Gay characters in children's cartoons
- Thread starter A Weary Exile
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I agree with this sentiment, but draw a different conclusion.Therumancer said:
Children's programming should not be sexual in any way at all.
However inserting homosexual characters into a cartoon could be done very simply and in no way sexual.
For example: What if Pingu had 2 daddy penguins instead of a daddy & mummy penguin? You wouldn't ever write a story that has anything to do with the fact that both penguins are daddies. I reckon 90% of kids wouldn't even notice. But for maybe a few little children who had already noticed this in a real life context they might say: "hey Pingu has 2 daddies just like how that kid Michael at pre-school has 2 daddies who come to pick him up sometimes".
No harm done. Kids aren't watching gay porn, and maybe a few children will see this behaviour as acceptable and in turn make someone's life a little bit easier.
I completely agree with you on this whole-heartedly. It'd be nice if more people shared the same opinion.Kipohippo said:
Also I firmly believe that sexuality shouldn't exist in children's television.
Well if your definition of homosexuality is "someone who has sex with both genders", than your logic is entirely correct.ConeFTW said:Those words that you said right there, thank you for them.Bara_no_Hime said:
You have no idea how good it feels to have someone else argue this point through science, at least partially.
Personally I would call that bisexual.
A nice enough sentiment. But if you're anywhere where people think replacing sex-ed with abstinence classes is a good idea, trusting the birds and the bees to parents is probably not.Dulcinea said:
I don't directly remember, no. But I've heard it from people who know firsthand.Dulcinea said:
Almost makes me wonder what the next big "moral panic" will be.
Both sides of the argument have their priorities wrong. I think sexual orientation in children cartoon/show characters is incredibly irrelevant. These shows should be more focused on teaching lessons in a fun and captivating way. I have no idea if the Count liked girls or boys, but he helped me count. Bert and Ernie are probably a gay couple, but I had no way of knowing that when I was kid, and it didn't really matter.
You don't need to bring sex into it at all. So there's a guy holding hands with another guy, therefore kids are instantly going to know they are doing it six ways til sunday? Not at all.internetzealot1 said:
If you see heterosexual couples in a kids tv show do they instantly assume they are having sex? No, that probably won't even cross their minds until they have heard sex mentioned form somewhere else.
Those classes are usually (if not invariably) half-assed scare-tactic-fests that get a lot of things wrong. But don't you know...anything else would encourage kids to go out and screw around!Dulcinea said:
And back on topic:
I think that's really the whole point that many of us have been trying to make: If they're going to put in G-rated implied romance at all, why not mix up the configuration once in a while? Because if there is G-rated implied romance, it kind of shoots the "oh, noes, that would expose kids to TEH SECKS!" argument to hell.ConeFTW said:
I agree too, but not having explicit sexuality in children's programming doesn't mean that sexual preference isn't implied constantly. Every prince marries a princess. Every character with parents has a mummy and daddy. You don't need to go all brokeback mountain, just have 2 queens instead of a king and queen.Harbinger_ said:
Edit: Just read my post. 2 queens? lol. No pun intended...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behaviorDulcinea said:
Wikipedia is not the best place for solid information but just follow the links in the article's Bibliography to confirm what it states.
That page also mentions Roy and Silo. The 'gay' penguin males who raised an egg together, then separated after 6 years with one of them moving onto a heterosexual pairing. Fairly solid proof for a lot of the questions being asked in this thread.
Even if children's cartoons had gay characters, i doubt the intended audience, mainly young children would even understand and or care about this. Children at that age don't really care about sexual orientation do they. This seems to me more like a way to get overally politically correct adults to feel better about themselves.
why educate about this separately?Kipohippo said:
Love is love whether you are homosexual or heterosexual. Hopefully by the time this generation does have children your sexuality will be as relevant as how you take your coffee and if they do ask don't lie.
If they really want to know why two people of the same gender can't get married tell them its because some people in society are prejudice against it, even though its completely normal. imo sexism is the same as all prejudices like racism or ageism.
Children are alot more intelligent than they are given credit for and they pick up on underlying issues between people faster that some adults can.
There's something that keeps cropping up in these gay threads that I just don't get.
nor·mal/ˈnôrməl/
Adjective: Usual, typical, or expected.
Noun: The usual, average, or typical state or condition.
I don't get how some people think that homosexuality fits that definition.
nor·mal/ˈnôrməl/
Adjective: Usual, typical, or expected.
Noun: The usual, average, or typical state or condition.
I don't get how some people think that homosexuality fits that definition.
It will change soon. And something like this only changes when someone or something (perhaps a TV show or a few TV shows with similar ideas) decides to break the line and do something different.SillyBear said:
There's always resistance to change, even good change. It happened with women and their rights (still happens in certain instances in most of the world); there will be resistance, mostly by the adults who have been taught all their lives that it's wrong to be different..but the point of the Original Post is that teaching kids will help implement this change for the future. I don't think it's a bad idea to say 'hey guys, let's not all hate each other, lolk?' and try to change. What's the worst that can happen if it succeeds?
Bara_no_Hime said:
orly? it sure does exist but do you know why and what it stands for? or does the fact some animals turn homosexual motivate every action to promote homosexuality for humans as a normal state?
"Every male that sniffed a female was reported as sex, while anal intercourse with orgasm between males was only "revolving around" dominance, competition or greetings."
That + the fact homosexual animals don't very well get to have offspring should tell you more about the conditions' causality than it being the default.
I don't have a problem with homosexuals existing and living as ordinary citizens, but don't tell me they're biologically normal. they're a state of being to which u get following certain conditions.
I would like to bring attention to the characters of Syaoran and Tomoyo from Cardcaptor Sakura, a guilty pleasure of mine.
Cardcaptor Sakura is a Japanese children's anime marketed towards girls, however the American sub, Cardcaptors, which re-edited much of the original story, removed the homosexuality of these two characters. Cardcaptors was marketed towards boys instead of girls, and was quite a big failure.
Now I won't say Cardcaptor Sakura is a very deep or meaningful show, Tomoyo's sexuality is played for laughs and Syaoran's seems to get retconned with a very strange explanation to turn him straight. What is interesting, however, is how homosexuality is never regarded as being strange by any of the characters, is never explored in depth or becomes a major plot point in any episode - two characters just happen to be, quite overtly, gay.
Syaoran is not camp or feminine in any way, he's a 10 year-old badass and actually becomes slightly more girly and caring when he realizes he's straight.
So is it a cultural or a gender issue? Did the homosexuality get removed by the change from Japanese children to American children or the change from girls to boys?
Cardcaptor Sakura is a Japanese children's anime marketed towards girls, however the American sub, Cardcaptors, which re-edited much of the original story, removed the homosexuality of these two characters. Cardcaptors was marketed towards boys instead of girls, and was quite a big failure.
Now I won't say Cardcaptor Sakura is a very deep or meaningful show, Tomoyo's sexuality is played for laughs and Syaoran's seems to get retconned with a very strange explanation to turn him straight. What is interesting, however, is how homosexuality is never regarded as being strange by any of the characters, is never explored in depth or becomes a major plot point in any episode - two characters just happen to be, quite overtly, gay.
Syaoran is not camp or feminine in any way, he's a 10 year-old badass and actually becomes slightly more girly and caring when he realizes he's straight.
So is it a cultural or a gender issue? Did the homosexuality get removed by the change from Japanese children to American children or the change from girls to boys?
Scientific research needs proper funding. There will never be the money to research the sexual orientations of all 5000+ mammalian species.Dulcinea said:
Instances like this are as close as you will get to identifying it. Bisexual behavior consists of homosexual behavior and a pedantic stance over language doesn't further the debate. I doubt the time and money will ever be devoted to prove any animal (including humans) was 'purely' homosexual throughout its life span.
Irony said:
In his misguided totally wrongly explanation, there's some truth to be had. Why do we need to put Sexuality into cartoon. They are, at the base, intended for children. Kid between 4 to 10. At this stage of life, they don't really have sexuality and they don't care. The sexual "revelation" come later when the body start to change. At this point, they would prefer Tween show from both side, and not cartoon. So, Like that, Why should we force kid that still doesn't understand or care to pay attention and choose their orientation. Couldn't we just let them develop like intended by nature? I think J.K. ROWLING did it best with Dumbledore when she reveal he is gay without shoving it into the people's faces. It's good to know that it's not enforced on the child and is only intended as a wink for the older crowd.A Weary Exile said:
Cartoon isn't the place to showcase sexuality in any ways. It should be handle by material intended to the teen demographic.
A character holding a same gendered characters handDuskflamer said:
A character having a crush on a same gendered character
You have now been told 2 ways.
And actions make no difference in sexuality, feelings do. For example a homosexual man will like men and a heterosexual man will like women (and a bisexual man has the best of both worlds, winning...). I'm pretty sure those are not actions...
I've just realised I've misread your entire argument but I'm going to leave the previously written statement up just for giggles.
Also, you're totally right. And awesome.