Is Western Animation Ready For Gay Characters?

And one involves how SOME parents might react.

More like how MOST parents might react. The guy's kidding himself.

I think including obviously-gay characters in cartoons is unnecessary. What's important for a good cartoon is what a character is about, its personality, how it fits in with other characters, its role in the overall plot, and so on. Sticking a gay character into a show just to make a statement is the ultimate in lameness IMO. It's a fun-killer at best, just like when female characters are inserted into a cartoon show when they have no real role to play other than being smarter and more capable than the males. I am SO tired of that.

And incidentally, I thought Rowling's "outing" of Dumbledore was just that - a lame statement. She waited until all the books were out to make that revelation. So I wouldn't exactly call it courageous. "Some" parents - and I bet "some" kids too - felt betrayed by that, and I can't say I blame them.
 
Exactly. Because of that mindset you can't have an openly gay character. How quickly do you think a series would've been cancelled because of protests and outrage?
 
Agreed, especially since there was nothing in the books that came close to referencing that. It's obvious that the reason she waited until the book series was over to "reveal" that was because she knew she would lose quite a large chunk of her audience if she actually referenced it in the book series. This has earned her many critics from both sides of the debate, and it feels more like a cheap political throwaway than anything else.
 
Most cartoons currently out have at least one extremely effeminate male character. They may play out the joke by never having him act romantic towards someone or they may have him end up having a female love interest to make it a casual inside joke, but that's the extent of what I have seen.
 
And I think certain shows, like the ones mentioned here that aren't straight up comedies should tell good stories with well developed characters. Or is that the opposite of entertaining now?

And for those mad about Dumbledore being outed after the seventh book came out, I have to ask. Did you read the seventh book? Dumbledore was totally shagging Grindelwald. It was subtle, but it was there. When JKR confirmed it, it was no surprise at all.
 
The thing is, I don't think effeminate male characters are a bad thing. The problem is them being automatically labeled as gay characters.


Take Ken from Toy Story 3. Obviously heterosexual, yet extremely effeminate. Nothing wrong with that, in my opinion.




Would it have been subtle if she'd decided to make Grindelwald a girl and Dumbledore straight?


Judging by every single romantic relationship depicted in Half-Blood Prince, I'd guess not.
 
I'm not saying they should create gay characters just to be role models but to having a gay character in a cartoon could give a role model to some sexually confused kids. Just like Green Lantern or Wonder Woman can be a role model to kids without them intentionally being created for such a thing.



Yes parents should talk to their kids about it but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be anything on TV about it as well. Plus there are narrow minded parents out there who could pass that on to their kids and the kids seeing a different point of view from somewhere else might help them grow up to not be as narrow minded.
 
As others have said: adult animation, yes, kids animation, no. There's just too much of a controversy. Any gay character in kids entertainment is likely to be subtle--you can often tell they are gay, but parents are happy because no one comes out and says it. Except when people were angry with Spongebob, who flat out says he reproduces by budding...Meaning he's asexual.


I have two issues with the project: 1, the animation is really bad. It probably has to do with budget issues, though, so I can let it pass. And 2, the title. Apparently the mothers aren't the primary focus, but the name just sends off the "OMG look lesbian parents" vibe, as if it's trying too hard. Wouldn't it have been better to have the slightly generic "Buddy G" be the title? Also...I kept expecting the theme song to turn into some sort of parody.


I don't know if we ever got direct proof that Grindelwald returned any of Dumbledore's feelings, though I wouldn't be surprised.

I was always under the impression that Rowling didn't reveal his homosexuality for any other reason than that she was asked a question pertaining to the subject of his love life. I really doubt that she went into into the discussion thinking "Okay, time to our Dumbledore!". I believe the talk was actually aimed at teenagers, so it wasn't a press release or anything. Her explanation made enough sense, too, within the context of the book. Didn't Rowling later confirm that Dumbledore basically gave up on romance after the Grindelwald incident?
 
Nightcrawler's religious beliefs have shown up in the origin animated series and in X-Men Evolution. I haven't watched Wolverine and the X-Men, but I'd bet they were there too.
 
Are western kids cartoons ready for gay characters? Well, that depends on country, but in a lot of them, yes.

But are American kids cartoons ready for gay characters? Sadly, no. Any kids cartoon in the US that featured an openly gay character would get cancelled after about two episodes. Very sad, but very true.
 
Some people would be in denial if they found out a character could be possible homosexual. Reasons could be religious or even someone being a crazy fan who pairs up with other characters to prove they are not gay.

It's wrong right there if you can't accept it. The creators do as they please and they should do whatever they want with their characters.

But I suppose even the creators like to mess with us on pairings.
 
Oh yeah, I remember that. The theme song was hillarious. I swear when they intro the moms, the image just freezes for a sec and the music just stops dead. It's almost like the show itself was so shocked it had to pause and go "WTF?!".

Which is really the wrong way to do it no matter how well intentioned. Having a show where the main characters are a lesbian couple and their kid is fine. Having a show that's all "ZOMG!!! WE HAVE LESBIANS!!! EVERYONE LOOK AT THE FREAK!!! TWO MOMMIES!!!! TWO MOMMIES!!!!!!!", not so much.
 
Pretty much. It's not about shoving it in your face so you can have a role model or do a 'take that' to opposing view. Just make them normal people who happen to be gay. Going back to Haruka and Michiru, they acted just like any couple. Haruka flirted with other girls, and Michiru got jealous/upset and scolded her. Their relationship wasn't thrust into the viewer's faces, it was the same as any other on that show, like Usagi and Mamoru. They were actual characters: two lone warriors on a controversial mission that the good guys found to be too extremist and often butted heads against. They just happened to be gay.
 
Except it *is* shown---how often do we see episodes on shows about a (straight) character's crush on someone, or asking them out on a date, or remembering their anniversary/making a pass at them/etc.? No reason you can't have a gay character do the same...

-B.
 
Even cartoons aimed at really young kids often show heterosexual parents. Like, say, Little Bear. Would it be inappropriate in the context of the show for Little Bear to have two father bears instead of a mother bear and a father bear? No (except it would make naming them a bit harder). Yet would it ever be accepted by the masses? No.
 
Leave gay and lesbian adults aside for a minute: what about gay and lesbian kids? How many times have we seen kids finding others of the opposite sex attractive, and even romances between them? Isn't that a blatant form of heterosexism? A lot of people assume there are no LGBT children, even though there are several cases of harrassment for kids being thought-of as such.
 
I think you can forget about American animation dealing with homosexual issues unless the animated TV show/movie is aimed for an older audience (college level and up).

The only country I know where homosexuality is dealt quite openly in animation at all levels is Japan: when you have anime shows like Aoi Hana, Strawberry Panic, the Haruka Tenou/Michiru Kaiou pairing in Bishoujo Senshi Sailormoon, and so on, their cultural norms can openly deal with an implied form of lesbianism called the Class S relationship, a concept which is a bit alien to Westerners. I think that idea is an outgrowth of the fact in Japan, gender-bending acting roles have a very long history, what with female roles in Noh and Kabuki theater played by men (some of those male actors have gained considerable fame playing female roles in these traditional forms of theater) and male roles played by women in the famous Takarazuka Revue founded 96 years ago (many Takarazuka actresses became famous for acting male roles).
 
Japan still has lots of issues regarding homosexuality. First off, not counting pornographic series, most manga series focusing on relationships between girls having the characters "grow out" of it and get married to a man. It's treated as a phase. BL is written by females and aimed at females, and should be no means represent gay males or healthy relationships. There are exceptions, of course, that I love reading, but the majority of it is pandering.

People assume Japan has this very open culture regarding the subject, a misconception that probably arose from the large amount of BL and GL. But in truth, society in general isn't that open-minded regarding homosexuality from all accounts I've heard. Sailor Moon made it through (though I think some people in Japan were critical of it?), but, I doubt anyone wants to take the risk of implementing a gay character and tackling it openly and seriously these days. You aren't likely to see gay parents as just parents, either.
 
Not to mention Japan has no recognition for same-sex relationships except when one Japanese is married to a foreigner from a country with legalized gay marriage. There's also nothing protecting LGBTs from discrimination over there.
 
Back
Top