Why so many gay couples in tv shows?

[ChristinaAH]

Yes yes yes! We are certainly to guide our eyes and ears.

I usually operate under a principle set down by St. Jerome that once everything earthly and idolatrous is removed from a piece of media, we can then make it fruitful for the Lord’s purposes. I remember getting teased sophomore year for scribbling out the profanities in my copy of A Separate Peace… Good memories!

The show is generally moral, and I watch it with my younger sister, so I think that I’ll just skip the small scene where a character references his bisexuality. Plus, the show is already finished and a complete product, so there’s no chance that a new season will come out and delve into LGBT+ issues further.

 

[GospelOfMatthew]

I would just remember that when you are fast forwarding, it is not because this bisexual or LGBT character is evil or a horrible person. This person deserves love and respect and many prayers. It’s not even that you are fast forwarding because “it’s disgusting” or something. Rather, it is because it is not appropriate to be exposed to grave sins when we don’t have to, especially at a younger age.

I fast forward during extensive sexual scenes in movies not because sex is evil, sex is literally a reaffirmation of our faith. But rather, I don’t want to be exposed to a potential near-occasion of sin. Just make sure you know why you are fast forwarding haha

 

[ChristinaAH]

Yeah! I have many non-believing friends that are part of the LGBT+ community, some of whom I’m quite close with. I always try to keep them in my prayers. I disagree with the way they live their lives, but it’s important to have deep love and compassion for those dealing with same-sex attraction and/or gender dysphoria.

 

[LateCatholic]

No, but it may alter the perception of what is normal.

Normal is a subjective term. As I mentioned, being left-handed is clearly NOT “normal”. But it is not a disorder. The problem is that posters in this thread regard same-sex attraction, even though it is legal and a protected right, as “disordered” (their word, not mine), and therefore should not be shown on television.

There is nothing wrong with showing non-sexual same sex attraction on television, just as there is nothing wrong showing non-sexual opposite attraction, or opposite race attraction, and so forth.

Smoking, drinking and drug use are not equivalent, because those are clearly harmful acts that could be glamorized by TV on young minds. If you believe your children will suddenly WANT to have a same-sex relationship simply because they see a legitimate, non-sexual one on TV, that’s something you have to address as a parent.

Sexual acts - even simple kissing - needs to be taken with more care, with both same sex and opposite sex couples.

 

[exnihilo]

If you’re using “indoctrination” in such a broad sense as to say any portrayal of anything is indoctrination, then I’m not sure “indoctrination”, as you’re using it, is bad or effectual. Maybe it is just me, but the references to indoctrination in this thread make it sound more akin to an oppressive government keeping its people in line.

I don’t consider indoctrination to be something unusual. Education is indoctrination. Yes, anything presented as normative is trying to indoctrinate as to what is normative.

Ultimately, though, I don’t see how this would change a child’s opinion unless the parents didn’t bother to talk to them about the topic.

Lots of parents don’t talk to their kids. And a parent’s messages may not reach as deeply or be as effective as TV shows. All I can say is my parents were very careful as to what we were exposed to. I’d call that wise but it seems to me common sense.

 

[LateCatholic]

Approximately 4.5% of the U.S. population identify as LGTB in the U.S.: A record 4.5 percent of U.S. adults identify as LGBT, Gallup estimates.

Approximately 10% of population in the U.S. are left-handed: Left-Handers and Health Risks: 12 Little-Known Facts - Everyday Health.

(Go lefties!)

So I don’t want to pound a dead horse, because 4.5% versus 10% is fine to make my point, BUT:
over 8% of millenials identify as gay (clearly more honest and unafraid as they grew up with SSA acceptance).
and over 12% indicate they have same sex attraction but do not identify as gay.

Regardless - I’m more than happy to accept 5% gay and 10% leftie, as that clearly shows being both gay or leftie, while not ‘normal’, are not disorders.

 

[LateCatholic]

The secular society no longer considers homosexuality to be disordered, but it objectively is.

How so? Homosexuality - even by statistics posted by your side - list it at 5% of the population. It is clearly not inherited. It is found in hundreds of other animal species. It has been around for centuries. If objectively disordered, why did the Romans not think that way? I’d like to understand why you think it is objectively disordered. Is oral sex disordered? Is kissing disordered?

Anyone who cannot pay the marriage debt to his spouse cannot get married. Two men or two women lack the proper anatomy to even perform the marital act, so all they are capable of is sodomy. No marriage debt can possible exist between two men or two women.

You are perfectly free to define marriage as you want in the context of Catholicism or any other religion. I am fine with Catholic institution not promoting same sex marriage. However, as citizens of the United States, you MUST accept it and treat it’s members as equals. Ergo, nothing wrong with showing same sex attraction on TV.

 

[edwest]

On a Catholic forum, the Catholic position should always be promoted. I don’t hate anybody. I do get angry at people sometimes, but that’s because they caused me harm. I pray for everyone.

“8. Society owes its continued survival to the family, founded on marriage. The inevitable consequence of legal recognition of homosexual unions would be the redefinition of marriage, which would become, in its legal status, an institution devoid of essential reference to factors linked to heterosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children. If, from the legal standpoint, marriage between a man and a woman were to be considered just one possible form of marriage, the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good. By putting homosexual unions on a legal plane analogous to that of marriage and the family, the State acts arbitrarily and in contradiction with its duties.”

 

[edwest]

People don’t like being forced. Or told what to think.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

So I was watching this tv show called Voltron (kids tv show!) and I’m annoyed at it. One of the main characters (he is male) at the very end of the tv show (like 5 seconds before the credits roll and the last episode of the last season) was shown gettin married to another male! I was so annoyed with it. I loved the show, but that kind of ruined it for me. Sorry, but I was just so annoyed with it! I was even in a little shock right after. I’m actually a bit sad now since I liked the show so much. How do you guys think I should go about the show?

An agenda is definitely being pushed by the secular world nowadays. They are trying to normalize something and make it the norm rather than the exception.

 

[boldlygo]

(Go lefties!)

More honest and unafraid is your interpretation of flawed data.
The 4.5% figure given is a Gallup Poll result using limited data on only U.S. residents, and conflicts with worldwide anecdotal evidence that puts the figure at 2.2%, and has been stable there for decades.
One thing it does imply is that homosexual behavior can be and is learned, and if the millenials prefer to be promiscuous in this way, it’s no big deal for them.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

LateCatholic:

(Go lefties!)

More honest and unafraid is your interpretation of flawed data.
The 4.5% figure given is a Gallup Poll result using limited data on only U.S. residents, and conflicts with worldwide anecdotal evidence that puts the figure at 2.2%, and has been stable there for decades.
One thing it does imply is that homosexual behavior can be and is learned, and if the millenials prefer to be promiscuous in this way, it’s no big deal for them.

I tend to think that some of your “gay” millenials aren’t truly that way (some are). I think the amount public schools are normalizing it now makes some kids ready to adopt the title in order to define “who” they are and gain some attention.

 

[boldlygo]

I agree completely…

 

[Seagull]

Because the important people who run the tv shows are gay.
Not all of them, I don’t have stats -
But I hear Hollywood is just a complete cesspool.

Imagine though, Harry Potter has grossed 7.7 BILLION.

 

[ZMystiCat]

It’s being used for censorship. On TV, I saw a few “comedians” use words that were bleeped out.

OK, sure, in that sense, but in a thread where censorship was already brought up in a much more extreme context, it’s probably best to describe what we’re talking about with “censorship”. The term is pretty loaded.

And what about the kid’s book King and King? How did that get into school libraries?

Probably because, by most metrics, it is a kid’s book. The idea of a same-sex relationship is not itself any more “adult” than the idea of male-female relationship. Sure, there’s adult aspects to both relationships, but both can also be explained in ways that don’t require having “the talk” with the children.

The problem is that posters in this thread regard same-sex attraction, even though it is legal and a protected right, as “disordered”

The law does not define what is right and wrong.

I don’t consider indoctrination to be something unusual. Education is indoctrination. Yes, anything presented as normative is trying to indoctrinate as to what is normative.

OK, but if we’re going to be using loaded terms that can easily mean something much more extreme, we should define them. Sure, “indoctrination”, in its most literal sense, can be as simple as education or good parenting. However, it frequently has horrific implications.

Lots of parents don’t talk to their kids.

That’s the fault of the parent, not the TV show.

All I can say is my parents were very careful as to what we were exposed to. I’d call that wise but it seems to me common sense.

So did mine, but that backfired a bit when I got to college. To me, the measures came across as an attempt to brainwash me into their ideology, and I did not take kindly to that. It contributed a bit to my leaving religion for a bit in college. Sure, I came back, but that was only after I had begun processing things that should have been dealt with earlier but wasn’t because they were too scared to expose me to it. I’d even say that it ultimately served some good, but I generally don’t encourage people to make decisions because it might not turn out so bad.

 

[exnihilo]

That’s the fault of the parent, not the TV show.

It would be both. The TV show producers and workers and network personnel bear fault too.

So did mine, but that backfired a bit when I got to college. To me, the measures came across as an attempt to brainwash me into their ideology, and I did not take kindly to that. It contributed a bit to my leaving religion for a bit in college. Sure, I came back, but that was only after I had begun processing things that should have been dealt with earlier but wasn’t because they were too scared to expose me to it. I’d even say that it ultimately served some good, but I generally don’t encourage people to make decisions because it might not turn out so bad.

I don’t know if this was your experience, but ignoring the issues isn’t what I recommend. Shielding to some extent is good. It needs to be accompanied with instruction and age appropriate revelation about what goes on in the world.

We are all individuals with free will. It isn’t that if we follow a certain program when raising children then the kids are guaranteed to turn out a certain way. Of course colleges themselves, even many or most Catholic colleges sadly, are a perfect environment for one to lose his faith.

 

[ZMystiCat]

It would be both.

The show’s creators and producers aren’t at all responsible for a parent not having a conversation with their children. It’s not like they have power to force the parent to do their job.

 

[exnihilo]

The shows creators are responsible for putting out immoral filth. They have the power to not act immorally and lead others astray. There is a moral obligation to be a good influence upon others.

 

[lilypadrees]

Stop watching it and other shows that feature the kind of actions/behavior you disapprove of. It’s all about ratings (money). Things won’t change unless viewers tune out.

 

[Agnus]

Hi RandomGirl, I know what you mean and it seems to be everywhere these days. The best thing I think you can do is not watch those shows if you know that unwanted content is in there. However, if the show does happen to sneak it in there at the last minute, of the last episode, of the last season, use it as a reminder of why you disagree with that lifestyle. Good luck and God bless!