Gay characters in children's cartoons

[Radoh]

Umm...Why do children's cartoons need to address sexuality in the first place? How can a character on a show where you can't even say the word "sex" have a sexual orientation? Do they act camp? If so, then they're not an accurate representation of a homosexual, if not, I can't see how you could even notice this.

Again, no. You see people in these shows that have those crushes? Having a character have a crush on another addresses this as natural. Also apparently in Kim Possible, one of the characters has two moms and this is not called in the show as being weird.

 

[joshthor]

i think there is no reason to have gay characters in childrens shows. perhaps 12+ MAYBE but before that no reason. the pure reason for this is that its a kids show. there shouldnt really be any relationshipy stuff in it in the first place.

to extend this, sure, there are familys and stuff, and they COULD make a family have two daddys or two mommys, but honestly, what would be the point? it would confuse kids. when i was in elementary school there was literally NO familys that had gay parents. when i was in high school there was a couple, but it was still 99% straight. it would just raise a bunch of questions 90% of parents shouldnt have to deal with until thier kids are old enough to have questions about thier sexuality.

 

[shedra]

In Doctor Who, (Which is a show I could consider a family/kids show) there have been two homosexual characters that I know of. And it doesn't matter that they are. It hardly ever comes up. Only in passing conversation.

As far as exposing homosexuality to smaller children.
Well,

(both girls)
They don't form a lack of acceptance for alternative lifestyles until later.

Magenta's a boy. It's stated numerous times in the show. Not many people realize this, but it's true. I guess the creators wanted to subvert gender roles- nifty.

http://www.nickjr.com/blues-clues/about-blues-clues/blues-clues-characters.html
Read Magenta's article.

Huh. I could have sworn I remembered Steve calling her a boy. I apologize for my mistake- I need time to process this new information.

Certainly. Get back to me when you're feeling better.
:3

 

[Axelhander]

Should be more gay characters, but man, the conservative parent backlash...

 

[Canid117]

I have trouble believing it's not a choice... Just me... Because if it's not a choice it's a defect...

So what's your justification for thinking that it has to be one or the other, as opposed to merely being more akin to laterality?

Gay relationships can't have kids, simple.

I hate bringing this part up, but I'm stubborn as hell, what is the huge difference in sexual orientations that pedophilia, bestiality, or necrophilia (and probably more -ilias) can't be considered a valid option/choice/something? I don't see a huge jump from them to gay, if you subtract doing damage. Why shouldn't some things be considered acceptable while others aren't. I choose not to vouch for any of them. Gay just seems to be the borderland of the sexual orientations(probably not using the right word)

I hope it makes sense, i almost never do, partly blame my English..

Pedophilia has a negative psychological impact on the younger party. Bestiality isn't illegal but it is looked down upon by society due to a lack of any possibility of an emotional relationship and necrophilia is seen as violating the wishes of the deceased.

erm regards to your bestiality:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_the_law#National_laws

Well looks like I was wrong about the legal issue. Still not the point of the post though.

 

[V8 Ninja]

Uuugh...another thread conceived by that My Little Pony show...I swear, I'm tempted to eat steroids just to avoid turning into a mindless MLP fanatic...

MUCH MORE ON TOPIC: I think the problem isn't so much with children not accepting homosexuality as it is with teens/adults being surrounded by a culture that outright forbids (and/or looks heavily down upon) any same-sex behavior. I believe there's a TED Talk about how a study showed that children were more open to different solutions to problems than were teens and adults. It's not too far imagine that the teens' and adults' minds had also gone much more "One-Way" in terms of logical thought process.

 

[powell86]

Well looks like I was wrong about the legal issue. Still not the point of the post though.

haha yeah, thats why i didn't say anything much. it's just a fyi. cuz your argument is still valid with or without the bestiality portion. But I would prefer your argument not made weaker due to misinformation.

 

[ArtanisCreed]

homosexuals in real life...so kids shows, which are supposed to teach life lessons, are supposed to ignore them? i think not.

 

[deckai]

You are wrong. If you're going to use science, you should get it right.

Homosexuals exist in nature - all mammals have homosexual members. And those members REPRODUCE. Even before Sperm Banks, gay individuals would still "take one for the team" and have children the old fashioned way. It's a preference, not a rule.

Homosexuality is a desire - it doesn't prevent us from getting pregnant (or from getting someone pregnant) - we just prefer the alternative.

Do research on homosexual animals in the wild. They reproduce.

So please, do not try to spread intolerance or ignorance in the guise of weakly researched science.

First of I never said homosexuality is nonexistent in nature. I'm well aware of the fact that homosexuality exist between animals.

So you say denning ones sexuality is the way to embrace ones sexuality? Because they reproduce in a heterosexual way not a homosexual way. A heterosexual can live his life embracing his sexuality and still produce offspring... a homosexual could not(at least not without help). Also is it possible for a homosexual couple to produce offspring without a third person? A heterosexual couple could, a homosexual couldn't. And without showing me, how you and your partner or any homosexual couple could reproduce without the help of a third party, you fail to disprove my point. It's biological impossible for a homosexual pair to have offspring(only the two people in the relationship, no medical help).

Also only because it occurs in the wild isn't a indicator for everything runs as planned...and don't get me started on that, you won't like it.

And please don't accuse me of being intolerant or ignorant, maybe you just ignored or just didn't bother to read the rest of my post. In NO way I'm opposed to homosexuality, people can live their sexuality out the way they want.

Maybe we have different definitions what "homosexuality" is or maybe I just fail to express my point(English isn't my first language).

 

[SteewpidZombie]

As a kid I knew Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street were gay, yet I never had a problem with it

Wow... Ernie and Bert were brothers. Not gay, just brothers. Word of God, Jim Henson said so himself.

If that's the case...then that explains ALOT...cause about 99% of the people I talk to say that they were gay lovers XD

 

[Mordwyl]

All there needs to be said.

 

[deserteagleeye]

I don't know if it's a bad sign but, I can actually name more openly gay characters in videogames than I can regular TV-shows. And most of them aren't necessarily flamboyant about it either. :/

 

[brinvixen]

I haven't read this entire thread (sorry, 8 pages is a whole lot) so pardon me if someone has already touched upon this, but I think Spongebob handles homosexuality rather carefully in a few of it's earlier episodes.

For example, there's an episode where Spongebob and Patrick adopt a baby mollusk, and as a result, they take on roles as Mommy and Daddy. Complete with Spongebob wearing drag (curlers and a nightgown). Here's a situation that is "normally" (the word in quotes for a reason) attributed to a man and a women, and in the episode we have two men on the job, with one acting as the mother. Is this so different to what actual gay couples do? (Maybe one doesn't necessarily take on a "mother" role, but you get the idea) And the episode was still just as funny, and just as silly, and kid-oriented as any other, but it explored a different theme to parenting. If more children shows could do this (or Spongebob could go back to being good, instead of brainless) and could do this just as tastefully, then why not have these kind of themes explored in children shows? Maybe if kids grow up seeing that its okay for a girl to like a girl, or a boy to like a boy, they'll be mindful in the future not to pick on someone for their sexuality choice.

And if you're one of those people who believe that homosexuality can be indoctrinated into another person, and therefore showing kids gay characters is going to make them gay, then you're just silly.

 

[loremazd]

Honestly I think forcing kids to deal with hotopic issues against their will is kinda goofy.

 

[chaosyoshimage]

I don't think I've ever posted here, maybe once or twice. I read articles and webcomics here all the time and sometimes click an article if I'm interested in it. As a not-so-straight man and a huge cartoon nerd, this one interested me. When I was kid growing up I watched a lot of cartoons and played a lot of video games to except the harsh reality life sucks and the characters in these where my role models. My parents are great parents and never tried to shove any of their own ideology down my throat but kids at school did. I remember becoming religious and hating the very idea of "gays".

I think I would have avoided that horrible phase of my life if there where some openly gay characters in kid's cartoons. It would teach tolerance, obviously, I'm disheartened that it's even a debate here. To me, it's like saying there shouldn't be any blacks on TV or anyone who's Jewish. The whole "Well Gays=Sex" nonsense is the most irritating of all, not all relationships are about sex, especially none of the previously existing relationships in kid's cartoons.

Also, I really need to get around to watching My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic...

 

[KirbyKrackle]

It's in a different medium, but Archie Comics recently added an openly gay character to their roster. I only bring it up here because, as far as I'm aware, Archie Comics is still well known as wholesome kids' stuff that's about as controversial as, well, a very uncontroversial thing. I can still recall being given them to read as a quite young child. I think if they can manage it without causing a global apocalypse, children's shows can too. It also doesn't seem to have created an epidemic of children wanting to know about sex either.

EDIT: I also think it's worth bringing up because the gay character is revealed to be gay without all that "ooh ick he's talking about sex won't someone think of the children now I have to give them THE TALK" nonsense some of you are so paranoid about, as well as rebutting the hilarious argument of "but how will we know someone's gay if they aren't an odious stereotype?" which shows that it can pretty easily be repeated with other entertainment media.

New Guy: "She's not so bad...I'm just not interested in dating her!"
Jughead: "Veronica's not going to let that stop her!"
New Guy: "It's nothing against her! I'm gay!"

Oh no, he mentioned dating! Yeah, that's so much more sexualized than your average Archie comic.
Hell, as previously mentioned, same-sex attraction has come up before in children's cartoons like Sailor Moon without traumatizing the poor, innocent little children.

And as for all that hand-wringing, you might as well ask that shows like Rugrats be taken off the air because uh-oh, the kiddies might wonder where babies come from! How scandalously sexualized that TV show is.

 

[Baneat]

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.

>implying that "being natural" is relevant in any way at all.
You don't even have to address that at all, it's a worthless argument.

 

[killcannon71]

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

 

[Stako]

Actually yes, it does bother me, this idea... because most people are not smart enough to work the character as it has to be worked out and the chances of him turning out parodycal, silly or twisted are pretty good... which is bad. But those people are probobly doing this just because they are afraid that if they do theyre job on this character right some one will start complaining 'he is gay' - thus the taboo aspect of the subject.

I havent watched the cartoon you are talking about, but I just wanted to have a nice conversation, so I answered the first question anyway.

 

[Farseer Lolotea]

Also is it possible for a homosexual couple to produce offspring without a third person? A heterosexual couple could, a homosexual couldn't. And without showing me, how you and your partner or any homosexual couple could reproduce without the help of a third party, you fail to disprove my point. It's biological impossible for a homosexual pair to have offspring(only the two people in the relationship, no medical help).

What does that have to do with anything? Again: that simply means that same-sex couples only have children when they actually want to. (Medical and third-party involvement is irrelevant.)

And if you're one of those people who believe that homosexuality can be indoctrinated into another person, and therefore showing kids gay characters is going to make them gay, then you're just silly.

I think their real worry is that portraying it as acceptable in the media will make it harder to indoctrinate hate into said kids. But that's just my cheap 2¢.

Honestly I think forcing kids to deal with hotopic issues against their will is kinda goofy.

What makes you think it's necessarily against their will? Or, for that matter, forced?