Lack of diversity in LGBTQ+ tv shows and how it has an effect in the real world

[ILoveGames48]

I just think people look more into something more than it actually is..

We will never EVER!! Be seen the same as straight people.. look at how many years others have been wanting the same thing and even til this day they aren’t treated the same as others

So the more we become accepted ( or tolerated ) by straight community doesn’t mean we will be seen the same as them

 

[badd mamma jamma]

This is what happens when gay men socially and ideologically align more with women and gynocentric attitudes than those of fellow men. A lot of the sensationalism and stereotypical gay behaviors are catered to women's tastes whom are the primary consumers of media, you'll notice in a lot of more androcentrically geared media gay men do not follow the predictable stereotypes, and in many cases are indistinguishable from straight men aside from whom they share a relationship/bed with.
If gay men were more properly aligned with straight men the mainstream media depiction of gay men would be much closer to the couple in "The Last of Us" then the cast of "Queer as Folk", but as long as you seek straight women's approval and allyship you'll have to cater to their fetishism to keep it

Why blame women and not the film studios which are headed by straight men? Most straight men aren't even comfortable with gay lead movies unless it's autobiographical about a beloved legend ( Bohemian Rhapsody ). Instead of blaming women why don't we demand better more nuanced depictions of gay men and show our support accordingly?

 

[badd mamma jamma]

The whole point is that you dont need representation of anything. You need it if you are biased in the first place. Without representation, no information and therefore no bias.

Your whole sermon does not even make sense.

If you need representation, you would need it from other countries and languages if you believe in DEI (Diversity, equity and inclusion).

You as an American person are obviously more privileged now, and you are systemically discriminating the whole world through your privileges.

And this is important, you dont want to share your wealth and privileges with others. Just look at the average income of the world and also of income for the same job.

Americans have more money and power than the rest of the world and earn more for the same job.

That is American supermacy according to wokeness and diversity, equity and inclusion

. So if there is a power imbalance, it is privileging all of you who complain the loudest about it (I mean Americans).

And what's wrong with demanding representation, diversity and inclusion and equity from our home nation? Your argument makes no sense and you honestly just sound like a angry European. Personally I do consume foreign media especially and more specifically LGBTQ stuff as I like seeing and contrasting how the other half lives across the world if that makes you feel better.

 

[badd mamma jamma]

I was told that Hollywood was founded by minorities mainly Jewish people. Jews are still overrepresented.
Iger, Feige etc.

If you say it is discrimination you have to proof it beyond anecdotal evidence. It is normal that they choose from the local people and there were not a lot of Black people.

That is why I recommed removing Hollywood from the USA and give it to another country. Nobody like Hollywood anyway, if you view it worldwide.

Overrepresentation is not necessary discrimination or it is discrimination everywhere. Nobody complains about overrepresentation in sports of Black people in soccer of Asian in table tennis.

There are a couple of factor that have nothing to do with discrimination.



If they see them as violent and criminals, they are somehow represented, but wrongly represented.

I had never fear of black people and I knew them only from the American media only. Now I know some people from Africa (refugees).

The people that have fear of foreigner need it. But that should not happen in the first place. You should not fear people just, because you dont see them on television.

If you need representation you can also watch sport. You dont need Hollywood.

But what is removing Hollywood from the USA into another country going to solve? Most people do in fact like Hollywood. We may not be turning out the hits like we use to, but that doesn't mean we're hated by everyone.

 

[Sagittarius84]

Why blame women and not the film studios which are headed by straight men? Most straight men aren't even comfortable with gay lead movies unless it's autobiographical about a beloved legend ( Bohemian Rhapsody ). Instead of blaming women why don't we demand better more nuanced depictions of gay men and show our support accordingly?

Who is we? Whom would be in the best position to demand a better more nuanced depiction of gay men but medias primary consumer? What the presumably straight male film studio heads serve is the whims of a female audience whom unlike straight men relish in the bombastic depiction of gay men almost the point of fetishizing.
Even the straight men you'll applaud so much for being comfortable playing gay leads, typically are only comfortable doing so because their appeal to straight women is already deeply cemented, or they operate somewhat asexually.

 

[Sagittarius84]

think all humans should have a balance of energies, many gay men aren't interested in brotherhood or activities that build character and comradery with other guys (especially with straight men). Quite frankly they are too busy fantasizing and lusting after straight men, to actually form bonds with them. But that's another story for another day.

I think that's applicable here, because what I often identify is that it takes objective work to cultivate allyship and camaraderie with men, while women often tend to offer it on simply a subjective, sympathetic basis. When you feel starved for attention and affirmation, unfortunately a subjective standard to get it is easier to attain, even if it doesn't come with the objective benefits.
It's sort of akin the trope of single men preferring dogs vs single women preferring cats, and gay men would rather get cats that may or may not just like them for them instead of putting in the objective work to get unconditional love from a dog. Cat affection for free sounds great until they don't alert you to/or protect you from intruders, and a dog's unquestioning loyalty costs training, discipline, and uncomfortable routine.

 

[FrankieGuile]

The underlying assumption of many of these posts is that active discrimination against minority groups in films produced by straight "Hollywood" studio bosses exists de facto. The arguments are either, "yes, it exists!" or "no, it does not!" Popular entertainment, whether produced in Hollywood or elsewhere, simply responds to the market for entertainment. It produces what people want to consume, or at least, what segments of people want to consume. Hollywood has been criticized for decades for going out of its way to produce content that appeases one group at the sacrifice of the market in general. Sometimes those productions are successful, and sometimes they are not. Sometimes they expand the general market's understanding of others, and sometimes the general market is unmoved. Whatever the case, do not blame the filmmakers. The marketplace speaks loudly and it can be a bitch to many who are not in-step with it. If you believe a different market exists -- or should exist -- then start your own film company and address it. Don't say it can't be done when many have done it, representing many races, ethnicities and cultures.

 

[badd mamma jamma]

Who is we? Whom would be in the best position to demand a better more nuanced depiction of gay men but medias primary consumer? What the presumably straight male film studio heads serve is the whims of a female audience whom unlike straight men relish in the bombastic depiction of gay men almost the point of fetishizing.
Even the straight men you'll applaud so much for being comfortable playing gay leads, typically are only comfortable doing so because their appeal to straight women is already deeply cemented, or they operate somewhat asexually.

Your comment still didn't disprove anything I said. I think LGBTQIA people need to take a page from black folks and support our own while demanding better and more varied depictions of queer life instead of trying to form alley ship with a group that generally has no interest in seeing us in anything unless we're water down in some way.

 

[bar4doug]

The underlying assumption of many of these posts is that active discrimination against minority groups in films produced by straight "Hollywood" studio bosses exists de facto. The arguments are either, "yes, it exists!" or "no, it does not!" Popular entertainment, whether produced in Hollywood or elsewhere, simply responds to the market for entertainment. It produces what people want to consume, or at least, what segments of people want to consume. Hollywood has been criticized for decades for going out of its way to produce content that appeases one group at the sacrifice of the market in general. Sometimes those productions are successful, and sometimes they are not. Sometimes they expand the general market's understanding of others, and sometimes the general market is unmoved. Whatever the case, do not blame the filmmakers. The marketplace speaks loudly and it can be a bitch to many who are not in-step with it. If you believe a different market exists -- or should exist -- then start your own film company and address it. Don't say it can't be done when many have done it, representing many races, ethnicities and cultures.

Agreed.

At the end of the day, the project, no matter the content, needs to make money, unless the production company is in the business to lose money, or the producer is willing to fund it out of their own pockets.

It's about making money. As I posted earlier, don't make it personal. There are lots of film genres that can be considered unrepresented, but if there is no money to be made (i.e. - there is no market for it), who's going to lay out the funds for it to be made?

 

[FrankieGuile]

Agreed.

At the end of the day, the project, no matter the content, needs to make money, unless the production company is in the business to lose money, or the producer is willing to fund it out of their own pockets.

It's about making money. As I posted earlier, don't make it personal. There are lots of film genres that can be considered unrepresented, but if there is no money to be made (i.e. - there is no market for it), who's going to lay out the funds for it to be made?

Agreed with your agreement. And a paucity, or perceived paucity, of those films is not prima facie discrimination. It is, more likely, simple market dynamics.

 

[Sagittarius84]

instead of trying to form alley ship with a group that generally has no interest in seeing us in anything unless we're water down in some way.

Perhaps it is upon you to determine what your collective identity will because you will essentially whore yourself to those whom fetishize your effeminate ways, but tell those that embrace your masculinity that they are holding you down in some way.

 

[badd mamma jamma]

Perhaps it is upon you to determine what your collective identity will because you will essentially whore yourself to those whom fetishize your effeminate ways, but tell those that embrace your masculinity that they are holding you down in some way.

You clearly have internalized homophobia and resentment towards effeminate gays and women, which is sad. Like I said in my original comment how about we support varied forms of gay men and not one sideas there is no correct way to be gay.

 

[bigboaster]

You clearly have internalized homophobia and resentment towards effeminate gays and women, which is sad. Like I said in my original comment how about we support varied forms of gay men and not one sideas there is no correct way to be gay.

That guy is straight I'm pretty sure. So he doesn't have "internalized" homophobia. I guess to you it would just be "homophobia". Which seems like a stretch tbh.

 

[Kanashi]

That guy is straight I'm pretty sure. So he doesn't have "internalized" homophobia.

i thought the exact same thing when i read his response!

 

[Sagittarius84]

You clearly have internalized homophobia and resentment towards effeminate gays and women, which is sad. Like I said in my original comment how about we support varied forms of gay men and not one sides there is no correct way to be gay.

No, I just refuse to accept effeminate, and stereotypically flamboyant behaviors as the prerequisite for male homosexuality, and I consistently wonder why for all the "varied support" and " not one way to be gay" arguments that as long as the support and way fulfills women's fetishes and gets you short term attention, youll forsake your self respect and masculinity.
Androcentric media may be watered down but at least it gives genuine characterizations to gay characters beyond whom they share the bed with. Gynocentric media is where youre either one of the girls, or a woman's plaything...give me water over that any day.

 

[Sagittarius84]

homophobia

Unfortunately , like misogyny, it has become an all encompassing buzzword to describe behaviors, observations or opinions that aren't flattering to a homosexuals feelings or personal worldview, independent of their objective accuracy.

 

[bar4doug]

No, I just refuse to accept effeminate, and stereotypically flamboyant behaviors as the prerequisite for male homosexuality, and I consistently wonder why for all the "varied support" and " not one way to be gay" arguments that as long as the support and way fulfills women's fetishes and gets you short term attention, youll forsake your self respect and masculinity.
Androcentric media may be watered down but at least it gives genuine characterizations to gay characters beyond whom they share the bed with. Gynocentric media is where youre either one of the girls, or a woman's plaything...give me water over that any day.

Kevin Smith wrote about how he tries to write LGBTQ into his films, and tries to portray them in typical everyday settings, since his brother is gay, and Kevin didn't know how to approach his "normal" brother when they were younger. You can read about it; you can also watch him discuss it in "An Evening with Kevin Smith"

I think much more progress can be made when people are portrayed as how they act, not how customers think they should act. This "All in the Family" aired more than 50 years ago. Norman Lear was a genius. Too bad the industry hasn't taken enough cues. I'd like to think that, today, nobody cares who you bang...

 

[FrankieGuile]

You clearly have internalized homophobia and resentment towards effeminate gays and women, which is sad. Like I said in my original comment how about we support varied forms of gay men and not one sideas there is no correct way to be gay.

Nothing of the sort is "clear." Rather, good, level-headed points have been made. Resorting to name-calling is a sign the points have been made successfully without meaningful counterpoint.

 

[badd mamma jamma]

No, I just refuse to accept effeminate, and stereotypically flamboyant behaviors as the prerequisite for male homosexuality, and I consistently wonder why for all the "varied support" and " not one way to be gay" arguments that as long as the support and way fulfills women's fetishes and gets you short term attention, youll forsake your self respect and masculinity.
Androcentric media may be watered down but at least it gives genuine characterizations to gay characters beyond whom they share the bed with. Gynocentric media is where youre either one of the girls, or a woman's plaything...give me water over that any day.

Effeminate and "stereotypical" gay men exist. Sorry that bothers you. If Hollywood cared enough they could produce such works, but they're clearly not invested. There are plenty of independent gay writers and directors as well as foreign media that you could support, if your truly interested instead of just waiting on the mainstream media.

 

[FrankieGuile]

Effeminate and "stereotypical" gay men exist. Sorry that bothers you. If Hollywood cared enough they could produce such works, but they're clearly not invested. There are plenty of independent gay writers and directors as well as foreign media that you could support, if your truly interested instead of just waiting on the mainstream media.

He never said it "bothers" him. Whereas you make some well-considered points, you tend to undermine them by setting up straw man arguments just to knock them down. As another example, you conclude Hollywood is "not invested" on the pretext that they do not "care enough" to produce works that others would claim are plentiful. Even assuming a paucity of such works, many reasons exist, other than indifference, for not producing more of such works.