I want vessels for exploring art of narration not a pulpit. I don’t want to always see myself on the page or on screen. I’m not that interesting and I want interesting characters. 

Neutral is a perfect approach for Friendship is Magic. And yes in my mind a  character or two happen to find the same sex attractive, but that’s all me. Your mileage will vary. 

[Celli 4,338]

8 hours ago, EpicEnergy said:

Definitely not, making any character in any movie/TV show gay or transgender is repulsive to me.

 

Ah yes the whole "gay people are bad" religious shtick. Thanks for giving me reason to ignore your posts.

 

As for the topic at hand, I don't care as long as it's done well and not forced.

[Jeric 46,851]

1 hour ago, Celli said:

Ah yes the whole "gay people are bad" religious shtick. Thanks for giving me reason to ignore your posts.

 

As for the topic at hand, I don't care as long as it's done well and not forced.

Agreed. Admin or not I don’t have time for people who piss on an entire group because of that. I’ve since walked away from organized Christianity specifically because of the amount of douchebagery I saw. I don’t know what’s worse though, being out front about it, or passive aggressively leaving reactions on a post on here, Facebook, etc. 

I still kinda believe, but I’m looking for a Church that doesn’t believe in breeding stupid people who can’t read their own bloody religious texts. Same types that let strangers on cable news tell them how to feel and bend over and say Thank You Sam! 

 

 

Anyway, yeah I think all reasonable people who like good story telling don’t want any character elements forced. It’s preachy, and doesn’t allow for that “oh!” moment. 

[Singe 2,111]

Considering how the show already did cross-species relationship teases like Twilight/Flash Sentry and Spike/Rarity.  It shouldn't be a big deal if two of the same gender have a romantic interest. I more incline that if it happens in the show, it just happens and the characters don't make a big deal epic moment out of it.

Edited March 18, 2019 by Singe

[EpicEnergy 23,193]

On 3/17/2019 at 9:38 PM, Jeric said:

I don’t have time for people who piss on an entire group because of that.

Isn't that what people who support LGBT do to religious people? I mean, LGBTs seem very intolerant of Christian beliefs in regards to sexuality, and the modern day culture does as well, it's ironic once you think about it. Religious people hate on LGBTs, then LGBT supporters hate on religious people - both sides aggressively attack each other, neither of them willing to relent. Now that's something problematic, the outcome wouldn't be good.

Edited March 23, 2019 by EpicEnergy
edited out my misunderstandings

[Celli 4,338]

@EpicEnergy

I didn't mean I was going to block you, just that I wasn't going to read your posts, and you didn't need to explain your point of view in three extensive paragraphs. I misunderstood your meaning and that's it. I don't think all religious people are homophobic but I don't really like the whole "homosexuality is bad because my god said it is or some book that may or may not have been made up" justification.

[EpicEnergy 23,193]

On 3/19/2019 at 12:06 AM, Celli said:

I didn't mean I was going to block you, just that I wasn't going to read your posts, and you didn't need to explain your point of view in three extensive paragraphs. I misunderstood your meaning and that's it. I don't think all religious people are homophobic but I don't really like the whole "homosexuality is bad because my god said it is or some book that may or may not have been made up" justification.

I'm good at overthinking and misunderstanding things, I apologize for misunderstanding your post as well.

Edited March 23, 2019 by EpicEnergy

[cuteycindyhoney 13,306]

I see absolutely nothing wrong with it. Steven Universe had a lesbian wedding, and the world didn't end.

[RDDash 19,170]

Is that raises the bar or something? I remember homosexual characters had been teased for awhile in the show

[Cash In 22,236]

I'm perfectly fine with that, seeing as there is nothing wrong with being homosexual. Granted, it would mean upseting a few, as some are more accepting than others.

[FearTheBelle 55]

Should it be allowed? Yes, of course it should. But that's a very different question from the one that matters, which is, "Will it happen?" To which my answer would be no. Hasbro is a corporate entity that has to be wary of turning off any demographic, and the best way to do that is to steer well clear of topics that are even moderately controversial. And beyond that, it is a kid's show; so in my view it is best to limit romantic facets of all types of relationships, be they hetero-, homo-, or bisexual, to some degree and keep them out of the spotlight.

[Kadeda 178]

I don't really care... just don't treat it as toxic like so many shows have done.

[Sunset Rose 254]

It's a children's show no matter how many grown fans try to deny it based on their patronage- that argument is so tired and empty.

Sexuality should not be an element of children's entertainment as far as I'm concerned, particularly off the backs of abject arguments shoving social ideologies in every direction they can. I don't think intimate relationships should be a highlight in the show period. They can imply a pair of characters are in a relationship- gay, straight, helicopter, whatever- without shoving it into a spotlight and telling everyone to look at how gay or straight it is. Obviously Twilight's parents are in a relationship, there's an obvious pander to the fans for Lyra and Bon Bon being a thing, but it's not called 'My Little Pony: Sexuality Is Magic' for a reason.

[Tao 7,599]

I tend to agree in keeping things in a gray zone when it comes to MLP.  Given the show is for younger kids in the first place.  We have other cartoons that are very open when it comes to the idea of LGBT community nowadays.   Which is great to see!   So a nuff is a nuff.   If not,  you have fandom things you can make or read for that kind of thing!

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,371]

1 hour ago, Sunset Rose said:

Sexuality should not be an element of children's entertainment as far as I'm concerned

Under this argument then literally no relationships should be in the show whatsoever. People seem to forget that sexuality isn't strictly 'gay or bisexual', heterosexual is also part of this. They've gone as far to have Shining Armor and Cadence get married, then they have a kid which obviously means they boned each other at one point. Does that not count as sexuality? If they can go that far with a heterosexual relationship in a 'children's show', I think including a gay couple isn't that big of a deal.

[Rebel the Wolfgirl 5,601]

18 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

Under this argument then literally no relationships should be in the show whatsoever.

 

18 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

They've gone as far to have Shining Armor and Cadence get married

Can I also add that these points also undermine and invalidate this bit of the "argument"?:

1 hour ago, Sunset Rose said:

I don't think intimate relationships should be a highlight in the show period. They can imply a pair of characters are in a relationship- gay, straight, helicopter, whatever- without shoving it into a spotlight and telling everyone to look at how gay or straight it is.

Particularly, I want to highlight that first sentence. By this logic (if we take it at face value as I am), we shouldn't outright show things like marriage or families, because those things are "intimate" and children obviously can't handle those obviously mature concepts.

I'm just adding my two cents here, pay no attention to the bisexual fellow with the David Bowie avatar and edgy username. *walks off, whistling innocently*

Edited March 20, 2019 by Renegade the Unicorn

[Sunny Fox 5,950]

The show already shows romance and love between heterosexual couples, (Hearts and Hooves Day is about little else) and all the nascent understanding of sexuality that such entails. So, if they were to include homosexual couples in the show in the same vein, I don't see how it would be a problem for anyone except those people who are going to be offended by any reminder that they share a planet with people who feel romantic or sexual attraction to members of their own sex. Even having an episode that delicately (YMMV) broaches the issue should present no problem.

Having a "very special episode" episode would be counterproductive, I feel. Be the change you want to see in the world, and all that. Presenting it as something normal and accepted in Equestria, without putting too fine a point on it, would be enough. Of course, I'm a young, white, cisgender male, so what the heck would I know?

[Sunset Rose 254]

41 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

Under this argument then literally no relationships should be in the show whatsoever.

▼

2 hours ago, Sunset Rose said:

They can imply a pair of characters are in a relationship- gay, straight, helicopter, whatever- without shoving it into a spotlight and telling everyone to look at how gay or straight it is. Obviously Twilight's parents are in a relationship, there's an obvious pander to the fans for Lyra and Bon Bon being a thing, but it's not called 'My Little Pony: Sexuality Is Magic' for a reason.

 

43 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

They've gone as far to have Shining Armor and Cadence get married, then they have a kid which obviously means they boned each other at one point. Does that not count as sexuality?

What sounds more likely, for the show to say to the viewer "Yes, they had sex and Cadence became pregnant then gave birth to a child." or for them to handle it in the nebulous way that they did by her simply just by saying she was going to have a child (without showing that she was pregnant physically- just by saying it) and then having a child offscreen later on? They don't need to imply that they had sex specifically, just that they had a child because- once again- this is a children's show rated for children and not for mature audiences. the mature elements of it are not even implied because of the show's rating. Adults can put two and two together because we know sex makes babies, but it's not one of the show's talking points. It's a show about colorful ponies making friends, not colorful ponies having sex and fretting over their orientation.

 

32 minutes ago, Renegade the Unicorn said:

Particularly, I want to highlight that first sentence. By this logic (if we take it at face value as I am), we shouldn't outright show things like marriage or families, because those things are "intimate" and children obviously can't handle those obviously mature concepts.

Read above. One thing implicates another to adults, but not to children. Did they highlight the straightness of their relationship in the show or did they just marry them? Did they go into specifics about how children are made or did Cadence just have a child as a background story function?

Correct answer: the latter, on both questions. If this show were rated anything above TV-Y then you might have an argument. Adult themes do not suit that rating therefor mature concepts do not apply.

 

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,371]

6 minutes ago, Sunset Rose said:

What sounds more likely, for the show to say to the viewer "Yes, they had sex and Cadence became pregnant then gave birth to a child." or for them to handle it in the nebulous way that they did by her simply just by saying she was going to have a child (without showing that she was pregnant physically- just by saying it) and then having a child offscreen later on? They don't need to imply that they had sex specifically, just that they had a child because- once again- this is a children's show rated for children and not for mature audiences. the mature elements of it are not even implied because of the show's rating. Adults can put two and two together because we know sex makes babies, but it's not one of the show's talking points. It's a show about colorful ponies making friends, not colorful ponies having sex and fretting over their orientation. 

That established, then by all means having a gay couple casually in the show should be of no issue whatsoever. I am not saying "PUT GAY PONES IN THE TOP SPOTLIGHT AND TOTALLY HAVE THEM SAY THEY ARE GAY." because that doesn't work regardless of orientation. They can easily have a gay couple included and not have to make a big fuss about it. Of course though, we already know people would lose their fucking minds over it no matter how casual it is. I saw the outrage over the whole thing with Scootaloo's aunt. In a BOOK. People were going insane over that of all things. So this shit is clearly one-sided as hell. To them, even just acknowledging homosexuality is an 'agenda'. It shouldn't be an issue, but it obviously would be because people are morons.

7 minutes ago, Sunset Rose said:

Read above. One thing implicates another to adults, but not to children. Did they highlight the straightness of their relationship in the show or did they just marry them? Did they go into specifics about how children are made or did Cadence just have a child as a background story function?

Correct answer: the latter, on both questions. If this show were rated anything above TV-Y then you might have an argument. Adult themes do not suit that rating therefor mature concepts do not apply.

And this part. What would a gay couple imply going by this logic? It would imply that two ponies love each other. THAT'S IT. The exact same thing as Cadence and Shining Armor, only in a same gender scenario. That is all it would tell kids, that should be perfectly fine.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Kyoshi

[Sunny Fox 5,950]

I do like* that double standard:

heterosexual couple portrayed... oh that's just life...
homosexual couple portrayed... gosh, so adult, so sexualized! 

* actually, I do not like it, it sucks.

[Sunset Rose 254]

9 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

That established, then by all means having a gay couple casually in the show should be of no issue whatsoever.

I believe that's what I said. I didn't say that it was bad to have this orientation or that in the show or that one should or shouldn't be in or out, I said orientation shouldn't be a highlight. I don't believe having gay ponies depicted in the show is inherently negative or positive so we can have tiny teasers of things like Lyra giving Bon Bon a gift on Hearts and Hooves Day or simple things of that nature. My point is that it shouldn't be an initiative to underline the sexual nature of a relationship regardless of orientation due to the show's rating. Children see that Hearts and Hooves scene I mentioned and don't think much of it other than it's a function of Hearts and Hooves Day, adult fans look at it and begin preparing their essays on MLP Forums. If the nature of orientation wasn't rooted in sexual desire, then it would be more appropriate.

 

9 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

Of course though, we already know people would lose their fucking minds over it no matter how casual it is. I saw the outrage over the whole thing with Scootaloo's aunt. In a BOOK. People were going insane over that of all things. So this shit is clearly one-sided as hell. It shouldn't be an issue, but it obviously would be because people are morons.

What a lovely, uplifting sentiment. Thanks for sharing.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Sunset Rose

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,371]

28 minutes ago, Sunset Rose said:

I believe that's what I said. I didn't say that it was bad to have this orientation or that in the show or that one should or shouldn't be in or out, I said orientation shouldn't be a highlight. I don't believe having gay ponies depicted in the show is inherently negative or positive so we can have tiny teasers of things like Lyra giving Bon Bon a gift on Hearts and Hooves Day or simple things of that nature. My point is that it shouldn't be an initiative to underline the sexual nature of a relationship regardless of orientation due to the show's rating. Children see that Hearts and Hooves scene I mentioned and don't think much of it other than it's a function of Hearts and Hooves Day, adult fans look at it and begin preparing their essays on MLP Forums. If the nature of orientation wasn't rooted in sexual desire, then it would be more appropriate.

Tiny teasers? Why can't we have have a couple be in the show outright? Again, if we go by Cadence and Shining Armor, it could easily be done without getting into the nitty gritty, I would think. The sexual desires thing, again, that applies to all orientations, so them showing one means they could show another.

30 minutes ago, Sunset Rose said:

What a lovely, uplifting sentiment. Thanks for sharing.

I believe I sense sarcasm here, but I'm not wrong. I already know that if they showed even the slightest hint of an actual gay couple, idiots would be wanting to burn Hasbro to the ground. Like I said, it is hilariously one-sided. Homophobia is clearly still a very real thing in the US and people still want to bow down to the homophobes more than anything else in situations like this.

@EpicEnergyJust wanted to point out that you have Rainbow Dash dressed up like Tracer in your avatar and Tracer is a lesbian. Just wanted to point it out because I thought it was ironic and funny.

[EpicEnergy 23,193]

4 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

Just wanted to point out that you have Rainbow Dash dressed up like Tracer in your avatar and Tracer is a lesbian. Just wanted to point it out because I thought it was ironic and funny.

LOL, I didn't even know that!

I haven't played much of Overwatch, the main reason I have that as my avatar is because Rainbow looks good as Tracer and because of the "I'm already Tracer" meme. I'm still going to keep the avatar on though just because it's one of my favs, not being a troll or anything.

[Sunset Rose 254]

3 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

Tiny teasers? Why can't we have have a couple be in the show outright? Again, if we go by Cadence and Shining Armor, it could easily be done without getting into the nitty gritty, I would think. The sexual desires thing, again, that applies to all orientations, so them showing one means they could show another.

But they didn't, they just said that Cadence and Shining Armor were expecting a child and then Flurry Heart came along offscreen without the explicit mention of hows of it all. That could raise questions in a child's mind for their parents to answer later, but Hasbro would say (truthfully, I believe) that it wouldn't be FiM's duty to teach kids about the birds and the bees. If Shining Armor had married Big Mac and they adopted a child offscreen and did so in the same way I would be just as fine with it. (Though I'm sure many others wouldn't. I just think it would not break any moral rules or anything.)

I think my point is that I agree with how the show has handled it so far. Yes, people would probably have a lot to say if Twilight married Celestia, but in the absence of the show's rating in this scenario mind you, for that specific reason, I don't think Hasbro would want to do that with higher profile characters. While I think it would be a wonderful message to send that they support and acknowledge LGBT people as a normal thing, it would probably incite more than they bargain for from viewers in this day and age. We're getting there, but we're not quite there yet.

And yes, that's me off-hand admitting that I also don't think Shining Armor and Cadence really have much of an impact on the show. Or at the very least that I didn't think The Crystal Empire was very interesting.

 

5 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

I believe I sense sarcasm here, but I'm not wrong. I already know that if they showed even the slightest hint of an actual gay couple, idiots would be wanting to burn Hasbro to the ground. Like I said, it is hilariously one-sided. Homophobia is clearly still a very real thing in the US and people still want to bow down to the homophobes more than anything else in situations like this. 

If you were Hasbro, would you want that to make a martyr of your series by proving a point about non-straight relationships' acceptance in America or just continue to stay the successful course? I believe the best way of handling it- for Hasbro anyway, since it's such a sensitive topic for so many people one way or another- is to distance themselves from any potential for others to say they're culturally insensitive to anyone. i.e. To not put themselves in any position to fall into hot water with fans or the media, which means having a light touch with orientation representation.

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,371]

1 minute ago, Sunset Rose said:

But they didn't, they just said that Cadence and Shining Armor were expecting a child and then Flurry Heart came along offscreen without the explicit mention of hows of it all. That could raise questions in a child's mind for their parents to answer later, but Hasbro would say (truthfully, I believe) that it wouldn't be FiM's duty to teach kids about the birds and the bees. If Shining Armor had married Big Mac and they adopted a child offscreen and did so in the same way I would be just as fine with it. (Though I'm sure many others wouldn't. I just think it would not break any moral rules or anything.)

I think my point is that I agree with how the show has handled it so far. Yes, people would probably have a lot to say if Twilight married Celestia, but in the absence of the show's rating in this scenario mind you, for that specific reason, I don't think Hasbro would want to do that with higher profile characters. While I think it would be a wonderful message to send that they support and acknowledge LGBT people as a normal thing, it would probably incite more than they bargain for from viewers in this day and age. We're getting there, but we're not quite there yet.

And yes, that's me off-hand admitting that I also don't think Shining Armor and Cadence really have much of an impact on the show. Or at the very least that I didn't think The Crystal Empire was very interesting.

Oh, I wasn't even referring to sex in that particular point, I was just referring to the relationship as is. They could simply show the relationship and have it be that, like they have done with others. That would work perfectly fine, buuuuuuuut...

2 minutes ago, Sunset Rose said:

If you were Hasbro, would you want that to make a martyr of your series by proving a point about non-straight relationships' acceptance in America or just continue to stay the successful course? I believe the best way of handling it- for Hasbro anyway, since it's such a sensitive topic for so many people one way or another- is to distance themselves from any potential for others to say they're culturally insensitive to anyone. i.e. To not put themselves in any position to fall into hot water with fans or the media, which means having a light touch with orientation representation.

From a pure business perspective, obviously it makes more sense to bow down to the idiots so they can continue getting their precious money, but that I might add is part of the overall problem. The fact that there are so many people that would implode if a gay character or couple were ever even slightly hinted at on the show. Those people are morons. It isn't a matter of "I am sensitive to this topic." It is "I am a homophobe and them showing gay characters is an agenda by them." which is funny because the anti-LGBT thing often comes across as a pretty big agenda to me. I am not saying anyone that disagrees with having a gay character on the show is like this, but for the topic in question, it certainly is the majority.