Gay characters in children's cartoons

[Sinclair Solutions]

Anyone Remember Hey Arnold, did you know that the teacher Mr. simmions is a gay character, its true, and yet he was normal.

Oh yeah, Mr. Simmons! This is a pretty good example. He was gay (or at least very effeminate), and was shown to be the best teacher at the school. That's pretty respectable.

 

[chaosyoshimage]

The Thanksgiving episode basically outs him as gay, this is from a forum poster on cartoon website, ToonZone on a similar thread:

"In this episode Arnold and Helga spend Thanksgiving with Mr. Simmons' family because they weren't enjoying theirs. It turns out his family isn't like the perfect loving people he portrayed them as in his play. He had his mother, his uncle, a female friend and a male friend at dinner (forgot their names) and those two didn't like each other. The specific scene is where his mother suggested that Mr. Simmons take his girl friend out on a date but then it shoots to the male friend scowling and hinting at Mr. Simmons, who then nervously declines the offer. His "friend" and his mother then continue to argue the rest of dinner, and I'm pretty sure she makes a snotty remark about his err orientation. I think there was another episode where he was featured."

 

[theultimateend]

Questions to consider when posting:
-Does the idea of including more or any gay characters in a show targeted at younger audiences bother you? Reasons for why or why not?
-Speaking specifically about the character of Rainbow Dash: In the (Highly unlikely) event that she was to actually turn out to be homosexual how would you feel about this change? Do you think she would make a good gay character or does she fit too neatly into established stereotypes?


EDIT: Accidentally hit post before I could add the poll. Rectifying this ASAP.

Being gay is not like being religious. I can't just brainwash folks into being gay (if the word brainwash sounds bigoted towards religions replace it with any word you want, converted is fine too).

So you could make every show from now till 2050 have nothing but gay characters and I'd be chill with it. It wouldn't change the rate of homosexuality in either direction, at best it would just increase awareness of it.

I am in no position to say what sexualities are legitimate. But I would happily punch someone in the throat for being homophobic. There are certain levels of idiocy that should be responded to with above and beyond the normal level of force.

Homophobia falls into the same camp as womanizing to me. Trying to treat a group of folks like shit because of personal insecurities.

It's terrible.

I wish that pony luck and hope it gets to be whatever it is supposed to be.

Edit: Also if you want to get science involved. Homosexuality has many strong reasons for being natural and expected in nature. It's no less natural than having blue eyes and no less useful than having the correct amount of limbs. But folks can just to the ole giggly google because that's something that I thought had been already established and was no longer really being discussed anymore. To copy pasta again would hurt my soul.

Having a "gay" character would bring attention to the fact that that character is having sex with other men. Bringing attention to the sex part isn't a good strategy for a kid's cartoon.

They don't have to be having sex though. Heterosexual relationships in kid's shows arn't about sex at all (atleast I hope not).

Also it's not just men who could be gay.

So wait. Are you saying that every time you see a straight character in a kid's show you don't immediately think about their sex life?

I may need to evaluate how I watch children's shows :/.

 

[Farseer Lolotea]

The Thanksgiving episode basically outs him as gay, this is from a forum poster on cartoon website, ToonZone on a similar thread:

"In this episode Arnold and Helga spend Thanksgiving with Mr. Simmons' family because they weren't enjoying theirs. It turns out his family isn't like the perfect loving people he portrayed them as in his play. He had his mother, his uncle, a female friend and a male friend at dinner (forgot their names) and those two didn't like each other. The specific scene is where his mother suggested that Mr. Simmons take his girl friend out on a date but then it shoots to the male friend scowling and hinting at Mr. Simmons, who then nervously declines the offer. His "friend" and his mother then continue to argue the rest of dinner, and I'm pretty sure she makes a snotty remark about his err orientation. I think there was another episode where he was featured."

It had to be kept G-rated in the show proper. But IIRC, Craig Bartlett (the show's creator) actually outed him "off-camera."

 

[me.vicky]

I'm all for it. Gay it up as much as possible. The more homosexuals there are the more females for me.

You made me laugh so hard I woke up my little brother. Sarcastic thank you, and genuine thank you.

 

[Kurokami]

The show Ed Edd and Eddy had, what could be considered a gay character. The boy was named Jimmy, he had a very high voice and only talked with the girls and followed the girls, he found the guys disgusting and he loved stuffed animals and bunnies. Anyone remember that show?

Shows efeminate males, maybe. Was he actually accepted for it or was he sort of outcasted/rejected for that very reason though?

In the show, Jimmy's constant low level of macho-ness,and high fragility, is used as a comedic foil to the occasional times when he becomes brave and overly-strong.
Example: Eddy hypnotizes Jimmy, telling him he's a body builder, local heterosexual bully, Kevin, crushed his stuffed bunny earlier with a mailbox. Jimmy proceeded to flatten Kevin with the same mailbox.

So I guess it's just a character extreme, but still, he could be a wuss, without a high voice and attachment to girls, and would probably have the same effect, so I think it's relevant.

I suppose, but doesn't it seem as though they're saying that acting that way is bad? I suppose not since he always reverts back to the character and all that.

Meh, you probably have a point.

 

[Falconsgyre]

Please dont spit fire at him for thinking,

From the standpoint of it being natural, he is right on that fact. It may occur in nature alot but we were naturally built for sexual intercourse and relations with the opposite gender, we were not designed or naturally intended for homosexuality but obviously it does occur. Things like this happen alot when nothing is copied perfectly and genes are blended or the pilot behind the body has a preference not socially normal to it current host.(depending on your view of mental capacities Biology Programing Vs Soul Influences)

Homosexuality is not actually natural, from a biological standpoint (dont bite me im talking on a pure, animalistic standpoint) because it is un-productive to the species. Copulation does not occur in same sex couples obviously and homosexuality serves no animalistic purpose beyond pleasure.

I dont want to incite any major firestorms but i get the feeling it will happen regardless of my forewarning, but if you take the Biological Programming concept to why it is we do what we do then homosexuality is actually referred to as a genetic defect. (I can feel the fire already....)

Now if you take the Soul Influence concept then homosexuality is considered a soul preference on what gender your soul prefers to mate with. (some would argue that mateing and gender preference are not stored in the soul, that the soul stores more simple preferences like morals and values only)

My opinion on it all, I really dont care who you choose to do it with but it should be your own choice not influenced for or against by anyone. We should not bring up anything pertaining to sexual orientation to children AT ALL in ANY way. They are simply too young to be able to comprehend such decisions yet and should not be influenced for or against.

Sorry, biology major here, so I feel like I have to chime in. "Soul preference" is not a scientific term, nor are souls a scientific concept.[footnote]I assume most people figured that out, but just in case...[/footnote] And "biological programming" could be a vague term for genetic determination, but sexuality is generally not considered to be genetically determined in animals.[footnote]Though, and this is important, it is genetically influenced.[/footnote]

As to the question of "natural" or not, something doesn't have to be productive to the species, the individual, or even the gene to be natural. Natural simply means it occurs in nature. Science makes observations, not judgments. And, here's a page I like to show to anyone who says homosexuality doesn't occur in nature. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals] There is plenty of homosexual activity in animals, and that makes it pretty natural to me.

The idea of "intent" or "design" in biology is simply shorthand for "evolutionary pressures." Whether we were "designed" by evolution to do something is simply irrelevant to most discussions of homosexuality. Please read this article on the naturalistic fallacy. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy] And for an example of how bisexuality can be adaptive behavior in nature, read the Wikipedia article on bonobos [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobos]. I've got to admit, I don't have any handy references or examples of how homosexuality itself can be adaptive, but evolution is smarter than you are. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgel%27s_rule] Given the high prevalence of homosexual behavior, it's almost certainly either an adaptive behavior in and of itself or the side effect of an extremely adaptive behavior.

 

[chaosyoshimage]

I don't think he was gay, just really effeminate as other posters have noted. However, Ed, Edd, n' Eddy technically lasted 10 years, so it wasn't abruptly canned or anything, it was pretty successful and, I believe, aired to this day.

 

[blankedboy]

I think you guys are over shooting this. Being straight is biologically normal. Should we not present that as a norm? Yes, homosexuality is a part of life, but we dont need to stuff it into entertainment for the hell of it. Especially a kid's show. If a kid is going to be gay, let them find that out for themselves instead of doing it because this character from this show is gay.

Edit: Plus, i dont want to have to explain ANYTHING about sex to my children. Keep it simple.

You don't need to explain anything about sex - explain about love.

Also...

Being straight is biologically normal? Um, no. Homosexuality exists all throughout nature. Homosexuality is as biologically "normal" as heterosexuality.

Please don't make such ignorant and offensive statements.

Pretty sure he is trolling.

Also pretty sure Rainbow is actually bi. Based on that quickie she gave that brown pony in ep 26.

Oh my god... I.. I think I might be a brony! NOOOOOO!!!!!!

What's wrong with that? [http://ponychan.net/]

 

[Duskflamer]

I tried, I really really tried to read through all of this before responding, but I keep seeing one argument that I just cannot help but respond to.

Argument: Well, it's impossible to show a homosexual so homosexuals cannot be represented in a kids show!

Response: a) care to tell me how you show a heterosexual person?
b) ACTIONS people ACTIONS! What defines Hetero- or Homo- sexuality is someone's ACTIONS! Watch any kids show around valentines day and chances are you'll see the main character fretting and worrying about how he should confess/display his love for an opposite-sex character. THIS IS A DEPICTION OF HETEROSEXUALITY IN A CHILDRENS SHOW! What, may I ask, would be so wrong with having a sideplot, hell, I'll settle for 5 seconds of background screentime with a guy handing a valentine to a guy? or a girl to a girl? THIS WOULD BE A DEPICTION OF HOMOSEXUALITY! It doesn't have to be about sex! A girl blushing after another girl compliments her and then no comments being made, a piece of chocolate being given in the valentines day special. It is incredibly easy to point to depictions of chaste heterosexuality in children's shows, you just have to swap the gender of one of the characters in that depiction to make it of chaste homosexuality. THAT IS ALL YOU HAVE TO DO AND IS ALL THAT IS BEING ASKED FOR!

/rantmode

 

[Of-the-Lion]

I recently did a paper on stereotypes, and when I came to the "media" branch of it, things like this really stood out. Homosexuality has been addressed by the people above me, but I'd like to point out a few other was they perpetuate stereotypes. Think of all the secondary characters we see in children's shows. Skaters, gamers, nerds, jocks; the whole nine yards as far as hobbies are there. And each character is tied ball-and-chain to the stereotype of that hobby. Skaters skate, play violent games, do dangerous things and generally fail at school. Nerds scientific things and are often seen doing something excessively school-related, whereas the protagonist is doesn't usually care about school as much. Gamers do the Dungeons and Dragons-esque hobbies, and play generally violent games.

And per the topic, if you happen to ever see someone showing possibly homosexual behaviors, it is usually damn obvious.

There is a bit of justification in the sense that kids' shows need to convey simplicity, and stereotyping everyone heavily is an easy way to do this, but guess when we develop our stereotypes? That's right, in childhood. And guess who gives us a lot of our preliminary views on stereotyping? The media.

There are some shows that defy stereotyping (see: Sandy Cheeks and lots of other Spongebob characters) and those shows usually turn out to last for a long time. And it's those kinds of shows that we need to look to in the future if we ever want to start addressing stereotypes in society as a whole, let alone in just the shows themselves.


Tl;dr The media sucks and needs to be less stereotypical. Now.

The issue i see with your argument is that those character archetypes are defined by what decisions a character makes and not by factors that they can't control. Unfair and harmful stereotyping would be if all of the athletic characters on the show were black and all of the caring, physically weaker characters were women. The skater skates because it's what he enjoys. He fails school because as an individual character, he isn't very dedicated to scholastic achievement. Skating is a thrill-seeker sport(just stick with me), and someone who prioritizes over living dangerously without looking to closely at the future consequences is generally going to enjoy things like skating. That same disregard for future consequences hurts them in a slower more regimented environment like school.

Furthermore, I'm pretty sure that Rainbowdash is bisexual. I say this because of the few non-heterosexual people I know (I go to a "good" school) Rainbowdash bears more common with my bisexual friends than my homosexual friends.

 

[Farseer Lolotea]

Wasn't Jimmy from Ed, Edd, & Eddy implied to be homosexual? It only makes it worse that show was canned. If there is a gay character, they normally don't last long between being kicked off or just canning the show outright.

There's already been some talk about Jimmy. No, he wasn't gay; was a Camp Straight with a big crush on Sarah. (And he was a total "Crouching Wuss, Hidden Berserker.")

 

[Prof.draco]

I'm not sure if it counts as a childrens show, being anime, but I remember Lii having a crush on Julian in Cardcaptor Sakura (I know that this isn't their japanese names but meh). And it was a pretty big plot point. And not once did any characters thik it was strange that a guy was in love with another guy.

 

[Falconsgyre]

So the idea of the person determined by genes is bunk? Sexuality, personality, and the like? Leaving only physical attributes to be effected in actual major ways?

Knew I shouldn't have said that. Now I have to explain myself.

Okay, the difference is in the concepts of genetic determination of traits vs. genetic influence on traits. Very, very few behaviors are genetically determined because the environment has a huge effect on how we will behave. Sexuality certainly is not genetically determined because a multitude of environmental cues, starting from hormones in the womb and going up through culture, will affect our sexuality. But our genes certainly influence our sexuality. If you're gay, your family members are also more likely to be gay (even when accounting for similar environments), which provides very strong evidence that genes play a role in determining sexual behavior. It's just that genetic determination of a behavior is a term reserved for things that will never, ever be changed based on the environment. Sexual preference is almost certainly not genetically determined; at the very least, we have very good evidence that hormones in the womb can affect your sexual preference. Personality is generally given to be something along the lines of a 50/50 split between nurture and nature nowadays, but even that kind of statement is hopelessly vague. Every behavior has both a genetic and environmental component to its development.

 

[SD-Fiend]

I don't really think putting in a gay charachter would matter unless he/she sys out loud that he/she is gay

 

[Duskflamer]

I don't really think putting in a gay charachter would matter unless he/she sys out loud that he/she is gay

Ever heard of the phrase "Show don't tell"?

Have a girl fret over making the perfect valentines card for another girl as a side plot in a show, that is a clear display of homosexuality, and one that doesn't even need to end in so much as a kiss, let alone any content that isn't appropriate for kids.

 

[Of-the-Lion]

Disclaimer: I am for gay rights and I think people should be able to love whoever they want.

I think you guys are over shooting this. Being straight is biologically normal. Should we not present that as a norm? Yes, homosexuality is a part of life, but we dont need to stuff it into entertainment for the hell of it. Especially a kid's show. If a kid is going to be gay, let them find that out for themselves instead of doing it because this character from this show is gay.

Edit: Plus, i dont want to have to explain ANYTHING about sex to my children. Keep it simple.

You don't need to explain anything about sex - explain about love.

Also...

Being straight is biologically normal? Um, no. Homosexuality exists all throughout nature. Homosexuality is as biologically "normal" as heterosexuality.

Please don't make such ignorant and offensive statements.

Pretty sure he is trolling.

Also pretty sure Rainbow is actually bi. Based on that quickie she gave that brown pony in ep 26.

Oh my god... I.. I think I might be a brony! NOOOOOO!!!!!!

What's wrong with that? [http://ponychan.net/]

I understand what Hime is saying about heterosex being biologically normal. Normal as in, more than two-thirds of the population. And I think we can all agree that, anatomically speaking, males go with females and females go with males. I UNDERSTAND THAT WILD ANIMALS HAVE HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS AND THAT SEXUALITY IS DEFINED BY WHO SOMEONE FEELS SEXUAL ATTRACTION TO. All I'm saying is this: Homosexuality is, and probably always will be, the minority.

It's okay Candid. We will accept you and support you no matter what shows you watch. You need to embrace who you truly are.