movies/tv Gay characters in a kids show?

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

Sure there have been gay people who showed up in TV shows. In fact, it's done all the time, from what I can tell.. They make cameos and even sometimes star in the cartoon.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRDlRYCX8es

[MelancholicMemory 2,025]

Well, I wouldn't be against shows with gay romance, but I think in general you want to avoid homosexuality in children's television because it is tied so closely with sexuality in general which is a more mature subject. I mean, think about it. Without relying on stereotypes, actually showing homosexual acts, or someone randomly shouting out there sexuality, how would you get it through that the character is gay? Generally stuff like that usually isn't closely tied to the plot at all.

[Zygen 6,066]

Well I wouldn't personally be against the whole fact exactly. But I do think that maybe its just kinda unnecessary and would cause conflict between the ones who don't like homosexuality and such, possibly getting Hasbro into a tight spot.

 

Its also a confusing thing to teach children, I don't think they should really be exposed to it quite that much at that age, I think it could lead to some confusion and misinterpretation that children are prone to.

 

So I'm not against the idea totally, and not against homosexuality at all, I just think its kinda unnecessary and will cause more trouble then its worth mostlikely.

 

Thats just my thoughts, i don't actually know what the reaction would be for sure.

[Tollhouse 79]

Well, I wouldn't be against shows with gay romance, but I think in general you want to avoid homosexuality in children's television because it is tied so closely with sexuality in general which is a more mature subject. I mean, think about it. Without relying on stereotypes, actually showing homosexual acts, or someone randomly shouting out there sexuality, how would you get it through that the character is gay? Generally stuff like that usually isn't closely tied to the plot at all.

Not necessarily.  They have boys kissing girls in kids shows.  Instead of that just have boys kissing boys or girls kissing girls.  It doesn't need to get dirty like that. 

Edited June 26, 2013 by Tollhouse

[Fox 5,330]

One flaw with your post (I really don't think you saw my post in"What's your sexuality") but Im actually not heterosexual. But that's okay, I have a hard time telling homo and heterosexuality in people myself.

 

And TV shows MAY influence people, but they don't change who they really are. (Or none that I know of)

Man, you're a person I really don't care if you're pan-sexual, trans-sexual, gay, faggot, whatever. You're a person, it's okay man. I'm not going to judge you for being yourself.

 

I don't know how not seeing a post in a complete other thread is a flaw in my previous post here though.  There's no need to argue, lol.

3. Yes, but TV shows didn't really make you completely change who you are? Am I correct?

Sorry, I sort of avoided that. Depends! I'm sort of different generally from what I watch, I don't watch too much TV, but I'll watch some shows online. They do have some sort of addition to my lifestyle. I guess. XD

 

[lincolnshirepony 527]

6teen had an episode that featured a gay character. Though that episode was the only one from season 4 that never made it to the US. Hm...

[James 302]

6teen had an episode that featured a gay character. Though that episode was the only one from season 4 that never made it to the US. Hm...

 

I've never watched 6teen before, but I just checked out the episode you were talking about. That was pretty cool, it was very casual about it, a reasonable portrayal of homosexuality that you'd think wouldn't offend anyone.

 

I guess Canadians aren't as bothered by this kind of stuff.

[Orablanco Account 3,707]

I say go for it, if the producers of said show are up to it. It's gonna happen eventually, and the only reason it's taboo is because we make it inappropriate. There shouldn't be anything wrong with it, and doing it in a mature matter would not be "shoving it into a kid's face". You'd merely be informing them that that's a thing that actually exists.

 

I mean, the creators of Gargoyles wanted the character Lexington to be gay, but they never got around to it. The rage reigned down upon the kids show that has the balls to feature a homosexual character would be worth it for the legacy it'll leave behind.

 

Also, ParaNorman was the best movie that came out in 2012. Frigging love that film.

[James 302]

Here's that episode of 6teen if anyone wants to see it. It's also pretty cool that the premise of this episode is switching up gender roles, even if it is in a simple way.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRya1xht05g

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MZVlgmAqok

 

Wasn't quite expecting them to actually use the word gay.

Edited June 26, 2013 by James

[Flutter's lover <3 8,206]

I never seen that episode of 6Teen, but I was watching Totally Spies and Clover, Sam or Alex accused some other girl at the school of being a lesbian.

 

 

1. I have the choice to be gay or what not. I choose not to though.

(how ignorant of a comment from me~)

 

2. I don't understand what kind of activities you judge or perceive as "gay." 

3. It can spark interest. Most bisexuals are curious~

 

1. It is not a choice. I am gay. I did not choose to be gay....I am who I am.

 

I really dislike it when people say it's a choice, because quite simply put....it is not. I can choose to act straight though.But where's thepoint in that? I rather just be myself.

[Dr. Eggnog 203]

I think that there aren't any gay characters in a kids show unless you count He-Man if that is a kid show. But other than that, Spongebob is the only character in a kid show that acts gay and is usually rumored to be gay with Squidward and Patrick.

Actually, a lot of people thought that Ren and Stimpy acted gay with each other.  However, it was completely unintentional by the creators.  So the same is probably true with SpongeBob and Patrick.

 

Personally, I wouldn't care if they put a gay character in a kids show, so long as they don't make a big deal about the fact that they're gay.

[Fluttashy 325]

You're very wrong about there not being gay characters in cartoons. I'm a big sailor moon fan and there's a lesbian couple in the show. It's kind of subtle but they are clearly lovers and it even mentions it and its s kids show from the 90s.

[ePONYmous 215]

As far as kid's shows go, the only show I remember(I don't know if it's the same in Japan, but at least in America it was treated as a kid's show) with any homosexual characters that was taken seriously was Sailor Moon, with Sailor Uranus and Sailor Neptune. I don't know enough about Sailor Moon, I always thought that these two were romantically involved with each other, and at times was taking pretty seriously at times(Someone correct me if I'm wrong, cause I probably am)

That's correct. I also know that Zoisite and Malachite (US Dub, real name Kunzite) were homosexual lovers. In the US dub, Zoisite was re-dubbed as a heterosexual female, when in reality, he's a homosexual male. Such a shame, really.

 

I fully support the idea of including gay characters in kids shows.  The heterosexualism needs to stop.  Kids at a young age need to understand that it's ok to be in love with others of the same sex.  If a kid sees a gay character on tv that doesn't mean they're going to end up being gay.  That's ridiculous.  They'll confirm their sexuality later when they mature just like everypony else.  

 

Another thing that needs to be put to an end is associating homosexuality with mature themes.  That's just plain stupid.   And I fail to see why parents would find homosexuality inappropriate for their children to be aware of.  It's just love for Christ's sake.  Love has no gender.  So get with it moms and dads.

^ This. You have taken the words right out of my mouth.

 

I've never been really sympathetic toward the whole, "but I'll have to explain to my child why two same-sex individuals are together" perspective. So? That's your job. Homosexuality isn't something that should be hidden. If I had a child that asked me that question, the answer is really simple, "Some boys like girls, just like girls like boys, and some boys like boys, and some girls like girls." There. Done. Simple as that. You don't need to go into detail, just make them aware of the fact that love exists in multiple forms. They'll figure out where they fit in due time. It's the fact that predominant heterosexuality exists in these cartoons that kids are "pre-programmed" to think that anything else isn't normal.

 

The way I see it is, if you're going to introduce sexuality into a cartoon. Be fair, and inclusive. Show that other forms of love exist. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm sure companies like Hasbro (or any other, for that matter), aren't avoiding it for that reason. As most, if not all, of us know, doing a move like this today is rather risky. You or I may not mind seeing two mares or two stallions nuzzling in an alternate version of "Hearts and Hooves Day," but a large group of parents seeing it surely would not be pleased.

 

You don't even need to look into television to know that. It reminds me of the drama that Oreo encountered when it posted its picture of a rainbow cream-filled cookie to show support for gay pride. Or the drama that Target encountered when it started allowing same-sex couples to register in their wedding registry. So do I think it'd be a smart move for companies to introduce homosexuality into kid's cartoons? No, not right now, at least. That would be a poor business decision on their part. Do I think that's right? Not at all. Perhaps in a few decades from now, when popular opinion has shifted further in favor of gay rights, which I don't see why it wouldn't, then you may see it as ubiquitous as heterosexuality. At least, I certainly hope so. I'd like to see that in my lifetime.

[Silver Letter 1,832]

It would be a bad idea. This show wouldn't be a viable place to have the kind of message that it would present towards viewers of a younger age. Mostly, it would attract negative attention from bombastic parents that care more about controversy than their foals and simply wouldn't flow with the show itself.

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

Technically there's already more than one kid's show with a gay couple in it. Besides Spongebob and Patrick there's also Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street. And if anyone disagrees I've found some Youtube videos that say otherwise.

Hold on a minute. I admit I have never seen a full episode of SpongeBob, and I never watched Bert and Ernie, so maybe I'm wrong here. But my issue is this: Why is it assumed that two close friends are automatically gay? This is a bigotry going in the other direction. People are so eager to jump onto the pro-gay bandwagon that they have to stretch their imagination and find "gayness" in everything. It is, by definition, prejudice to assume two characters are gay, merely because of their close friendship. You can care and even love someone as a friend without being gay.

 

Is SpongeBob really gay, in that he has sex with Patrick? I'm going to assume Nickelodeon doesn't portray sex (probably a bad assumption), therefore, we can't possibly know if Spongebob is gay. Two males can be close friends without being gay.

 

Why the obsession with wanting gay characters? How would that be portrayed? Compare and contrast: Cadence and Shining Armor got married, so clearly they are traditional lovers. And obviously sex happens off camera. Otherwise where do little ponies come from? But the key element in the issue is the separation of sex from love.

 

Sex should not be portrayed in a kids' show. The most that should be shown is that a married pony has a baby. Now, once you remove sex, all that is left is platonic love. But is platonic love also gay? I say no. Once you remove sex from the relationship, you are left with deep friendship and caring. Therefore, it is impossible to portray “gay” in a show without sex. You can imply it to a degree: characters live together, care for each other, etc, but it would be illogical to conclude that said characters MUST be gay.

 

It is hypocritical to force this whole “pro gay” issue down everyone's throat (pardon the imagery). On the one hand the pro gay movement says everyone should be free to be who they are. But on the other hand they want to push people in that direction.

 

The whole issue is artificial. There is not nearly the bigotry that people claim there is. It is politically popular to talk about how “pro gay rights” you are. No matter how accepting our culture is, there will always be people who make their living by “hate bating” by finding bigotry that doesn't exist.

[Blackcat 205]

1. False. True, for acting on the sexuality though.

2. "Gay" is society's perception in general.

3. Yes, but TV shows didn't really make you completely change who you are? Am I correct?

I actually would love to see a childrens show be unapologeticly ballsy and include gay characters. I don't think they will make an attempt to do this in MLP's lifetime, but eh, maybe someday a show will come along and do it well.

 

However P.F. Sparkle. I gotta say, as someone who has dated and enjoyed dating both genders I feel kinda like I could choose. I don't have much of a natural draw towards either gender. It wouldn't be too tough for me to forget about women and stick solely with men, nor would it be difficult for me to do the same the other way around. Or I could be content with both.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong about it being a choice or not. I just feel like there's some 'doubt'. 

 

Usually you see straight people suggesting that it is a choice, I just felt like you should see that not even all non straight people are on board with the  'it's not a choice' version of things.

[John 793]

I don't think any expression of any type of sexuality is appropriate in a children's cartoon.  Those who support gay rights under the condition that gays "don't rub it in their faces" might be offended.  I'm not saying that this would be an example of that, but some people might see it that way.  Also, there are people who are entitled to their opinion that homosexuality is objectively wrong because they believe it causes impurities in the immortal soul.  The show might lose a large number of supporters with these beliefs.  Also, all of those other bronies who are irritated by all of the lesbian shipping might abandon ship.

[ePONYmous 215]

@@BronyNumber42, I agree with part of what you said. It does seem awfully silly to automatically assume those characters may have been homosexual. I was surprised to read that myself. However, I respectfully disagree with some of your points:

 

Why the obsession with wanting gay characters? How would that be portrayed? Compare and contrast: Cadence and Shining Armor got married, so clearly they are traditional lovers. And obviously sex happens off camera. Otherwise where do little ponies come from? But the key element in the issue is the separation of sex from love.

I don't think there is a so-called "obsession" to want gay characters. Rather, it's more of not hiding the fact that homosexuality exists. Allow it the opportunity to show up, side-by-side, along with heterosexuality. In the case you describe, it'd be very easy to portray it. Two stallions or two mares nuzzling. Remember the scene in "Hearts and Hooves Day" when Caramel and a mare were nuzzling? They could've done something as simple as that, but with two same-sex ponies, to communicate the same thing. Obviously, fillies and colts wouldn't result from that. I think separating sex from love in a same-sex situation is just as easy as an opposite-sex situation.

 

Sex should not be portrayed in a kids' show. The most that should be shown is that a married pony has a baby. Now, once you remove sex, all that is left is platonic love. But is platonic love also gay? I say no. Once you remove sex from the relationship, you are left with deep friendship and caring. Therefore, it is impossible to portray “gay” in a show without sex. You can imply it to a degree: characters live together, care for each other, etc, but it would be illogical to conclude that said characters MUST be gay.

I totally agree with your first point here. Sex should absolutely not be portrayed in a kids' show. However, gay love can certainly be platonic, just as heterosexual love. Just as a man and a woman can be romantically involved, sans sex, so can two men and two women. Sex is not the determinant between what constitutes a relationship versus a friendship. You can have sex even if it's not a relationship as well, but that's an entirely different subject matter, and you can have a relationship that doesn't even have sex. A relationship is based on how you feel for one another, not if you are physically intimate. My first girlfriend and I, for example, were platonic, but would you say we were not in a relationship, but just a deep friendship? If so, she and I would strongly disagree with that assertion.

 

So, with that said, it is very much possible to portray a gay relationship without sex. Like I said, a nuzzle will do, in the context of MLP:FiM. Just a simple sign of affection like that. In fact, what you said would be perfect. Have them live together, care for each other, but also add in the nuzzling, and I think that would get the message across that they are more than just friends, without even mentioning the notion of sex.

 

It is hypocritical to force this whole “pro gay” issue down everyone's throat (pardon the imagery). On the one hand the pro gay movement says everyone should be free to be who they are. But on the other hand they want to push people in that direction.

 

The whole issue is artificial. There is not nearly the bigotry that people claim there is. It is politically popular to talk about how “pro gay rights” you are. No matter how accepting our culture is, there will always be people who make their living by “hate bating” by finding bigotry that doesn't exist.

 

I do agree there is some sort of degree of hypocrisy, from both ends. I am a "pro gay" individual, but I do not hate someone for disagreeing with homosexuality. I think you have every right to disagree with it as much as you see fit, but once it crosses the line into denying others certain rights, then it is crossing into the realm of bigotry. Which certainly is not an artificial issue, but a very real one. Of course, your last point is most certainly right. There will always be people that will hate on something, but like I said, the bigotry does exist. Plain and simple. There's a difference between disagreement and bigotry.

 

It'd be like me saying this, "I disagree with your opinion, but I respect your right to say it." That's a disagreement.

"I disagree with your opinion, you have no right to express it at all." That's a bigoted statement.

 

I'm the former, by the way. I may disagree with you on some of this, but I hold no hard feelings toward you for having those views. We are just discussing our thoughts, after all.

[Just some guy 1,070]

I don't see the harm in it.

 

Why hide stuff like homosexuality from kids?It's a natural part of human society,whether we like to admit it or not,and we shouldn't hide them from it.Not saying there should be gay characters whose sole purpose is to be gay and remind the viewers of that every second,but just have it as a casual characteristic of a character or something.As long as they do it tastefully like how it was done in The New Normal,for example.

[John 793]

I don't think there is a so-called "obsession" to want gay characters. Rather, it's more of not hiding the fact that homosexuality exists. Allow it the opportunity to show up, side-by-side, along with heterosexuality. In the case you describe, it'd be very easy to portray it. Two stallions or two mares nuzzling. Remember the scene in "Hearts and Hooves Day" when Caramel and a mare were nuzzling? They could've done something as simple as that, but with two same-sex ponies, to communicate the same thing. Obviously, fillies and colts wouldn't result from that. I think separating sex from love in a same-sex situation is just as easy as an opposite-sex situation.

 

So, with that said, it is very much possible to portray a gay relationship without sex. Like I said, a nuzzle will do, in the context of MLP:FiM. Just a simple sign of affection like that. In fact, what you said would be perfect. Have them live together, care for each other, but also add in the nuzzling, and I think that would get the message across that they are more than just friends, without even mentioning the notion of sex.

 

 

I do agree there is some sort of degree of hypocrisy, from both ends. I am a "pro gay" individual, but I do not hate someone for disagreeing with homosexuality. I think you have every right to disagree with it as much as you see fit, but once it crosses the line into denying others certain rights, then it is crossing into the realm of bigotry. Which certainly is not an artificial issue, but a very real one. Of course, your last point is most certainly right. There will always be people that will hate on something, but like I said, the bigotry does exist. Plain and simple. There's a difference between disagreement and bigotry.

 

It'd be like me saying this, "I disagree with your opinion, but I respect your right to say it." That's a disagreement.

"I disagree with your opinion, you have no right to express it at all." That's a bigoted statement.

 

I'm the former, by the way. I may disagree with you on some of this, but I hold no hard feelings toward you for having those views. We are just discussing our thoughts, after all.

 

You have some good points.

 

 

You are also right about people having the right to believe homosexuality is wrong.  The show however would not constitute bigotry if it did not include homosexual aspects.  Keep in mind that in a capitalistic society, the show is owned by a private organization, which has the right to include its beliefs in the shows contents.  With this in mind, homosexuality doesn't necessarily have the right to be included just because it exists.

 

Also, platonic love can be expressed in ways that don't include aspects which could very well be interpreted as sexual.  Isn't this what the show is about anyway?  It might as well be called "platonic love is magic."  This isn't what makes someone homosexual though.  Straight people platonically love their friends.  Heck, even some will go as far as to take a bullet for them.

 

Your position on what Bigotry is actually depends on what one considers to be a "right."  Personally, I think marriage is a religious ceremony and a spiritual union, and thus should not have any benefits.  It is also not a right.

[Pan the Fabulous Ferret 2,642]

Its done all the time sillies c:

 

Gay characters everywhere! I mean just look at Pinkie pie! I don't think I have ever seen such a gay character with so much energy and high spirits!

[ePONYmous 215]

@@John, Thank you for your response. ^^

 

The show however would not constitute bigotry if it did not include homosexual aspects.  Keep in mind that in a capitalistic society, the show is owned by a private organization, which has the right to include its beliefs in the shows contents.  With this in mind, homosexuality doesn't necessarily have the right to be included just because it exists.

I know, I said that in my first post.

 

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm sure companies like Hasbro (or any other, for that matter), aren't avoiding it for that reason. As most, if not all, of us know, doing a move like this today is rather risky. You or I may not mind seeing two mares or two stallions nuzzling in an alternate version of "Hearts and Hooves Day," but a large group of parents seeing it surely would not be pleased.

 

You don't even need to look into television to know that. It reminds me of the drama that Oreo encountered when it posted its picture of a rainbow cream-filled cookie to show support for gay pride. Or the drama that Target encountered when it started allowing same-sex couples to register in their wedding registry. So do I think it'd be a smart move for companies to introduce homosexuality into kid's cartoons? No, not right now, at least. That would be a poor business decision on their part.

 

Your position on what Bigotry is actually depends on what one considers to be a "right."  Personally, I think marriage is a religious ceremony and a spiritual union, and thus should not have any benefits.  It is also not a right.

Not exactly. My position on what bigotry is, is based upon the definition of the word, which is, "bigoted attitudes; intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."

 

Also, the word "bigoted," which means, "having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one’s own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others."

 

Perhaps it was a bit erroneous of me to use the word "right" in my example, but that's all it was, was just an example. I could've easily omitted the word. It was basically just an example of someone totally dismissing someone's opinion, and forcing theirs upon them, without even respecting its existence. I guess I should've made that more clear. Sorry about that.

 

Its done all the time sillies c:

Gay characters everywhere! I mean just look at Pinkie pie! I don't think I have ever seen such a gay character with so much energy and high spirits!

Haha. I think I see what you did there. Using a different definition of the word. You're right. Pinkie Pie is quite the happy character. XD

 

You get a brohoof for that one. /)

Edited June 26, 2013 by ePONYmous

[Fox 5,330]

Fox, on 25 Jun 2013 - 9:41 PM, said:

1. I have the choice to be gay or what not. I choose not to though.

Spoiler 

 

 

1. It is not a choice. I am gay. I did not choose to be gay....I am who I am.

 

I really dislike it when people say it's a choice, because quite simply put....it is not. I can choose to act straight though.But where's thepoint in that? I rather just be myself.

Please tell me where I said it's a choice for homosexuals. I never said such thing. You must think I'm blind to the fact where I do not understand homosexual lifestyles. I said "I," not homosexuals.

But are you being ignorant to the fact where heterosexuals have a choice to become homosexual? What really constitutes for someone that is heterosexual to become homosexual? I never said homosexuals don't have a choice. 

Man, you're a person I really don't care if you're pan-sexual, trans-sexual, gay, whatever. You're a person, it's okay man. I'm not going to judge you for being yourself.

Sorry, but it seems like no one has cared or payed attention to what I had said before with judging homosexuals. It's like people "think" I reject homosexuals or something.

[Pan the Fabulous Ferret 2,642]

@@John, Thank you for your response. ^^

 

 

I know, I said that in my first post.

 

 

 

 

Not exactly. My position on what bigotry is, is based upon the definition of the word, which is, "bigoted attitudes; intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."

 

Also, the word "bigoted," which means, "having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one’s own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others."

 

Perhaps it was a bit erroneous of me to use the word "right" in my example, but that's all it was, was just an example. I could've easily omitted the word. It was basically just an example of someone totally dismissing someone's opinion, and forcing theirs upon them, without even respecting its existence. I guess I should've made that more clear. Sorry about that.

 

 

Haha. I think I see what you did there. Using a different definition of the world. You're right. Pinkie Pie is quite the happy character. XD

 

You get a brohoof for that one. /)

Its not a different definition at all, actually. It is the only definition, as homosexuality has nothing todo with the term "gay" and I find it nbothersome that our society has turned the useful and fun word into something that it is not. O)_(O

[GaleFenrir 281]

I can actually think of a Disney cartoon that had a canonically homosexual character.

 

Lexington from Gargoyles.

 

His sexuality was never addressed in an episode, but it is an aspect of his character as stated by the show's creator.

 

Still, I think the topic should be addressed in some fashion in the future, but I would prefer it if they did it in a low-key way. A 'bi-the way' moment, if you will.