I am Not a Homophobe! But...

a reply to: MrWendal

Walking Dead: Rick Grimes (he bit a chunk out of some guy's throat - that's not manly enough for ya?)

Hell on Wheels: Whatever the main character's name is - I don't watch it, but I've seen promos for it.

That little guy on Game of Thrones - he may be little, but he's a pro with the ladies

The main guy from Mad Men - he was a man's man

The two hunky guys in Supernatural

The sexy vampire guy in True Blood

Those are just ones off the top of my head, and I don't even really watch tv.

a reply to: Mugly

Naturally I'm speaking specifically about gay couples...I thought that was implied by the narrative 'some men like men and some women like women'.

Are you really this condescending that you think you need to point out to me that which I've clearly stated already - that basic, fundamental truth that man and woman can have sex and conceive a child?

Please...do me a lemon. It's exactly stupidity like that that led me to believe you could be a troll.

Also, I like ghow you spend the last page arguing with me only to agree in your last post:

those are different things. of course it is wrong/negative to PUSH sex on kids without context. that is not the same as sex education.

That's pretty much the point I made in my initial response to this thread...the hilarious thing is you're continuing to argue with me.

And stop fixating on single issues - it's nopt just about education, that's only one part of it, it's the media aswell...which is what this thread was about. I simply expanded on that and pointed out other areas where this is actively going on.

originally posted by: Mugly

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

No, I understand his point. Sy-Fy got called out for not having enough representation and between one season and the next all of their shows suddenly acquired gay characters either an existing character was "outed" whether it made sense or not or a new one was inserted summarily to be the "token."

It's annoying. When at most 5% of the population is gay, it makes sense to have a few gay characters, but not every ensemble cast has to have one. It's out of all proportion to reality. There are more gays in TV than there are Asians. And I'd be willing to bet there are way more Asians as a percentage of the population.

since when is tv all about reality?
outside of a reality show(which isnt even in proportion to reality) i thought the whole point of tv, movies, books was to get an escape from reality.
unless you are reading watching non fiction of course.

tv does not represent reality. pretty sure it is not supposed to

It doesn't, but at the same time, blacks have been pushing for more African-American characters for longer than gays have been pushing, and gays have better results than blacks do.

originally posted by: samerulesapply


Are you really this condescending that you think you need to point out to me that which I've clearly stated already - that basic, fundamental truth that man and woman can have sex and conceive a child?
just wasnt sure if you got it is all. ive debated a lot on here and a lot of members cant seem to get the fact that gay people can have kids. didnt know if you were on of them.


Also, I like ghow you spend the last page arguing with me only to agree in your last post:

those are different things. of course it is wrong/negative to PUSH sex on kids without context. that is not the same as sex education.

That's pretty much the point I made in my initial response to this thread...the hilarious thing is you're continuing to argue with me.
i dont think it is the same thing at all. when you first got on your little tangent it was about how teaching them about homosexuality could effect them in a negative way. i dont agree with that. over the last few posts you keep changing it up a little bit. so i tried to answer your amended questions too.
so no, i did not agree[/b[


And stop fixating on single issues - it's nopt just about education, that's only one part of it, it's the media aswell...which is what this thread was about. I simply expanded on that and pointed out other areas where this is actively going on.

youre the one that keeps fixating on the sex ed thing. you brought it up and are keeping it going. ive said i would like to get back to the original train of thought and asked if you can drop it but you wont. i dont want it to be looked at as if i am dodging questions so i keep responding but i really dont want to.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: MrWendal

Walking Dead: Rick Grimes (he bit a chunk out of some guy's throat - that's not manly enough for ya?)

Hell on Wheels: Whatever the main character's name is - I don't watch it, but I've seen promos for it.

That little guy on Game of Thrones - he may be little, but he's a pro with the ladies

The main guy from Mad Men - he was a man's man

The two hunky guys in Supernatural

The sexy vampire guy in True Blood

Those are just ones off the top of my head, and I don't even really watch tv.

nice.
i was going to run down a small list of manly men male leads that are not gay or just married to strong women and rick grimes and don draper were on my list.
there are others of course but you made the point well.

originally posted by: ketsuko

It doesn't, but at the same time, blacks have been pushing for more African-American characters for longer than gays have been pushing, and gays have better results than blacks do.

do they?
i can think of some gay characters but i cant really think of any gay leads.
i can think of some black leads though.
empire
how to get away with murder
scandal

73 shows with black leads or supporting
blogs.indiewire.com... e-full-list-20150310

edit
i dont know why that link goes to a 404
i just searched 2015 black tv characters and it is the second one down if you want to look

a reply to: Mugly

No...I contributed to the thread and stated my own [personal opinion. You responded, as did another person...and I continued to reply.

That's sort of how a forum works. I'm not saying the education aspect isn't important, that it shouldn't be discussed, but it's a broader issue than that and you know it.

I like the double standards, though. Nobody is to be judgemental of you or your opinions but you refuse to accept the opinion of anyone who disagrees with you. Evident by the fact that you've spent the last 20 or so minutes arguing against a point you supposedly actually agree with.

This actually happened!

Maybe some people should practise what they preach an accept that, like them, some people have ideas, beliefs, morals or whatever that they don't live by or agree with...respect others' right to harbour such opinions and views whether or not you like it.

You expect such tolerance yet are unwilling to extend that same courtesy to those you demand it from...yep.

That's your typical, modern attitude.

a reply to: samerulesapply

feel free to judge me and my opinions all you want. if you do i just want it to be on things i actually said is all.

a reply to: Mugly

I'm not judging you, just responding.

You argued against my points initially...

a reply to: kaylaluv

That's what I thought. I don't watch TV shows, but MANY I've seen advertised seem to have strong males in them. Yeah, there are a lot of shows featuring strong women (for the same reason many shows have gay people in them - to represent a realistic group of people) but is that a problem?

Remember when it seemed like ALL the shows featured strong male leads and the women in supporting roles?

Bob Newhart
CHiPs
Dallas
M*A*S*H
Bonanza
The Waltons
Sanford and Son
Marcus Welby, MD
Happy Days
Dukes of Hazzard
Adam-12
The A-Team
Cosby

OK, I'll stop. But why is it so threatening to have the pendulum swing in the direction of more women (or gay people) on TV? What is the threat?

No matter how diverse a show's cast or how positive its portrayal of minorities, the lead character will almost always be a conventionally attractive, heterosexual, Caucasian, vaguely Christian male. Common wisdom in the Western entertainment industry is that a show or film needs a lead character that the target demographic can identify with, so this is usually an Enforced Trope. The White Male Lead is often The Hero.

There are, of course, shows and films with female and/or minority leads, but those works are almost always targeted towards those specific demographics. If a producer wants to appeal across all demographics, chances are they'll go with a white male lead (with the occasional Will Smith and Jackie Chan exception). This is because there is still some racism in the West, whites are the majority there and studios believe they are unable to relate to minority characters.

Source

I'm not complaining. If I don't like a show, I won't watch it. But it won't be because one of the people is gay or because there aren't enough strong women represented...

a reply to: samerulesapply

one other thing, is you are confusing 'Sex' and 'Homosexuality' Sexual Orientation is not 'Sex' so educating people about Sexual Orientation is not pushing 'Sex' on anyone.

i'm not saying to teach anything in school or anything like that, but what i'm saying is that having Children learn that there are people who have different Genders and Gender-Identities, and different ways to express their Gender, and different Sexual Orientations is not a bad thing, maybe there would be less hate in this world and intolerance

a reply to: Darth_Prime

I agree, wholeheartedly.

There should be more tolerance of my opinions. You should tell that other person who kept arguing with me and telling me I was wrong.

To clarify, I didn't respond to this thread to bash yours or anyone elses opinion, I came to read the thread and decided to chip in with my views.

Then some intolerant people got rather defensive...

G.A.Y...Gone Againt Yahweh!

The Bible makes it very clear that the gay lifestyle is an abomination in the sight of God.

Our federal govt just shoved gay marriage down our throats and legitimized EVIL.

The media played a major role...

M.E.D.I.A...

Make Everyone Dumb In America.

Im no homophobe. Love the sinner, but hate the sin.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Believing homosexuality is a sin doesn't make anyone a homophobe. Being scared of a homosexual makes someone a homophobe. I'm sorry but this linguistic double standard of phobia for everything but homosexuality is unacceptable. A phobia is a fear. Either you are afraid of gay people or you are not.

Personally I'm not afraid of them, but find it ridiculous that virtually every show I see on TV seems to have a token gay guy, since they have moved on from having a token black guy. In fact, South Park needs to re-name their characters now. I guess if we want kids to be thinking about sex often, thats fine for a family show, as the shows seem to be designed to get people thinking about who is having sex with who.

You bring up a good point. Too many gay people are on TV, an amount that certainly comes nowhere near representative of the population. Maybe in New York City where the people there are all chemically neutered and overpopulated, leading to more gayness, maybe there they have that many gay people.

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: samerulesapply

one other thing, is you are confusing 'Sex' and 'Homosexuality' Sexual Orientation is not 'Sex' so educating people about Sexual Orientation is not pushing 'Sex' on anyone.

i'm not saying to teach anything in school or anything like that, but what i'm saying is that having Children learn that there are people who have different Genders and Gender-Identities, and different ways to express their Gender, and different Sexual Orientations is not a bad thing, maybe there would be less hate in this world and intolerance

Okay, then having a Christian class where the teacher demonstrates prayer, and the students learn Bible verses, isn't pushing religion by the standard you just set in your post. Right? I think you are right and agree with you.

I began asking myself a few questions after reading through a few of the comments on this thread.. People speak as though they feel some type of pressure, by gay televised representation, to be gay themselves..is that the problem?

Watching or learning about gay community issues and relationships does not mean you yourself must become gay. Defending or standing up for gay rights does not mean you yourself have to be gay.


Respecting and accepting gay community rights does not mean you yourself must participate in gay sexual behavior.


No one is asking you to become gay, lesbian, bi sexual or otherwise;


Some "straight-mind" comments though, seem to imply or seem to insinuate that that is the latent fear behind acceptance of gay lifestyle: the fear of becoming "one of them." How absurd is that? This is not about you and "your" "straight" sexuality: this is about the LGBQT community and their identity: I wonder, can heterosexual men disassociate themselves from gay male identity? Is there something you have to lose? Is there something that is at risk for you? Do you compromise your sense of masculinity by accepting gay community values and idenity? Is that what is at risk? Will you be called yourself if you support gay rights? Is it fearsome to be placed in such a position?


Gay folk are not "you" Straight folk. And don't worry, you are not suddenly going to turn into a gay person;

I don't know why, but I sort of just have this feeling that some people feel that honoring and respecting gay rights will make them be more susceptible to gay sexual behavior. Nothing could be further from the truth.



If you're straight you're simply straight, if you're gay, you're simply gay. There shouldn't be anything confusing or frightening about it..

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Mugly

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

No, I understand his point. Sy-Fy got called out for not having enough representation and between one season and the next all of their shows suddenly acquired gay characters either an existing character was "outed" whether it made sense or not or a new one was inserted summarily to be the "token."

It's annoying. When at most 5% of the population is gay, it makes sense to have a few gay characters, but not every ensemble cast has to have one. It's out of all proportion to reality. There are more gays in TV than there are Asians. And I'd be willing to bet there are way more Asians as a percentage of the population.

since when is tv all about reality?
outside of a reality show(which isnt even in proportion to reality) i thought the whole point of tv, movies, books was to get an escape from reality.
unless you are reading watching non fiction of course.

tv does not represent reality. pretty sure it is not supposed to

It doesn't, but at the same time, blacks have been pushing for more African-American characters for longer than gays have been pushing, and gays have better results than blacks do.

Gays have better results than blacks do? That is a perfect lie.

Look at the movies and the entertainment industry: Black is omnipresent my friend. Look at TV-- You're speaking perfect rubbish.

originally posted by: wayforward
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Believing homosexuality is a sin doesn't make anyone a homophobe. Being scared of a homosexual makes someone a homophobe. I'm sorry but this linguistic double standard of phobia for everything but homosexuality is unacceptable. A phobia is a fear. Either you are afraid of gay people or you are not.

The United States has a 2% gay population percentage rate. Do not worry, you will not become one by watching them on TV or by inviting them into your living room. I do find your comment about "phobia" important though:

Most crimes against members of the gay community do not occur because the violent aggressor was fearful, or "PHOBIC;"
Most crimes against members of the gay community occur because the violent aggressor felt "WRATH" and hatred.


Based on that truth then, how to create a word similar to "misogyny" or "misanthropy" that would work with the prefix "homos"? Here are two ideas:

Misohomos
Misohomy

Wrath and hatred, "MISO," would be a better option- I always wondered why they chose to describe it as a phobia..

Thank you for all the great comments; well, most of the non-hateful ones.

It's interesting to see the venom on both sides of this topic. Some folks are really angry about even posting such a topic...makes me wonder. As I've stated all along, I have no issue with sexual preference in everyday life. What I take issue with is the media trying to portray it as a larger representation of the populous than it really is. From there this topic has become a venomous debate about sexuality preferences. Again, I don't care. I just have an issue with the media making it something other than what it really is.

It seems some here have some real anger issues. Oh well...it doesn't change my opinion in the OP, or my opinion going forward. My position stands.

Enjoy.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

You aren't kidding! Even the competition-type "reality" shows push it, with every single season featuring homosexual contestants. 1-2% of society means that, out of every 12-20 sets, you should not always see someone who is, but you always, ALWAYS do. Everyone knows that 10% thing was a myth, but the shows behave as though it isn't. It's annoying. It doesn't matter where someone stands on the issue, either; its a matter of the cast of shows not reflecting real society. For the competitions, they should not make a point of representing one little group every time, and ignoring so many others. It's biased.