LGBQT Representation in Media?

[Kmon23]

What do you think should be done about such relationships in media/entertainment?
If you are aware, The Legend of Korra ended with a bisexual relationship of Korra and Asami (recently confirmed true by creators).
I believe (and most catholics as well), that relationships with the same gender is sinful and not what God intended for humanity. However my friend is a huge fighter/supporter for LGBQT rights and representation. She tells me how there is so little representation (if at all) of LGBQT characters in any form of media and entertainment, and how that is a problem, similarly to how people argue there is not enough representation of minority ethnic groups or in America in entertainment.

I agree that representation is important, however I wonder how representation of LGBQT relationships in media can work with the morality of such relationships in children’s media (like Nickelodean or Cartoon Network). There is no doubt in modern american society that a children’s show that gives a message that LGBQT relationships are bad will be very negatively received and with backlash. I don’t see that happening. However, it would be good to have representation of LGBQT relationships in children’s cartoons. But how can we have LGBQT relationships/representation in children’s entertainment that does not go against the morality of LGBQT relationships? Or should LGBQT relationships not be shown at all in children’s entertainment because representation of such is not worth it over the moral implications?
What do you guys think, that there should be representation even with the moral issues?

 

[cena]

What do you think should be done about such relationships in media/entertainment?
If you are aware, The Legend of Korra ended with a bisexual relationship of Korra and Asami (recently confirmed true by creators).
I believe (and most catholics as well), that relationships with the same gender is sinful and not what God intended for humanity. However my friend is a huge fighter/supporter for LGBQT rights and representation. She tells me how there is so little representation (if at all) of LGBQT characters in any form of media and entertainment, and how that is a problem, similarly to how people argue there is not enough representation of minority ethnic groups or in America in entertainment.

I agree that representation is important, however I wonder how representation of LGBQT relationships in media can work with the morality of such relationships in children’s media (like Nickelodean or Cartoon Network). There is no doubt in modern american society that a children’s show that gives a message that LGBQT relationships are bad will be very negatively received and with backlash. I don’t see that happening. However, it would be good to have representation of LGBQT relationships in children’s cartoons. But how can we have LGBQT relationships/representation in children’s entertainment that does not go against the morality of LGBQT relationships? Or should LGBQT relationships not be shown at all in children’s entertainment because representation of such is not worth it over the moral implications?
What do you guys think, that there should be representation even with the moral issues?

The problem with showing lgbtq relationships is that it is perceived as totally normal, healthy, moral, innocent, etc. and they are not. LGBTQ relationships are immoral

The writers of the show don’t want to be “homophobic” so they basically make the homosexual couple seem perfect. If you have problems like heterosexual relationships encounter sometimes the audience might call the writers homophobes and protest.i don’t know what she’so talking about it seems like there are so many recent books, movies, etc. coming out with at least one LGBTQ character.

Homosexual behavior is BEHAVIOR, not an ethnic group. They are two completely different things. There are minorities of people doing other immoral things, I don’t think we need to represent them in everything.

 

[cena]

For many people outside the Catholic world, it *is *normal, moral, and healthy. This is why these couples are presented this way.

Which TV shows are you talking about that have a “perfect” homosexual couple? In every show I’ve seen…and with every TV writer I’ve spoken to–and I’ve spoken to maybe a hundred–they all aspire to write homosexual couples in the same way they write heterosexual couples–flaws and problems and all.

Has just* one* writer of a TV show actually told you that they write “perfect” gay couples because they are afraid of being called homophobic?
Please let us know.

.

I knew a Toaist who was uncomfortable around lesbian and bisexual girls, she is not Catholic, so it is not exclusive to Catholics. Protestants and others share this view as well.

In the Legend of Korra the only problem the two girls had was that they were trying to steal the same guy from each other in the first two books. The next two books they had absolutely no problems as far as I can remember. Korra fights a lot with her ex boyfriend for no reason but she has no problems with automatically forgiving the girl who she fought over him with.

What TV show writers did you interview?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

What do you think should be done about such relationships in media/entertainment?
If you are aware, The Legend of Korra ended with a bisexual relationship of Korra and Asami (recently confirmed true by creators).
I believe (and most catholics as well), that relationships with the same gender is sinful and not what God intended for humanity. However my friend is a huge fighter/supporter for LGBQT rights and representation. She tells me how there is so little representation (if at all) of LGBQT characters in any form of media and entertainment, and how that is a problem, similarly to how people argue there is not enough representation of minority ethnic groups or in America in entertainment.

I agree that representation is important, however I wonder how representation of LGBQT relationships in media can work with the morality of such relationships in children’s media (like Nickelodean or Cartoon Network). There is no doubt in modern american society that a children’s show that gives a message that LGBQT relationships are bad will be very negatively received and with backlash. I don’t see that happening. However, it would be good to have representation of LGBQT relationships in children’s cartoons. But how can we have LGBQT relationships/representation in children’s entertainment that does not go against the morality of LGBQT relationships? Or should LGBQT relationships not be shown at all in children’s entertainment because representation of such is not worth it over the moral implications?
What do you guys think, that there should be representation even with the moral issues?

I don’t think immoral relationships of any kind need representation in the media. That idea is a fallacy. Media is a moral sespool, why anyone still wasts time with it is a mystery to me.

Pax
Linus2nd

 

[Maxirad]

I’ve seen the 1982 feature film Personal Best myself. Mariel Hemingway was in it.

 

[Lou2U]

I don’t think immoral relationships of any kind need representation in the media. That idea is a fallacy. Media is a moral sespool, why anyone still wasts time with it is a mystery to me.

Pax
Linus2nd

The problem is that for so many people, what Catholics call “immoral relationships” is perfectly normal. Were you watching a secular programme?

Lou

 

[Kmon23]

Someone in a different thread posted this, which is what leads to my question of representation vs. morality of homosexual relationships, so hopefully it gives greater context to my question.

“More on point, the show demonstrated an excellent show of support for marginalized groups around the board. Positive media representation of disenfranchised groups is crucial to working towards alleviating their suffering that has been caused by those in power. Normalizing non-heterosexual relations should be the norm. Queer people should not remain invisible, nor should they be treated like lepers.”

 

[cena]

Someone in a different thread posted this, which is what leads to my question of representation vs. morality of homosexual relationships, so hopefully it gives greater context to my question.

“More on point, the show demonstrated an excellent show of support for marginalized groups around the board. Positive media representation of disenfranchised groups is crucial to working towards alleviating their suffering that has been caused by those in power. Normalizing non-heterosexual relations should be the norm. Queer people should not remain invisible, nor should they be treated like lepers.”

Homosexual relationships are not normal. That does not mean that homosexuals can’t have friends of the same sex, they can. Being friends with people of the same sex is normal. Being sexually attracted to them is not. Also, they should not be treated like lepers but immoral behavior can not be tolerated.

 

[petitfleur]

Homosexual relationships are not normal. That does not mean that homosexuals can’t have friends of the same sex, they can. Being friends with people of the same sex is normal. Being sexually attracted to them is not. Also, they should not be treated like lepers but immoral behavior can not be tolerated.

Yes. What is the real danger here? It is pretty widely accepted that being gay is not a choice. throughout history gay people have been treated horribly. There are reasons there are laws against hate crime.People living in the US in my lifetime have been lynched for being gay. I can go on and on about this but will save you the time.
Portrayals of a loving gay couple will not turn people gay. Because my faith tells me gay relationships are a sin does not give me the right to mistreat them. It does not tell me not to treat gay people with kindness, respect, love and dignity. I am pretty sure I am still allowed to be friends with gay people. I say this because there is a gay couple in my neighborhood, their next door neighbors who are rabid Christians refuse to even acknowledge them when they say “hello”. I live in the Chicago suburbs, its ridiculous. So if normalizing a gay union means they will be more widely accepted and treated respectfully great. I acknowledge that there are people who have different beliefs than me, and unless they give me reason I will treat them with respect. Including muslims, single mothers by choice, couples that live together and are not married, and whoever else.
I think the normalizing of unmarried people living together, and the glorification of people sleeping around is more dangerous. People are more likely to look at that and have their morals weakened, than being harmed by seeing a gay couple as good people who deserve respect.

 

[cena]

Yes. What is the real danger here? It is pretty widely accepted that being gay is not a choice. throughout history gay people have been treated horribly. There are reasons there are laws against hate crime.People living in the US in my lifetime have been lynched for being gay. I can go on and on about this but will save you the time.
Portrayals of a loving gay couple will not turn people gay. Because my faith tells me gay relationships are a sin does not give me the right to mistreat them. It does not tell me not to treat gay people with kindness, respect, love and dignity. I am pretty sure I am still allowed to be friends with gay people. I say this because there is a gay couple in my neighborhood, their next door neighbors who are rabid Christians refuse to even acknowledge them when they say “hello”. I live in the Chicago suburbs, its ridiculous. So if normalizing a gay union means they will be more widely accepted and treated respectfully great. I acknowledge that there are people who have different beliefs than me, and unless they give me reason I will treat them with respect. Including muslims, single mothers by choice, couples that live together and are not married, and whoever else.
I think the normalizing of unmarried people living together, and the glorification of people sleeping around is more dangerous. People are more likely to look at that and have their morals weakened, than being harmed by seeing a gay couple as good people who deserve respect.

First, homosexual actions are serious, but hanging them for it is going way too far.
Christians should be charitable to everyone, not saying “hi” is ridiculous and unnecessary. You can be friends with them, just don’t encourage homosexual behavior.
Homosexual relationships are wrong. Making it normal is not okay. That is weakening their morals. There is this notion that if we don’t accept this immoral behavior, we must exclude them from society. I think those two things are too extreme and There are other ways of accepting people without accepting bad behavior. We can be nice to them but not approve of their behavior.

 

[petitfleur]

First, homosexual actions are serious, but hanging them for it is going way too far.
Christians should be charitable to everyone, not saying “hi” is ridiculous and unnecessary. You can be friends with them, just don’t encourage homosexual behavior.
Homosexual relationships are wrong. Making it normal is not okay. That is weakening their morals. There is this notion that if we don’t accept this immoral behavior, we must exclude them from society. I think those two things are too extreme and There are other ways of accepting people without accepting bad behavior. We can be nice to them but not approve of their behavior.

I am not exactly disagreeing with you but I think all gay people know what the bible sais about being gay. Whose morals are in danger of being weakened by a portrayal of gay people that shows they are not all monster rapist, child molesters? (a real question because there are still many people that would not let gay people around their child even if they were not engaging in homosexual behavior, and think of them as "sick")Are homosexual actions worse than frivolous unmarried sex? I honestly don't know, and I would like to know why too it they are.

 

[cena]

I am not exactly disagreeing with you but I think all gay people know what the bible sais about being gay. Whose morals are in danger of being weakened by a portrayal of gay people that shows they are not all monster rapist, child molesters? (a real question because there are still many people that would not let gay people around their child even if they were not engaging in homosexual behavior, and think of them as “sick”)Are homosexual actions worse than frivolous unmarried sex? I honestly don’t know, and I would like to know why too it they are.

You can show that they are not all rapists, child molestors, etc. without encouraging homosexual behavior. The problem with portraying the couples good is that they are promoting the behavior is good. The behavior is immoral. People who are “gay” but don’t indulge in their desires in any way are not guilty of anything.
Yes, they are worse. Homosexual acts go against the natural procreative act. In fornication it is still a male and a female.

Sins can have different degrees of serious (like adultery is worse than fornication)

 

[petitfleur]

You can show that they are not all rapists, child molestors, etc. without encouraging homosexual behavior. The problem with portraying the couples good is that they are promoting the behavior is good. The behavior is immoral. People who are “gay” but don’t indulge in their desires in any way are not guilty of anything.
Yes, they are worse. Homosexual acts go against the natural procreative act. In fornication it is still a male and a female.

Sins can have different degrees of serious (like adultery is worse than fornication)

   I guess the first part of your answer is a difference in how I see it. I don't think it is saying being gay is ok, but showing the humanness, and dignity of people who are different than me. I am coming from a mindset where people felt outright hatred and violence is acceptable.
 Another question, not splitting hairs but it is important to me, Is the sin of homosexual acts worse than something like rape where people are physically harmed? (I am thinking of Sodom and Gomorah since there was lots of rape and violence going on) an if yes can you verify actual church teaching and not opinion.

thank you.

 

[cena]

I guess the first part of your answer is a difference in how I see it. I don’t think it is saying being gay is ok, but showing the humanness, and dignity of people who are different than me. I am coming from a mindset where people felt outright hatred and violence is acceptable.
Another question, not splitting hairs but it is important to me, Is the sin of homosexual acts worse than something like rape where people are physically harmed? (I am thinking of Sodom and Gomorah since there was lots of rape and violence going on) an if yes can you verify actual church teaching and not opinion.
thank you.

You can show their humanness without showing gay couples or other immoral BEHAVIOR as good. Like the media never talks about the strength and value of a person with same sex attraction who stays celibate. Outright hatred of PEOPLE and not merely a behavior is wrong. You can hate a sin, but to outright hate people is wrong. Violence, unless it’s self defense, is wrong.

I don’t know the answer about the rape vs homosexuality, my guess would be rape is worse since it was against the will of one of the people.

 

[cena]

I guess the first part of your answer is a difference in how I see it. I don’t think it is saying being gay is ok, but showing the humanness, and dignity of people who are different than me. I am coming from a mindset where people felt outright hatred and violence is acceptable.
Another question, not splitting hairs but it is important to me, Is the sin of homosexual acts worse than something like rape where people are physically harmed? (I am thinking of Sodom and Gomorah since there was lots of rape and violence going on) an if yes can you verify actual church teaching and not opinion.
thank you.

The Church teaches that sodomy is a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance, that’s it’s worse than fornication, adultery, and other sins. I don’t know what it teaches if rape is worse or not.

 

[petitfleur]

The Church teaches that sodomy is a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance, that’s it’s worse than fornication, adultery, and other sins. I don’t know what it teaches if rape is worse or not.

Thank You for answering me.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Media is a moral sespool, why anyone still wasts time with it is a mystery to me.

Because they can’t stand a religion that frequently finds itself represented by opinions such as yours. You want to know what’s really mind boggling though? How people see that sort of unpopularity as a mark of the one true religion.

I guess the Westboro Baptists are really the most God-ordained people on earth given they’re hated more than the Vatican.

Homosexual relationships are not normal.

When you think about it, neither is religious faith.

 

[cena]

Because they can’t stand a religion that frequently finds itself represented by opinions such as yours. You want to know what’s really mind boggling though? How people see that sort of unpopularity as a mark of the one true religion.

I guess the Westboro Baptists are really the most God-ordained people on earth given they’re hated more than the Vatican.

When you think about it, neither is religious faith.

Cultures all over the world for all of history have tried to worship something
whether it was the Greeks with many gods or Christians with the one true God.

Also there are over one billion Christians in the world that population alone far exceeds the homosexual population many times over.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Cultures all over the world for all of history have tried to worship something
whether it was the Greeks with many gods or Christians with the one true God.

Also there are over one billion Christians in the world that population alone far exceeds the homosexual population many times over.

Yet religious people complain about mass departure from the faith, increasing secularization, atheism in schools, and (as this thread goes on) normalization of homosexual relationships.

They’re the ones crying persecution and marginalization from the big, secular bogeyman.

Seems legit.

P.S.

No matter how you slice it, believing in things like people coming back from the dead, multiplying food, water into wine etc… does that sound like a sane, normal person by today’s oh-so-evil secular standards?

 

[cena]

Yet religious people complain about mass departure from the faith, increasing secularization, atheism in schools, and (as this thread goes on) normalization of homosexual relationships.

They’re the ones crying persecution and marginalization from the big, secular bogeyman.

Seems legit.

P.S.

No matter how you slice it, believing in things like people coming back from the dead, multiplying food, water into wine etc… does that sound like a sane, normal person by today’s oh-so-evil secular standards?

That number is distributed all around the world and the government and media are secular.

The sun dancing in the sky sounds like a lie a child made up yet secular newspapers printed it in Fatima.