LGBT Themes, Stories And Characters On TV

[Bruinsfan]

TV does seem to be making wonderful progress in correcting bi erasure these past couple of years.

[galax-arena]

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, South Korea recently had its first television on-screen lesbian kiss ever, and some people aren't pleased about it.

The Korean Communications Standards Commission is investigating the February 25 episode of the teen drama “Seonam Girls High School Detectives,” due to a kiss scene which involved two female students.... Even though, “Seonam Girls High School Detectives” is aired on a cable network, this bold move could jeopardize sponsorship for the program.

The KCSC even admits that nobody made any formal complaints that precipitated the investigation, but they're still investigating because... I don't know, they have sticks up their asses?

 

The controversy over this makes me curious to learn more about LGBT media visibility/representation in countries that aren't the US, Canada, or England.

[Chaos Theory]

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, South Korea recently had its first television on-screen lesbian kiss ever, and some people aren't pleased about it.

The KCSC even admits that nobody made any formal complaints that precipitated the investigation, but they're still investigating because... I don't know, they have sticks up their asses?

The controversy over this makes me curious to learn more about LGBT media visibility/representation in countries that aren't the US, Canada, or England.

Does Austraillia Count? Because there is s show called Wenworth which has a popular lesbian lead. This is a remake of an old series/soap from I think the early 80s. The lesbian character then was.....a product of the time, but by the time she was written off the show she was a fully developed character, so progress and progress.

[smrou]

I don't watch a lot of international TV other than the occasional British, Australian, or Canadian show but Los Hombres de Paco was a Spanish show that had a prominent storyline involving the relationship between Pepa and Silvia, two women (a cop and a forensic scientist, respectively). I haven't ever watched the show as a whole, but I've watched the whole Pepa/Silvia plotline on Youtube. 

 

But actually I just remembered that I read this piece from AfterEllen recently that's about international LGBT TV and is actually the introduction to a weekly column on the subject.

[galax-arena]

Does Austraillia Count? Because there is s show called Wenworth which has a popular lesbian lead. This is a remake of an old series/soap from I think the early 80s. The lesbian character then was.....a product of the time, but by the time she was written off the show she was a fully developed character, so progress and progress.

Oh, I forgot Australia. Although I don't know much about them except that Home & Away apparently got some shit when they had a same-sex relationship a few years ago. I only know about that one because one of the girls was played by Kate Bell, and I knew her from Blue Water High. 

[Rick Kitchen]

Has Chris on Neighbours (Australian TV) ever had a sexual relationship, or even a kiss?  I know he's had boyfriends, but I don't think they've ever kissed or shown him in bed with any of them.

[Wax Lion]

I've only watched Neighbours on Hulu, but we haven't seen him intimate with his current boyfriend. It's not a soap with a lot of sex, but there is a little and Chris hasn't had his share.

[galax-arena]

The latest "think of the children!" controversy: ABC Family's The Fosters aired what is apparently the youngest same-sex kiss in US television history - 13-year-olds Jude and Connor, although I believe the actors are 14 and 15 years old IRL - and homophobes are not happy because it might influence impressionable young children. Dude, the show revolves around a married lesbian couple; anyone watching the show in the first place has probably already fallen prey to the insidious gay agenda.

[Taylorh2]

New series on Discovery Life:  *New Girls On The Block*  April 2 2015

 

"Follows a group of Transgender women in Kansas City, MO

 

[possibilities]

In the same episode of The Fosters with the supposedly shocking boy-on-boy kiss, we had to see a straight pair of teens actually have sex, and then afterwards suck each others' faces off in front of a younger sister of one of them. The 13 year old boys' kiss was comparatively extremely innocent and chaste seeming, believe me (the two of them holding hands in a previous episode was way hotter, if you ask me). The actors who took part have both given interviews where they basically say: "we feel great about being part of history and helping kids feel better about themselves." I'm hoping the horrified backlash will actually just get more eyeballs to download the episode and watch the show. It's really amazing to me, week after week, that this show is on the air with as little backlash as it gets. If they don't have two boys kissing, they have two moms lying in bed talking about orgasms, or flirting about handcuffs, or yelling "How very heteronormative of you!" during an argument. I always worry I'm dreaming, or maybe hallucinating, and it's always a relief to read a recap and find out no, I didn't make it up in my own head.

[Niuxita]

Completely agree, possibilities. The Fosters is an absolute dream come true of a television show. And speaking of LGBT visibility, I was just thinking the other day about how in just two days of TV I watch THREE shows with lesbian storylines and/or characters (Jane the Virgin and The Fosters on Monday and Pretty Little Liars on Tuesday). Then there's the sudden influx of f/f ships recently made canon that people kept dreaming about but never thought would happen, like Korra and Asami, Root and Shaw from Person of Interest, and Clarke and Lexa from The 100 (don't watch any of those shows out of a lack of interest in the premise, though I wish I did, but I do appreciate it). Which is why when I come across people STILL going on about "Swan Queen" on Tumblr, I think to myself that surely there is enough "representation" and visibility in many, MANY other places that people could stand to finally quit whining about the ONE show where they didn't get what they wanted. I agree with what someone said upthread about sometimes queer ships being less about an LGBT social issue and more about people just being upset that they didn't get their way (even though writers are entitled to tell the story they want to tell and not buck to the will of the fans if they don't feel like it. I may be in the minority in this, but I recognize that some shows are not going to have queer characters/storylines, just like in real life sometimes there are places where you don't encounter fellow queer people, and as long as there is a balance between shows with queer characters and shows without, I see no reason to sling around accusations like "homophobic" or "queerbaiting" when one of my shows happens to be overly straight). 

Edited March 6, 2015 by Niuxita

[galax-arena]

I don't know if I'd agree that there is enough representation on other shows that people shouldn't care if this or that particular show has LGBT representation or not. Sure, things are a lot better now than they were a decade ago, but I don't think that means people need to shut up and be satisfied.... especially when it's still the case that if two same-sex characters happened to be of the opposite sex, the "subtext" between them would often eventually just become "text." I think it's a different thing altogether to think that people who only ship a particular couple should chill out about that specific pairing. Doesn't mean that people should stop clamoring for more queer representation overall on the show.

 

Like, two of the shows you mentioned are Legend of Korra and The 100. I've complimented both shows upthread, but that's in context of the current landscape. Devoid of context, on their own, I'd say that both shows are lacking. Well, with The 100 it's still too early to tell, but I feel like it might be following the pattern of the female character who has a same-sex experience once but then goes back to guys as her endgame. I hope not, but I've seen it happen WAY too many times before to discount it as a possibility. And as far as Legend of Korra goes, Korra and Asami don't have any overt declarations of love, no physical displays of affection, etc. Bryke even admitted that Korrasami wasn't perfect, they said that they wanted to do more but ran into network interference. Nick didn't want to offend anyone, so they made it so that if you squinted really hard, you could keeping seeing what you wanted to see.

 

For a children's cartoon on Nick, I think LoK still broke a lot of ground with Korra and Asami, but it's all relative. I don't think you can argue that they were treated equally compared to A:TLA's Aang and Katara, who got to seal their relationship with a kiss. IMO it's not fair to point to LoK and say, "But you got Korrasami already, isn't that enough, can't you be happy?" 

Edited March 7, 2015 by galax-arena

[Chaos Theory]

Yes there needs to be more representation. I would LOvE a Better writen Rizzoli and Isles type show (like maybe In the Castle model). Where the two female leads end up together eventuallyz. It is not going to happen on R&I. The actors aren't right for it but wouldn't it be cool if someone actually wrote a series like that?

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I don't know if I'd agree that there is enough representation on other shows that people shouldn't care if this or that particular show has LGBT representation or not. Sure, things are a lot better now than they were a decade ago, but I don't think that means people need to shut up and be satisfied.... especially when it's still the case that if two same-sex characters happened to be of the opposite sex, the "subtext" between them would often eventually just become "text." I think it's a different thing altogether to think that people who only ship a particular couple should chill out about that specific pairing. Doesn't mean that people should stop clamoring for more queer representation overall on the show.

 

galax-arena, I don't think its as simple as saying, "Shut up and be satisfied!" and I don't think anyone has ever said that.

 

For myself, Buffy the Vampire Slayer was my first real obsession/fandom, although I have watched a lot of television in my lifetime. When Willow fell in love with Tara, there was a lot of outrage because the character seemed to erase her previous romantic history with guys, including her longtime crush on her best friend Xander. It just simply ceased to exist. I was not one of those people, as I really liked Tara and her portrayer Amber Benson. Then Tara was killed off in the generally miserable season six, which ignited a firestorm of anger about the dead lesbian cliche. Willow went evil and tried to end the world, and there were a lot of problems with that for me, which I won't get into as its not on point for this topic.

 

In the seventh season, Willow met Kennedy, played by Iyari Limon, and they pretty much pole-vaulted (so to speak) into a relationship. Kennedy was Tara's polar opposite, and they ended the series as a couple, although later they broke up in the comics. (Don't ask.) I had no issue with Kennedy either, although I don't think she was well-liked while the show was still on the air. But having killed off Tara, I think Whedon was wary of having a similar thing happen to her replacement. I think her death was a terrible writing choice, particularly in the midst of such a generally miserable season where all of the characters were unhappy for one reason or another. Like putting an olive on a crap sandwich.

 

The problem is, and maybe it isn't even so much a 'problem' as it is an apparent fact, it is the nature of Fandom to find one thing that annoys and zero in on it. I've been guilty of it plenty of times, but how do you distinguish between that and what is an actual issue?

[smrou]

I think to myself that surely there is enough "representation" and visibility in many, MANY other places that people could stand to finally quit whining about the ONE show where they didn't get what they wanted.

as long as there is a balance between shows with queer characters and shows without, I see no reason to sling around accusations like "homophobic" or "queerbaiting" when one of my shows happens to be overly straight

I think it's fine that there are shows that don't have LGBT characters, but just because there are shows that do doesn't mean there's no homophobia (though I think it's generally more about heteronormativity than homophobia) or queerbaiting going on in the writing/directing/producing/marketing/etc. of some shows. And I think it's perfectly fine for people to point it out and complain about it when they see it. 

[Niuxita]

 

I think it's fine that there are shows that don't have LGBT characters, but just because there are shows that do doesn't mean there's no homophobia (though I think it's generally more about heteronormativity than homophobia) or queerbaiting going on in the writing/directing/producing/marketing/etc. of some shows.

 

I don't disagree. The problem is when fans conflate "queerbaiting" (which should be a legitimate issue but the word has been so overused to the point that it doesn't carry the weight it should anymore) with "my crack ship will never become canon therefore the creators are being homophobic!!11!", especially when said accusation is flung at things that by definition are the very opposite of queerbating (like Swan Queen, which the creators admitted wasn't intentional, hence no "baiting" involved, or Myka and HG Wells on Warehouse 13, where the actresses decided to run with it without consulting the writers. If anything, the accusations of queerbaiting for the latter should be directed at THEM rather than at the show itself). Contrast that with Rizzoli & Isles, where people involved with the show have actually stated they do some takes of scenes between Jane and Maura to pander to the lesbian shippers. Now THAT is something that should have riled people up way more than I've seen.

 

That's my problem with the word "queerbaiting" as a criticism. It has lost all weight and meaning now that fans have taken to use it to justify their disappointment at wanting a ship to become canon and it not happening. Sometimes it happens because that's not the story the writers wanted to tell. People need to be able to tell the difference between "I saw subtext but I'm interpreting it differently from the writers of the show" and "The show is actively writing these characters to seem into each other but are gonna keep throwing in straight love interests because they're too chickenshit/cruel to follow through." The latter is way less frequent than the former (except for Rizzoli & Isles and I think I've read Supernatural is also guilty of this). 

 

 

IMO it's not fair to point to LoK and say, "But you got Korrasami already, isn't that enough, can't you be happy?"

 

You misunderstand me. I wasn't suggesting it should be enough and people should be happy. I was musing that I'd seen enough long-shot f/f ships become canon recently, and plenty of other shows with lesbian/queer regular/recurring characters treated WELL (let's not speak of Chicago Fire or Arrow), that, if people are unsatisfied with the perceived lack of "representation" in one particular show, they can take their business elsewhere to any of the other shows with the good portrayals of queer characters that fans are looking for, and so the continued martirization of themselves as poor fans who are "gaslighted" (yes, that is an actual word I've seen used by Swan Queen shippers) by OUAT for their shipping preferences starts to feel less understandable and more ridiculous when there is a decent variety of other shows that will actually give them what they want. 

Edited March 7, 2015 by Niuxita

[smrou]

Seems like we agree, Niuxita. I initially thought you were saying that people shouldn't make accusations of homophobia or queerbaiting on some shows because other shows have enough gay characters and relationships on them. But if all you mean is that sometimes people perceive queerbaiting when it's not there...yeah, totally.  And people can become unreasonable about so many fandom-related things, shipping being certainly a prominent one, so I totally agree sometimes people really need to take a step back. The shows I see mentioned most frequently when it comes to queerbaiting are Rizzoli and Isles and Supernatural, two that you mention may actually be guilty of this. I see enough R&I marketing/etc. to be convinced they are (

seems like pretty solid evidence to me) but really don't know much at all about Supernatural. Or OUAT. 

 

Outside of queerbaiting, though, I do think what's much more common is what galax-arena described, which is a situation in which a pair of characters have a particular dynamic--maybe not one that was the original intent of the writers, even, but one that develops over the course of a series--that, if it occurred between two characters of opposite sex, would almost certainly be developed into a romantic relationship but since it's between two characters of the same sex it seems like the writers don't even consider the possibility. As I mentioned earlier, I consider this more an issue of heteronormativity than homophobia. But it's something that I think viewers are reasonable to be frustrated about even though I certainly don't think every time viewers perceive romantic or sexual chemistry between two characters it means the writers should automatically turn them into a couple (for one thing, that wouldn't be possible, since viewers will never all agree on where the chemistry lies). 

 

I think that sort of situation is only going to become less and less common, though. 

Edited March 7, 2015 by smrou

[Cobalt Stargazer]

the continued martirization of themselves as poor fans who are "gaslighted" (yes, that is an actual word I've seen used by Swan Queen shippers) by OUAT for their shipping preferences starts to feel less understandable and more ridiculous when there is a decent variety of other shows that will actually give them what they want. 

 

The Destiel shippers also do this, although I don't think they've ever actually used the word "gaslighting", but like it must be some plot by the eeeeeeeeeeeeeeevul straight people keeping Dean and Cas apart. I have other issues with Supernatural in general and with Dean in particular that don't involve Castiel, but I'll stick to the ones that do. What exactly would be so bad about them not being in love in canon? I've been told I'm missing the point, that it's a matter of being represented in general,but there are other shows that have representation in the text. I don't it it's the same thing as "be happy with what you have," but OTOH I think some shippers do get their heart so set on one pairing that nothing else can or will make them happy.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Cobalt Stargazer

[Chaos Theory]

Outside of queerbaiting, though, I do think what's much more common is what galax-arena described, which is a situation in which a pair of characters have a particular dynamic--maybe not one that was the original intent of the writers, even, but one that develops over the course of a series--that, if it occurred between two characters of opposite sex, would almost certainly be developed into a romantic relationship but since it's between two characters of the same sex it seems like the writers don't even consider the possibility. As I mentioned earlier, I consider this more an issue of heteronormativity than homophobia.

 

 

Again it is in the eyes of the beholder. I was kinda annoyed when Warehouse 13 didn't go with the Myka/Helena pairing because honestly the one they went with came out of nowhere and they only put in there as a "fix" to end the show.  As for SwanQueen that always seemed to me as wish fulfillment fan fiction and I get annoyed when people assume it is more.  Just like I get annoyed when Every female character on the show (like both Ruby and Belle) isa assumed to be a lesbian.    Some shows should be seen as they are written heteronorm or not but again this is just my opinion.    The same goes for Teen Wolf which always seemed for of a friendship then a romance between the two main males whose names escape me now (I horrible with names and two lazy to look them up....and I don;t watch Supernatural but I hear that since there are like NO females on the cast that the homoerotism on that show is intense so hey whatever floats your boat...but I doubt the show will actually go there and it shouldn't be penalized for that.  

Edited March 7, 2015 by Chaos Theory

[Luckylyn]

I was really annoyed that Willow wasn't allowed to be bisexual.   They showed that she'd been in love with two guys and then fell in love with a woman.  I don't see how one love should cancel out the others.   She could be attracted to both genders and the show set a foundation for that but didn't explore it.  There's an interesting article the issue.

[galax-arena]

Niuxita, I get where you're coming from and I largely agree re: queerbaiting*, I think I just disagree with this: "...when there is a decent variety of other shows that will actually give them what they want." Because even though things are a lot better than they were several years ago, I'm not sure there is a decent variety. It's why shows like The 100 and LoK still merit so much ink when those relationships do happen. 

 

Luckylyn, Willow's "gay now" line totally bugged me, too. 

 

* I'm pretty sure I saw the queerbaiting accusations hurled at The Fosters, of all shows, and it's just... are ya kidding me? IIRC, it was with respect to Connor and Jude early on in the series. And it's like, come on, it's so obvious that the writers were doing a slow burn with those two and that something was eventually going to happen. Another show that got accused of queerbaiting was MTV's Faking It, which.... no, just no. That show has a lot of issues but queerbaiting isn't one of them. 

Edited March 8, 2015 by galax-arena

[Chaos Theory]

I was really annoyed that Willow wasn't allowed to be bisexual. They showed that she'd been in love with two guys and then fell in love with a woman. I don't see how one love should cancel out the others. She could be attracted to both genders and the show set a foundation for that but didn't explore it. There's an interesting article the issue.

The article is in 2011 but the BTVS was on from 1997-2003. We can debate Willows sexuality a decade later or we can commend one of the earliest shows that had a leading lesbian character.

[galax-arena]

Or we can do both. We can acknowledge how groundbreaking a storyline is and still critique it. I did it upthread with Legend of Korra. And I think it's especially interesting to do it in context of how the storyline has "aged" over the years so to speak. I was reading up on Dynasty's Steven Carrington, who was one of the earliest gay leading characters on US television. I've read a lot of analyses of his character that credit the show for that, but also criticize how he was primarily defined by his sexuality and the resulting angst, noting how dated it feels now. It's interesting to see how we've slowly moved away from that.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Luckylyn, Willow's "gay now" line totally bugged me, too. 

 

*pulls up a chair at ya'll's table*

 

As I said in my previous post, I liked Tara as a character and enjoyed her relationship with Willow, but I didn't care for the fact that Willow's previous feelings were, for lack of a better word for it, retconned out of existence. It was said at the time by viewers that it was in character for her to label herself, and I can kind of buy that, but the idea that she didn't/couldn't be attracted to or love Oz and Xander because of their gender defies what I saw happen on the show. Sure, the show has been off the air for over a decade, but the erasure of all of Willow's pre-Tara feelings, still really bothers me.

Edited March 8, 2015 by Cobalt Stargazer

[angora]

I think the best portray I've seen is  in In the Flesh, which the main character is probably gay. But it is not made a big deal and is mostly in the background of the show. From my experience many shows end up focusing strictly on that plotline instead of developing the character.

 

 

For now, Jane the Virgin feels like one of those shows where the queer characters get to be a part of the ridiculousness. (And I'd question if Rose is really bisexual or a heteroflexible opportunist.)  I wouldn't say that Luisa is just a plot device, though the show could do more to keep the audience thinking about her motivations.

 

blueray, how much of In the Flesh have you seen? Things get a lot less subtle in the second season, at least with the main character.

 

That said, the first season was beautifully done. It's easily the best of zombie drama of the entire lot. It's got some really unforgettable characters.

I just finished In the Flesh and absolutely loved it - such a compelling drama.  As for representation, I like that Kieren's sexuality is mostly allowed to just be.  There's the occasional comment from other characters, a slight or a remark about him being "not like" most people in the village, but his romantic plot lines are, for the most part, just romantic plot lines, and the brunt of his drama/angst comes from being undead.  He makes no apologies about loving boys, and his family seems fairly supportive of his queerness - though the circumstances are of course

horrifically sad

, I love the scene where

his mother finds and comforts him after Rick is killed the second time. So lovely and empathetic.

 

I also think it's really interesting how anti-zombie sentiment in the show serves as a metaphor for lots of social discrimination, including homophobia.  The use of flesh-colored makeup and colored contacts to blend in with the living, along with the way undead people are discouraged from talking about their experiences during the Rising, smacks of "It's fine for you to be (lgbtq,) as long as you don't look or act (lgbtq) - no one needs to see that" attitudes.  And season 1 has strong parallels with internalized homophobia with

Rick's storyline. The way his dad flat-out refuses to acknowledge that Rick is undead and treats him like one of the living even as he complains about the "rotters," and the way Rick indulges his dad's delusion. He eats and drinks like the living do, even though it makes him physically ill, all to keep up the facade. He insists that, even if he's like Kieren, he's not like Kieren, and without Kieren's interference, he would have shot the rabids they find in the woods. So much destructive self-loathing.

[blueray]

I've seen all of it now, so no spoilers for me. I really want more episodes though. I like his relationship with Simon.

 

And yeah the show goes into so many other issues such as PTSD and minority discrimination as well.

Edited March 9, 2015 by blueray

[Luckylyn]

I think the zombie/mental illness metaphor is fascinating.  I like Kieren is more than his sexuality.  In the Flesh was such a great show.  

[Nanrad]

I don't hear many people talk about Roscoe from House of Lies. He's gender fluid and is bi-sexual as well or doesn't care for the gender of the person. They've also slightly touched on trans people and show how Marty doesn't understand, but is trying to be supportive as possible (of Roscoe--the trans person he sympathize for, but that is all). 

Edited March 11, 2015 by Nanrad

[possibilities]

I like Roscoe. I watched "House of Lies" when I had a few months of free Showtime, and haven't seen the whole series because I don't normally get the channel. One of thine things I liked about the episodes I saw was how Roscoe was not presented as a tragic figure. Roscoe is so comfortable, people who are weird about it are the ones who seem like they have a problem-- they just seem weird and silly themselves. It was the best thing about the show, if you ask me.

 

Can someone tell my why Kerry Washington is being honored by GLAAD? Apparently she's "made a significant difference," but I don't know what she did. I have nothing against her, I'm just genuinely unaware of her contribution.

http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/lgbt/-Entertainment-Kerry-Washington-Alexander-McQueenThe-Fosters-Mario-Lopez/50803.html

 

On tonight's "bloop-ish" (half-hour special about "black-ish"-- advertized as a blooper reel, but was about 10% bloopers and 90% sales pitch/highlight reel), they seemed to be saying that Rainbow's biracial status was going to be explored more in coming episodes. She's the female lead on the show, and we know she has a white dad and black mom. Her parents are portrayed as hippies, more or less. They've only been shown in one episode, but they've been mentioned in more. And Tracy Ellis Ross (who plays her) was saying she thinks there's a lot more to mine in her identity issues. I'm trying to remember exactly how she phrased it. I just got the impression that they're going to bring this topic to the forefront in the future, instead of only making references to it on the side as has mostly been the case so far.

[Wax Lion]

Roscoe is a remarkable character, too bad House of Lies is otherwise one of those shows where I'm supposed to be entertained by what scumbags the characters are.

[joelene]

Yeah, I saw maybe three episodes of House of Lies but I just couldn't continue. Which is a shame because Roscoe was/is awesome.

Edited March 13, 2015 by joelene

[maraleia]

Can someone tell my why Kerry Washington is being honored by GLAAD? Apparently she's "made a significant difference," but I don't know what she did. I have nothing against her, I'm just genuinely unaware of her contribution.

http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/lgbt/-Entertainment-Kerry-Washington-Alexander-McQueenThe-Fosters-Mario-Lopez/50803.html

 

The Vanguard Award is given to a straight ally from the entertainment community who promotes and supports the LGBT community. Here is a link to the previous winners. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLAAD_Vanguard_Award

[candall]

Where is this In the Flesh of which you speak?  Sounds interesting, but I've never heard of it and neither has my Search For Shows guide.

 

Thanks, in advance.

[manbearpig]

In The Flesh was a UK show that aired on BBC3. Wikipedia tells me it aired on BBC America in the US.

[angora]

Yep, 2013-2014.  Only 9 episodes, so regrettably short-lived, but excellent - smart, emotional, and Kieren is a wonderfully compelling protagonist.  I got it from Netflix on disc.

[Wax Lion]

I think Amazon has an exclusive on the streaming rights for In the Flesh.

[Chaos Theory]

I was really annoyed that Willow wasn't allowed to be bisexual.

 

 

I have a question and I really don't mean to offend anyone.  Was Willow a bisexual or are people just wanting her to be one.  Plenty of women, including friends of mine dated men in high school and then fell in love with a women and realized they liked women.  Does this make them bisexual or lesbian?   Willow had a boyfriend in high school and a crush growing up but ultimately chose women to love.  What does that make her?    

 

YEs television needs more bisexual characters but television also needs more gay and lesbian ones as well and if a lesbian character comes out of the ashes of a heterosexual relationship we need to let it happen just like we need let characters who know who they are from a young age  happen.  If Willow ended up with a boy after Tara died I would have been annoyed back then.  Honestly I would have hated the show forever.  I didn't want Willow to be bisexual not then not with my first true taste of a lesbian character that touched my heart and soul.  Now.....the more the merrier.  

Edited March 17, 2015 by Chaos Theory

[smrou]

I think the Willow thing is complicated for all the reasons that sexuality in general can be complicated. I remember feeling annoyed when Willow identified herself as a lesbian because to me it felt like it partially invalidated the relationship she'd had with Oz and the feelings she'd had for Xander. I loved Willow and Oz as a couple (I also was a fan of Willow and Tara as a couple) and could not read that relationship as anything other than one where both people involved were genuinely in love (and attracted to each other), so my feeling was that clearly Willow had experienced romantic and sexual attraction to men so if she then also experienced those things for women that would make her bisexual. Identifying her as a lesbian seemed to somehow retcon the Willow/Oz relationship as something less than it had been written/shown at the time. And on top of that there's the significant problem in pop culture but more generally just in life of people seeming to think that a person's sexual/romantic identity is a function of who they're involved with, so if a bisexual person is dating/married to someone of the same sex they're labeled gay/lesbian but if they're dating/married to someone of the opposite sex they're labeled as straight. When a woman--a character or real--who is bisexual becomes involved with another woman it seems like they are almost always labeled as a lesbian, even if that's not how they personally identify. The Willow situation just seemed to follow that pattern.

 

Having said all of that, I'm not particularly bothered now by Willow identifying as a lesbian for a couple of reasons. One is simply that I know orientation can be a kind of complicated thing for some people and is very personal--that a woman might feel like "lesbian" is the most accurate description of how they feel even though they have experienced attraction and love at least at one time for a man. The other is that I firmly believe in some cases a person's orientation can undergo natural shifts. Granted, in Willow's case it seemed awfully abrupt so I think it makes more sense to believe that she just found something deeper/stronger with Tara than she'd ever experienced before and that made her realize that women were it for her.

 

At any rate, Willow's case is one where I can see both sides of the issue. I definitely understand why people are annoyed or even angry that she was written to identify as lesbian rather than bisexual, but I also don't think the fact that she did have legitimate relationships with guys before she met Tara means she couldn't be a lesbian or that it was wrong for her to identify that way.

[galax-arena]

If Willow ended up with a boy after Tara died I would have been annoyed back then.

But... no one's saying that Willow should have ended up with a guy, just that she should have been allowed to identify as bisexual. Heck, I've mentioned elsewhere on this thread that I was cautious of The 100's sexuality reveal for that very reason, i.e. I was used to shows exploiting bisexuality for sweeps. The girl would dabble in same-sex relationships once, but her endgame ship would always be with a guy. One of the reasons why I liked Chasing Life so much was that they had Brenna explicitly declare herself bisexual, and I didn't get the sense that her relationship with Greer was used as some gimmicky sweeps thing. Even though Grenna is over as of this week (sob), I have faith that the writers aren't going to use that as an excuse to have Brenna ultimately end up with a guy. She might explore another opposite-sex relationship, but I do feel like the show is working towards having her end up with a girl, maybe even Greer if the show can get the actress back for season 2. 

 

Anyway, my issue is that television and pop culture don't operate in a vacuum, devoid of any cultural context/stereotypes. Yes, there are women out there IRL who date guys before realizing that hey, they're into girls, and they identify as lesbians. But there are also women who date guys who then date women and realize that they're into both. And the problem is that the former is consistently depicted in the media, but not the latter, and that serves to erase bisexuals from the picture almost entirely. The "bisexuality is a myth" trope is a harmful one, and that sort of depiction only serves to perpetuate that. Willow on Buffy contributed to that particular trope.  

 

Similarly, there are also lesbians out there IRL who decide to sleep with a guy for the heck of it. Maybe they're curious or pressured or whatever. Either way, it's not like it never happens. That was the common defense used for Faking It when they had Amy sleep with Liam at the end of season 1. My rebuttal is that sure, it might happen IRL, but it's also an entirely too common portrayal that only furthers the idea of straight guys hooking up with lesbians because it's ~hot. And that all lesbians are confused and will be willing to hook up with a guy. 

 

Or, going back to the bisexual thing... there are bisexual women IRL who end up with a guy. IIRC most of them do, in fact, due to societal pressure (including a lot of lesbians who refuse to date bisexual women because they think bisexual women will cheat on them with a guy). But referring back to my first paragraph, that doesn't mean I'm happy with bisexual women who ultimately end up with guys in television shows, because I feel like we see way too much of that already. And there are bisexual women who cheat with men IRL, but shows that have the depraved/cheating bisexual trope make me wince because I feel like it furthers the stereotype that all bisexuals are like that. 

 

I guess what I'm getting at is that I don't think that "this happens IRL" is necessarily a good reason to depict something a certain way, not when it comes with a whole host of stereotypical baggage and there aren't enough depictions of the other side to counteract that. This doesn't just apply to sexuality, but to categories like gender and race, too. Almost all stereotypes have people for whom the stereotype is actually a reality. But we doesn't mean we should ignore the effect said stereotype has on society as a whole when discussing the media's adherence to it. 

 

...And for the record, IDGAF about Oz lol. My irritation with Willow's storyline had nothing to do with shipping those two. I actually preferred her with Tara... well, at least until Willow turned into an abusive, manipulative asshole. 

 

Anyway, with Willow, I recognize that that was in the early days of positive leading LGBT representation. So, it's like, baby steps? If a similar storyline were done today, it'd be a lot worse and more offensive because I expect more now. Like if Chasing Life had had Brenna declare herself gay instead of bisexual, I'd have been much more irritated than I ever was with Willow's "gay now" line. So I don't think that that little fumble means that we need to chuck Willow's storyline into the bin and declare it complete and utter trash forever. Characters like Willow led the way for characters like Brenna after all, IMO. It's just that I also don't think that means we should act like her storyline was free of problems.

Edited March 18, 2015 by galax-arena

[Luckylyn]

I think the Willow thing is complicated for all the reasons that sexuality in general can be complicated. I remember feeling annoyed when Willow identified herself as a lesbian because to me it felt like it partially invalidated the relationship she'd had with Oz and the feelings she'd had for Xander. I loved Willow and Oz as a couple (I also was a fan of Willow and Tara as a couple) and could not read that relationship as anything other than one where both people involved were genuinely in love (and attracted to each other), so my feeling was that clearly Willow had experienced romantic and sexual attraction to men so if she then also experienced those things for women that would make her bisexual. Identifying her as a lesbian seemed to somehow retcon the Willow/Oz relationship as something less than it had been written/shown at the time. And on top of that there's the significant problem in pop culture but more generally just in life of people seeming to think that a person's sexual/romantic identity is a function of who they're involved with, so if a bisexual person is dating/married to someone of the same sex they're labeled gay/lesbian but if they're dating/married to someone of the opposite sex they're labeled as straight. When a woman--a character or real--who is bisexual becomes involved with another woman it seems like they are almost always labeled as a lesbian, even if that's not how they personally identify. The Willow situation just seemed to follow that pattern.

That's how I felt about it.  I was a fan of both Willow/Oz and Willow/Tara.  The show made it clear that Willow sincerely loved and was sexually attracted to Oz.  Falling in love with Tara shouldn't erase that history.      I don't why she couldn't have identified as bisexual.   They could have done that and still had her end up with a woman.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Luckylyn

[Chaos Theory]

That's how I felt about it.  I was a fan of both Willow/Oz and Willow/Tara.  The show made it clear that Willow sincerely loved and was sexually attracted to Oz.  Falling in love with Tara shouldn't erase that history.      I don't why she couldn't have identified as bisexual.   They could have done that and still had her end up with a woman.

 

 

Actually I felt the exact opposite.  When Oz came back during the episode "New Moon Rising"  I remember being afraid that she would go back to OZ and that the show would throw the bisexual label at her but in truth she would be "TV Bisexual"  which was mostly straight unless it is sweeps week when she would be tempted by a hot chick but ultimately choose the love of a good man.   At the time Willow going back to OZ would have been the one thing to make me leave the show.  Now I am not saying television doesn't need more bisexual characters but I don't think the the timing was right.   I might be wrong but I do not think there were any bisexual characters on tv that where bisexual with same gender partners.  Most if not all eventually ended up with opposite gender partners or those who had relationships with both once they found a man to date.    I know I am explaining this wrong but I remember how I felt at the time and how much I would have hated it if Willow chose OZ in the end because even if the show called her bisexual it would have been in name only.

 

Now like I said I do think TV needs more bisexual characters but I want them to be bisexual which why I love Lost Girl.  The show might not be the greatest show ever but Bo has had several sex partners (and relationships)  with both genders .  Yes ultimately I hope she choses Lauren but honestly I wouldn't be upset if she choses Dyson or if she choses both or neither.  This is one of the few shows where I have my preference but I wouldn't be upset if the show doesn't go my way.  

[galax-arena]

At the time Willow going back to OZ would have been the one thing to make me leave the show.

Okay, but the person you're quoting wasn't advocating for that? And in fact said that they could have had Willow declare herself bisexual and still have her end up with a woman? 

Now I am not saying television doesn't need more bisexual characters but I don't think the the timing was right.   I might be wrong but I do not think there were any bisexual characters on tv that where bisexual with same gender partners.  Most if not all eventually ended up with opposite gender partners or those who had relationships with both once they found a man to date.

Which is why it would have been great if Willow had gone there, called herself bisexual, and ended up with a woman. Why was the timing not right for a bi!Willow, but right for a gay!Willow? That implies a type of hierarchy in the LGBT movement that I've never been comfortable with, i.e. G comes first, then L, then B, and then T gets to pick up the leftovers. (And that's not adding racial intersectionality into the mix.) I can't tell you how often I've come across the attitude that we should work first on getting people to accept G and L entirely before moving on to B and T because reasons. Once someone told me that since sexual orientation discrimination is still a problem, we shouldn't focus so much on gender identity discrimination because that's more complicated. No. Just no. 

[DeLurker]

To further complicate matters, high school and junior high kids have started to use the term pansexual.

Not sure what it means or why Bi is inadequate for their purposes...kids today.

[galax-arena]

The one I've heard is that pansexual is inherently more enlightened than bisexual because to pansexuals, gender is irrelevant and they reject the gender binary. 

 

Sometimes - speaking as a cis person with all the privilege that entails - I wonder if some degree of separation between T and LGB would be useful because I feel like putting them all together leads to a lot of ignorance and confusion with respect to the differences between gender identity and sexual orientation. (I don't think this would ever be feasible, guess it's more of a thought experiment than anything else.) But then I hear from LGB people who are all for that separation, but mostly because they think that transgender issues drag down the LGB fight and don't want to have to bother with taking up the mantle for T, which makes me want to go, "No, and fuck you." 

Edited May 27, 2015 by galax-arena

[Blergh]

OK, this isn't exactly a 'LGBT' theme but I can think of no better category to put this in. Anyway, all this  hullabaloo over Caitlyn the Jenner Formerly Known as Bruce got me to recall how in 1978, when they decided to produce a live-action version of the 'Incredible Hulk' comic strip, it was decided that they had to change the protagonist's name from Bruce to David Banner because 'Bruce sounded too gay'. Talk about times changing!

   I wonder how that went over this Scottish viewers who consider Robert the Bruce to have been a national hero?

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Which is why it would have been great if Willow had gone there, called herself bisexual, and ended up with a woman. Why was the timing not right for a bi!Willow, but right for a gay!Willow?

 

Because something actually can defeat the penis?

 

More seriously, I think that some people really do/did see Willow's "Gay now!" stance, her complete rejection of romantic and sexual feelings for Oz and Xander as a good thing, that of course she would feel the need to label herself in a concrete fashion because she could be ever so slightly obsessive-compulsive. Unfortunately, for me it had the effect of saying that what I saw - how happy she was the first time she was with Oz in an intimate way, and before that how she yearned for Xander - was not what I saw and she was likely fantasizing about Buffy the whole time instead. Much like the writers pulling it out of their asses that Spike had been in love with Buffy for a long time before that wet dream, I found that incredibly obnoxious because telling me that what happened is not what happened pisses me off.

 

Would it have been "better" if Willow had decided she was bisexual instead? I don't have the answer to that, and FWIW I was outraged when Tara was murdered by a stupid magic bullet because she was one of the few bright spots in a generally crushingly depressing sixth season. But I do think it wasn't necessary to erase years of Willow's pre-Tara history so that Whedon can try to claim credit for being an equal rights warrior.

Edited June 5, 2015 by Cobalt Stargazer

[Chaos Theory]

I am enjoying Sense8 despite the questionable reviews. This is one of those shows that gets better with each episode it is also truly inclusive which is interesting. (Now I know there will be people who will say it does have [enter culture] so it is not inclusive enough but honestly it had a black man from Africa, female Korean prize fighter/businesswoman , a German theif, a male white American cop, white London Dj, a MTF transsexual hacker, a gay Spanish actor and a female Indian woman about to be married off to a man she doesn't love so and those are just the main people.

I am putting this here because the transsexual story is probably one of the more interesting early stories and a good character and I am only half way through by Netflix binge.

<----edited to add the TV-MA is no joke. There is sex sex sex. I don't want to give the good shit away trust me sex sex sex....and nudity.

Edited June 7, 2015 by Chaos Theory

[smrou]

<----edited to add the TV-MA is no joke. There is sex sex sex. I don't want to give the good shit away trust me sex sex sex....and nudity.

So I'd watched the first four episodes of the show before reading your post, Chaos Theory, and was thinking, "Eh, I mean there's sex, but not THAT much." 

 

Well I just finished episode six, and holy shit. I was wrong. :)

[galax-arena]

Marlene King is blaming the negative reaction to the Pretty Little Liars finale on transphobia.

The idea to make CeCe/Charlotte transgender was decided upon nearly four years ago, and King was prepared for some backlash. “I knew we had so many years to build this story and make it layered and not what it could have been. We were pretty confident we would get a few negative responses — and there are negative responses from people who just don’t want to see transgender on TV at all,” she said.

Ummm... no, I don't think that's it. 

[Lady Calypso]

LOL, yeah, no this idea of Cece being A and transgendered didn't come four years ago. This absolutely came sometime this season at the last minute because their original plans got discovered and Marlene wanted a 'shock' factor. You can absolutely tell this bullshit was not created four years ago. Marlene screwed up and can't admit that she screwed up because she doesn't want to be seen as transphobic herself. In all honesty, I don't see her as being transphobic at all, I don't. But I think she screwed up majorly on where this story would be going and how this would affect the trans community. The trans community already gets negative backlash in the media. Why would she think turning a trans character into the ultimate big bad would be a good idea? She's a total idiot, and she even made significant progress in the LGBT community with her various lesbian characters.