First Elsa and now Captain America too? NOT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE GAY

[Res]

...lolwut? Nobody is hating on gays and lesbians here. I even said I support LGBT+ rights. They're human beings with feelings just like the rest of us, they don't deserve to be hated on because of who they love or who they are. This is about people trying to force that lifestyle into things it doesn't belong in, regardless of their own sexuality.

Generally if you have to specifically state that you support LGBT+ rights, and use language like 'the rest of us', it comes across as very 'othering'.

Really, the number of LGBT+ characters present in media is still nowhere near - not even close - to the percentage that exist in the general population. I think we're in dire need of greater representation.

I think the advantage to revealing characters like Elsa and Captain America to be bisexual, gay or asexual, is that they are already well-established, main characters with plenty of fans. It means that LGBT+ characters aren't relegated to being a niche character.

[Hardin]

I'm ok with this, our media should reflect society and that includes LGBT people.

[blah the Prussian]

I don't care one way or the other about the sexuality of either character. I'll be quite unimpressed if they make a big deal out of it in either case. Elsa IMO has much more... pressing character issues, like the whole froze over her kingdom and suffered no consequences stuff.

[Specta]

Generally if you have to specifically state that you support LGBT+ rights, and use language like 'the rest of us', it comes across as very 'othering'.

Really, the number of LGBT+ characters present in media is still nowhere near - not even close - to the percentage that exist in the general population. I think we're in dire need of greater representation.

I think the advantage to revealing characters like Elsa and Captain America to be bisexual, gay or asexual, is that they are already well-established, main characters with plenty of fans. It means that LGBT+ characters aren't relegated to being a niche character.

I agree 100% that avoiding othering is insanely important, but in this case I don't believe she was doing that particularly. Sometimes you do have to explicitly state if you do or do not support LGBT+ rights, such as when people are specifically calling it into question. Whether you personally believe their claim or not from there is another thing, but it's hard to blame someone for explicitly stating they support LGBT+ rights when that's exactly what they're being questioned about, yeah?

Always try to avoid creating a sense of the 'other,' though, for damn sure.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Specta

[Tryhard]

Really, the number of LGBT+ characters present in media is still nowhere near - not even close - to the percentage that exist in the general population. I think we're in dire need of greater representation.

I'm with you to a point, it would be nice to see more LGBT characters, but forcing the issue never helps anyone. I'm a bit apprehensive to get behind something anymore than suggestions as in demanding more LGBT characters.

Because most creators of games, comics, movies etc. are straight, and so they may not be comfortable writing or including a gay or bisexual character, either because they don't think they would do a good job of it or exactly because of this reaction. And that's quite unfortunate and it's quite sad because they probably know you would write them the same as any other character but they just don't want to deal with the reaction. Or perhaps the sexuality of the character is just not relevant.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Tryhard

[Jotari]

Captain America probably wasn't intended to be gay in the first film (though IMO, I don't recall feeling much chemistry between him and whatsherface) but I could easily believe this is something they've been trending towards for a few years now. I recently seen the Winter Soldier (wasn't altogether impressed overall) and one scene that sticks out in my mind is when his partner asks if their fake kiss was the first kiss he's had in seventy years. He responds not by acting embarrassed, getting angry or flirting back as one would expect from a straight character. Instead his reacting is a much more subdued "Does this really matter to you? I really don't want to talk about this."

I don't care one way or the other about the sexuality of either character. I'll be quite unimpressed if they make a big deal out of it in either case. Elsa IMO has much more... pressing character issues, like the whole froze over her kingdom and suffered no consequences stuff.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Jotari

[carefreejules]

Someone is still capable of being attracted to a different gender even if they've already dated a particular gender in the past. Sexuality is not something that happens in it instance. It takes time and discovery for someone to realize that 'oh hey, I think I'm starting to be attracted to _______ as well'. There's no age limit to when you can realize what you're attracted to.

With that being said, I'm all for LGBTQ representation in the media - my only concern would be how they execute it so I would agree that I wouldn't want there to be a LGBTQ character there FOR THE SAKE of bringing one in - like it's an obligation to do so. But at the end of the day, people just want representation in the media because the more people see it, the more people are going to be open and used to the idea. That's what happened to me, anyway.

If the directors could make it so that Elsa slowly develops an attraction to females rather than BAM, I'm into chicks, then I'm all for it because there's actually character development involved too.

Edited May 26, 2016 by carefreejules

[solrocknroll]

I saw this stance that making a character like Captain America gay is that he already has a big fanbase. There might be straight children who look up to Captain America or Elsa. If they were gay, it could teach those children that gay people are equal to them and not people to look down upon. It would also give gay children a boost in self-esteem that wouldn't exist otherwise. A lot of kids can love in fear, and it's great to help them be in touch and proud of their identity. That kind of thing can be found in Steven Universe, where diversity is certainly encouraged and many children watch it.

A new character wouldn't have the same effect tbh. Idina Menzel herself supports giving Elsa a girlfriend.

[Anacybele]

I'm with you to a point, it would be nice to see more LGBT characters, but forcing the issue never helps anyone. I'm a bit apprehensive to get behind something anymore than suggestions as in demanding more LGBT characters.

Because most creators of games, comics, movies etc. are straight, and so they may not be comfortable writing or including a gay or bisexual character, either because they don't think they would do a good job of it or exactly because of this reaction. And that's quite unfortunate and it's quite sad because they probably know you would write them the same as any other character but they just don't want to deal with the reaction. Or perhaps the sexuality of the character is just not relevant.

Yeah, this is a good post. I agree with it entirely.

And sorry if I was coming across as trying to form some "other" or whatever some of you are saying, I didn't mean that at all.

[DarkDestr0yer61]

The thing is though, someone could easily title this "NOT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE STRAIGHT", because straight representation is a lot greater then gay, trans, Ace, bisexual representation.... In fact, I would say be smart to make Elsa a lesbian or bisexual or asexual because it would show young kids that some people are not straight, and that is okay.

Regarding the recent Marvel movies, I would say if anything Cap is probably bisexual, which I would be fine with.

[Anacybele]

Thing is, straight people are much more common than LGBT people. So naturally, straight characters will be more common too.

And honestly, I feel like hateful adults are more a problem than hateful kids. If certain adults with kids saw their children watching lesbian Elsa, they'd be the ones trying to convince their kids that it's wrong and stuff. And in return, kids would be like "but why? I still like this movie!"

Personally, while I support rights for LGBT people, I'm not into that stuff. I'd rather not see Elsa kiss a woman. I just don't swing that way. Other people can love who they want, I got no problem with that, but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy it myself. People that do though, good for them if they do get a lesbian Elsa!

Edited May 26, 2016 by Anacybele

[Balcerzak]

I... what? You do know bisexuality exists, right? Being interested in women in the past doesn't mean a person can't also be interested in men.

WRT the Captain America thing... have you seen Civil War. There is so much going on between Steve and Bucky even the actors talk about it.

I couldn't see even a whiff of romance between Steve and Bucky. Yes, they have a deep bond, but it's all comrade in arms/best friends/loyal to the last drop type stuff. All of the romantic tension was related to Cap still being violently hung up on Peggy and her granddaughter (or whatever the actual relation is). At least, as far as my viewing of the movie was related.

[Res]

I agree 100% that avoiding othering is insanely important, but in this case I don't believe she was doing that particularly. Sometimes you do have to explicitly state if you do or do not support LGBT+ rights, such as when people are specifically calling it into question. Whether you personally believe their claim or not from there is another thing, but it's hard to blame someone for explicitly stating they support LGBT+ rights when that's exactly what they're being questioned about, yeah?

Always try to avoid creating a sense of the 'other,' though, for damn sure.

Fair enough, you're right that it probably was necessary within the context of the OP.

I'm with you to a point, it would be nice to see more LGBT characters, but forcing the issue never helps anyone. I'm a bit apprehensive to get behind something anymore than suggestions as in demanding more LGBT characters.

Because most creators of games, comics, movies etc. are straight, and so they may not be comfortable writing or including a gay or bisexual character, either because they don't think they would do a good job of it or exactly because of this reaction. And that's quite unfortunate and it's quite sad because they probably know you would write them the same as any other character but they just don't want to deal with the reaction. Or perhaps the sexuality of the character is just not relevant.

I certainly wouldn't wish to force the issue. However, I feel there's a difference between 'forcing' an issue and encouraging it to be less of an issue in the first place.

Also, sometimes there's a need to challenge the default.

And sorry if I was coming across as trying to form some "other" or whatever some of you are saying, I didn't mean that at all.

No worries! I didn't mean to sound harsh if I did, just wanted to advise caution.

[blah the Prussian]

The best approach to this, I'd say, is the Falcon approach. The Falcon wasn't the first Black superhero, but he was the first that was handled well, in that him being black was completely irrelevant to his character; he wasn't the token black Avenger, he was an Avenger who happened to be black. LGBT characters should be handled the same way; don't make a big deal out of it, don't write them any differently from how you'd normally write them.

Captain America probably wasn't intended to be gay in the first film (though IMO, I don't recall feeling much chemistry between him and whatsherface) but I could easily believe this is something they've been trending towards for a few years now. I recently seen the Winter Soldier (wasn't altogether impressed overall) and one scene that sticks out in my mind is when his partner asks if their fake kiss was the first kiss he's had in seventy years. He responds not by acting embarrassed, getting angry or flirting back as one would expect from a straight character. Instead his reacting is a much more subdued "Does this really matter to you? I really don't want to talk about this."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGRUOD1P_Nk

Well, it could be worse. Elsa at least has a good understanding of Keynesian Economics.

[Jotari]

The best approach to this, I'd say, is the Falcon approach. The Falcon wasn't the first Black superhero, but he was the first that was handled well, in that him being black was completely irrelevant to his character; he wasn't the token black Avenger, he was an Avenger who happened to be black. LGBT characters should be handled the same way; don't make a big deal out of it, don't write them any differently from how you'd normally write them.

Well, it could be worse. Elsa at least has a good understanding of Keynesian Economics.

One thing that video failed to realise is that Elsa actually spent a lot of time educating herself when playing the hermit. She somehow manages to know what fractals are even though it's something that's only been properly researched (and named) using computer science.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Jotari

[Etrurian emperor]

I don't really mind turning characters gay unless they have already been explicitly mentioned to be straight before. My thought on gay characters is that you should never write them, you should instead write characters who happen to be gay.

And turning an established character with no visual romantic life into one is a way to achieve that. The character has already proven before that he's a character and so he can't fall into the trap of being defined by his sexuality. This why I'm so pleased with how the coming out of a certain character in the Percy Jackson series was handled, it was only after five books of that character showing his character.

That being said Captain America never struck me as a character anything other then straight though I'm hardly the biggest Marvel guy so I'm not one to judge that.

[Moblin Major General]

I don't care one way or the other about the sexuality of either character. I'll be quite unimpressed if they make a big deal out of it in either case. Elsa IMO has much more... pressing character issues, like the whole froze over her kingdom and suffered no consequences stuff.

Given that she was almost executed by a foreign lordling for a combination of imagined crimes, self defense, and being witch hunted, I wouldn't blame the people for forgiving her so readily. If anyone had to pay the legal consequences for her outburst, it's the king and queen. Sorry to say, their behavior, though characteristic of aristocracy, was inevitably going to lead to her to ostracism. As devastating as it was for her to lose them, they got their due (unless they survived to be eaten by Sabor in Tarzan.)

[roymbrog]

I couldn't see even a whiff of romance between Steve and Bucky. Yes, they have a deep bond, but it's all comrade in arms/best friends/loyal to the last drop type stuff. All of the romantic tension was related to Cap still being violently hung up on Peggy and her granddaughter (or whatever the actual relation is). At least, as far as my viewing of the movie was related.

Nah, I didn't mean romantic tension as much as chemistry. There was no romantic tension, but there was definitely foundation for a potential something floating around ("He said Bucky and it was like I was a 16 year old kid in Brooklyn again", ect.) Basically what's going on is, if Bucky was a chick in the same comrade in arms/best friends/loyal to the last drop position, them becoming a thing would not surprise anyone. That happens all the time with male/female best buds.

[Locke087]

Frankly my only position on the matter is that I believe in the artistic integrity of writers, and they should not have to bend to the political agendas of others, or the pleas of fans. Any form of fan service is a detriment to art as a whole, If an author feels that adding a certain something would actually add to the story then he should, but otherwise it will be a irrelevant and forced. If people want more representation certain things, you should not push for shoehorning it in to existing properties or characters where it would not add to the story. Because what you will get is not what you wish, you will get something forced and something that will overall hurt the narrative. What you should be pushing for is new characters that explore new themes and territories and expand art as a whole. Not this crap about changing an existing work of art, an author should feel the right to write what they know, and to write what feel would benefit the overall story.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Locke087

[Rapier]

The best approach to this, I'd say, is the Falcon approach. The Falcon wasn't the first Black superhero, but he was the first that was handled well, in that him being black was completely irrelevant to his character; he wasn't the token black Avenger, he was an Avenger who happened to be black. LGBT characters should be handled the same way; don't make a big deal out of it, don't write them any differently from how you'd normally write them.

You, kind sir, deserve a medal.

Making Captain America gay or bi would be a really forced move, since he never showed such signs before even as he was surrounded by men who are close to him, in comparisson to how he shows signs of attraction toward women close to him (Peggy and her granddaughter). I know that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, however it is very unlikely that a character who never showed any signs of liking men (and Captain America is old, even if we don't consider all the time he spent frozen) will suddenly like men (which is different from "leaving the closet"). It would be much less of a forced move to create a new character who happens to be gay/bi, preferably with a bigger focus on character building than political pandering to appeal to activist groups.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Rapier

[blah the Prussian]

Given that she was almost executed by a foreign lordling for a combination of imagined crimes, self defense, and being witch hunted, I wouldn't blame the people for forgiving her so readily. If anyone had to pay the legal consequences for her outburst, it's the king and queen. Sorry to say, their behavior, though characteristic of aristocracy, was inevitably going to lead to her to ostracism. As devastating as it was for her to lose them, they got their due (unless they survived to be eaten by Sabor in Tarzan.)

I'm far more partial to the King and Queen; when faced with a crisis they didn't understand they put their people ahead of their daughter. The sentiment behind that, at least, I can respect, new matter the results.

[Sandalphon]

Look, I'm all for LGBT+ rights and all, but this is not how you get it. You don't try to force your lifestyle on people or existing media that's been portrayed to be straight.

Ah yes, the LGBTQIA lifestyle, like "existing while queer" or "occupying space while being an SGA/ Gender Minority". Because every single LGBTQIA person lives the exact same way and every narrative about LGBTQIA characters has to have a big neon sign that says "by the way this character is [insert sexuality/ gender identity here]" or else people will get confused because a deviation from the societal default occurred and dang it now my habitus has been disrupted again!!!

Do you also just go up to queer people and ask them "why" they're gay and complain that they didn't show hints that they were queer?

Perhaps you should ask yourself why you're so upset at the possibility of a bisexual Steve Rogers or a lesbian Elsa. Why are you, for instance, more willing to accept Anna falling for Hans or Kristoff in less than 24 hours but somehow a lesbian Elsa seems more shocking and unrealistic to you?

Does the character become less engaging because they're attracted to a character of the same gender as opposed to a similar story with a love interest of a different gender?

I'm not trying to be antagonistic I am just genuinely confused about why people asking for representation is so upsetting when we have SO MANY stories about straight, cisgender characters and their straight, cisgender love interests... Likewise, how is it more forced to have an SGA character. If anything, having another story that panders to the socially accepted heteronormative conventions of storytelling would be more forced, in my opinon. Saying my boy Cap has to be attracted to women exclusively because he hasn't shown any interest is like saying I HAVE to be attracted exclusively to trans/nb people because I haven't happened to meet a cisgender person that tickled my fancy. It's a bit reductive to say the least and Bad Discourse to say the worst. :P

Edited May 26, 2016 by Ichimatsu Matsuno™

[Anacybele]

Have you even read my posts or this thread? This isn't a matter of people wanting fair representation, that is PERFECTLY FINE. The problem is trying to force it where it doesn't belong, like stated over and over in here. There's a difference.

And Anna falling for Hans so fast was unrealistic, and Elsa even pointed that out. But it took her longer than that to fall for Kristoff. They were searching for Elsa for a few days at least and Anna didn't actually show romantic interest in him until near the end when she realized that Kristoff was the one who truly loved her while Hans was a manipulative dick.

EDIT: Also, now it's LGBTQIA? I've never heard of it written this way before. What the hell are the I and A supposed to mean? This is getting really confusing.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Anacybele

[Balcerzak]

Nah, I didn't mean romantic tension as much as chemistry. There was no romantic tension, but there was definitely foundation for a potential something floating around ("He said Bucky and it was like I was a 16 year old kid in Brooklyn again", ect.) Basically what's going on is, if Bucky was a chick in the same comrade in arms/best friends/loyal to the last drop position, them becoming a thing would not surprise anyone. That happens all the time with male/female best buds.

Oh, okay, I think I see what you mean now.

However, in that case I think the real problem is the "That happens all the time with male/female best buds," and the inability of many writers (and to be totally honest the fans) to let purely platonic relationships stay platonic. Not every man and woman will be interested in each other, even if they have a long and storied past, and hell sometimes even because of that shared past they have more reasons not to hook up, despite how much outsiders might think they should.

What the hell are the I and A supposed to mean?

Presumably Intersexed and Asexual/Aromantic. Edited May 26, 2016 by Balcerzak

[Anacybele]

Presumably Intersexed and Asexual/Aromantic.

Oh, well then, I guess that means I'm part of the LGBT+ community, because technically, I'm asexual (though not aromantic, as I'm interested in men for romance. Just not sex). More reason for me to support rights for them.

No idea what intersexed means tho.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Anacybele