J.J. Abrams Says Gay Characters Are Coming to Star Wars

[Something Amyss]

Am I allowed to be pulling my hair out over this as a writer and ask what a character's sexual orientation brings to the story?

Depends. Did you pull your hair out when Luke and Leia and Han were the ones whose sexuality were on display?

I'm going out on a limb and guess not, especially given the pre-emptive "evil straight white man" deal. And can I just pause and point out the irony that you're bringing your race, sexuality and gender into an argument while questioning what sexuality adds?

Can I go one further now? Because as a writer, I get shit for including female protagonists, and gays and lesbians and trans people. As a bisexual transwoman, these are literally my people. They're no being included for the sake of progress, but because it's the fucking story I want to write. In fact, one of the reasons I started writing is because so many of those straight white dudes told me that if I didn't like what was being created, to make my own. Now I get whined at because I'm making my own. And because it doesn't specifically pander to straight white dudes, even though 2/3 the main cast is still straight white dudes. And suddenly, that excuse doesn't work anymore. Disney's including blacks and women as main protagonists, and JJ Abrams says gays are coming. Don't like it? Make your own is what I was told, why doesn't the same advice apply now? You're a writer, create your own stories the way you want to make them. Why is it even an issue someone else is doing something else? I kind of get the impression that the issue is more that straight white dudes aren't pandered to 100% of the time.

Is this the great cross that straight white folk are asked to bear? That they're only pandered to 95% of the time in mainstream media?

It always comes off very disingenuous to me when people say the problem is introducing sexual orientation, and then act like heterosexuality is not a sexual orientation.

Thing is, a lot of the time they don't even notice. They're not being disingenuous, we're just so culturally inundated with heterosexuality that people don't think about it. It's not disingenuous, but it tends to be indicative of a systemic problem.

I meant that more in consideration of every single humanoid character that takes up screen space across the 7 films. 99.99999% of them are of completely unknown sexuality.

But that's a goalpost shift and you know it. You didn't make the argument that there was a lack of sexuality, you claimed that you would expect to not see it in a more progressive, futuristic world.

If we're going there, however, the cast is nowhere near large enough for that statistic to be even remotely true. Even if you couunt every onscreen character, you're looking at closer to 94% unknown, and that's ignoring things like the Life Day crap (which was canon at least up until Disney). And if you want to argue that, fine. In fact, I already brought this up chatting with someone earlier:

2:18 PM - Something Amyss: I mean, the only argument I can see is that there's not a lot of romance or sexuality in Star Wars. Which is mostly true.

But that wasn't the case you made. You made a case that you expected a lower visibility for gays in a progressive society.

I guess I'm just concerned here; the straight relationships are ham-fisted enough, and a poorly implemented gay character would do far more harm than good.

Yes, and look at how far back 50 Shades and Twilight and Star Wars have set heterosexuality.

 

[Something Amyss]

Okay, here's a point I want to make, if they made a character in a film and reveal after some time it's gay, then that would have least be an effort, but by announcing it they already doom the character to be "that gay character" and in general it has the condescending tone of "look at how progressive I am!!!".

What character have they announced as gay?

 

[Saltyk]

We all knew C-3PO was gay. That was obvious. I stated as much in my original post in this thread.

What, because he's all shiny and walks funny in the desert? I'd be shiny in intense sunlight (probably) and walk funny if I had sand stuck in my robocrack too!

What? Man, now you're being racist. ...Droidist? ...Robotist?

Nah, it's obvious that C-3PO is gay. He and R2-D2 are in a relationship. Why do you think C-3PO always seems so mad at R2? It's because R2 keeps interfacing with other computers. Half the time while C-3PO is standing right there. R2 is a horndog, man.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

People.

Aren't.

Reading.

The.

Article!

Why comment without reading properly?? This is how misinformation and superstition spread. J.J. was responding to a damn question, not bloody announcing it to "shove teh gays into our medias." Fuck's sake. Why are there so many reactionary monkeys?? This article headline is just baiting a lot of stupid.

 

[Something Amyss]

This was not an unsolicited statement. Someone at a Star Wars event asked the question, and the answer was given. If you dislike this being a story, then fine, whatever, but I think the Escapist deserves more of your bile for publishing it than...whomever you're blaming in the Star Wars franchise does for answering a straightforward question in a straightforward way.

I suspect the whole reason this became a story in the first place is that people were hoping to cash in on then outrage train.

I should point out that the event was not a Star Wars one, but an Oscar Wilde Award ceremony Abrams himself hosted. But still, this doesn't change the bit where he didn't go out and advertise gays were coming to Star Wars.

I would like to add to this that those romantic or sexual interactions include every single lead character in a Star Wars movie excluding TFA - Luke, Han, Leia, Anikin, Padme, and Obi-wan. Not only is every romance or sexual interaction heterosexual, but every single lead character demonstrates attraction to the opposite sex and never demonstrates attraction to the same sex.

Indeed, and that's kind of what I noticed as well, but didn't explicitly say it. Hell, I forgot about Leia's adopted parents, or Lars and Beru Skywalker. makes me wonder how many others I'm actually forgetting in the Star Wars movies because heterosexuality is so "normalised" in our society.

 

[the December King]

Am I allowed to be pulling my hair out over this as a writer and ask what a character's sexual orientation brings to the story? Am I allowed to do that at any point?

Please do not pretend anyone can stop you from having whatever reaction you want. You can pull your hair out and ask questions whenever you want, just as I "am allowed" at any point to pull my hair out and ask why people it is when people say "sexual orientation," they actually seem to mean "non-straightness," because for all the ranting about how sexual orientation doesn't make a difference and detracts from the story, no one ever seems to argue that the form of sexual orientation which is heterosexuality detracted from the previous two trilogies. I never hear the audience complaining, "Look at Luke being all straight! Look at Han being liking girls, it adds nothing to the plot! Look at Leia being into guys, that's such pandering! Look at Anakin and Padme cramming their heterosexual agenda down our throats! Look at Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru, pandering to straights with their token straight relationship!"

It always comes off very disingenuous to me when people say the problem is introducing sexual orientation, and then act like heterosexuality is not a sexual orientation.

While I don't mind the inclusion of gay characters in the Star Wars franchise (what with aliens, and what must be some non-binary sexual orientations amongst them, and the interesting degrees of racial/gender normative tensions that simply must exist with so many different races and creatures in such a huge and dangerous universe), the romance and 'heteronormativity' in the Prequels were the worst acting and writing, wooden as hell, and lots of us complained about it. It really did almost feel like the movie was cramming a heterosexual agenda down out throats, though admittedly this could have been softened by a better story.

In fact, I'll dd my voice to the aether now on those points you mentioned: "Look at Anikin saying reeeeally creepy and patently stalkerish things to a girl who could be his teen mom, that's messed up, he looks like he's four." "Look at their relationship later on, can you buy that they are in any way attracted to each other? Are we supposed to?" "Why don't their declarations of feelings for each other ever reach their doll-like, empty eyes?"

I mean, I didn't even get a sense of sexual tension between them that felt in any way plausible, let alone anything else.

 

[ccggenius12]

I don't know why, but it seems to me that the best way to go about this would just be inverting the whole Slave Leia thing. Just get a Hutt they've firmly established as male, and give the cast a reason to have to traverse his All-Male pleasure dungeon. Probably in one of the side movies that isn't part of the new trilogy, but still.

 

[RedDeadFred]

I love the hypocrisy in this thread. It's glorious. Probably the most I've ever seen in one thread.

"Don't make a big deal of it"

....He answered a question, so who's REALLY making the big deal of it? I guess it's only partially your faults since you're not the ones who felt the need to post an article about it, but still.

 

[JimB]

It always comes off very disingenuous to me when people say the problem is introducing sexual orientation, and then act like heterosexuality is not a sexual orientation.

Thing is, a lot of the time they don't even notice. They're not being disingenuous, we're just so culturally inundated with heterosexuality that people don't think about it. It's not disingenuous, but it tends to be indicative of a systemic problem.

Intellectually dishonest or cognitively dissonant, then, if you prefer those terms.

I should point out that the event was not a Star Wars one, but an Oscar Wilde Award ceremony Abrams himself hosted.

Huh...I was sure it said "Star Wars." My mistake.

I'll add my voice to the aether now on those points you mentioned: "Look at Anakin saying reeeeally creepy and patently stalkerish things to a girl who could be his teen mom, that's messed up, he looks like he's four." "Look at their relationship later on, can you buy that they are in any way attracted to each other? Are we supposed to?" "Why don't their declarations of feelings for each other ever reach their doll-like, empty eyes?"

I like you, the December King, so I'm not trying to aim my dickishness at you. You're the only one of the two of us who can speak for your motivations, but I'm just saying, these complaints don't make it sound like you object because the straight-ness of all the characters I named (and I forgot Lando and Jabba) actually fails to add to the story or is rubbing heterosexuality in anyone's face. These complaints sound like you think two specific characters were badly written, badly directed, and badly acted.

 

[VoidWanderer]

While reading the varied reactions is amusing, I figure that the openly gay thing will be handled like they did on Jessica Jones. The gay partner will be established as being in the relationship and have some other connection to the character. That's it.

 

[Something Amyss]

the romance and 'heteronormativity' in the Prequels were the worst acting and writing, wooden as hell, and lots of us complained about it. It really did almost feel like the movie was cramming a heterosexual agenda down out throats, though admittedly this could have been softened by a better story.

But there you have it. You answered it right away in your own post. You didn't have an issue with it because heterosexuality was involved, you had an issue because it was shit writing.

What JimB responded to, what is being said in this thread, is a reaction not to how the gay romance is conducted, or that there's a gay romance, or that a character has been made gay or a gay character has been announced. It is a reaction to the very fact that a guy no longer involved in the franchise offered the opinion that gay characters would one day arrive. When asked.

And nobody was tearing their hair out because there was going to be a hetero love story in Star Wars. Or heterosexuals in general. Nobody asked why Luke and Leia and Han and several other people's sexuality mattered, or martyred themselves like this "straight white guy" did.

You don't have a problem? Great! But clearly a lot of people do. And they're not objecting to a specific instance of bad writing. They're objecting to a hypothetical gay character. They can't even wait to see how said character is portrayed.

"Why don't their declarations of feelings for each other ever reach their doll-like, empty eyes?"

Not "why do they have to rub their heterosexuality in our faces?"

I love the hypocrisy in this thread. It's glorious. Probably the most I've ever seen in one thread.

"Don't make a big deal of it"

....He answered a question, so who's REALLY making the big deal of it? I guess it's only partially your faults since you're not the ones who felt the need to post an article about it, but still.

I think there's more of it in general than you give credit. This is usually how these things get spread.

Intellectually dishonest or cognitively dissonant, then, if you prefer those terms.

I don't know, it's more like having blinders on. People are very content to not upset the status quo, to the point that when it's pointed out, they will get very protective of it. But part of that reasoning is they're not aware. That's not really intellectual dishonesty or cognitive dissonance.

Huh...I was sure it said "Star Wars." My mistake.

In fairness, I had to read the original source article because this one makes it sound like two separate events.

 

[Floppertje]

Apart from when it's an issue that is actually important to what is going on, not paying too much attention to it is almost always the way to go. I like how they did it in borderlands 2, when Jack threatens the wife of a scientist he's pushing into doing something against her will. He's the most disgusting thing you ever scraped off your shoe and even he doesn't think being gay is a big deal.
Game of Thrones was good at it too.

Spoiler

Spoilered for the one person who hasn't seen that yet... Renly and Loras being gay was something they paid attention to but in both their cases it was actually important to the plot, what with Renly maybe getting to be King and having to produce an heir, and Loras being imprisoned by the sparrows.

And it's not like Abrams said it to bang some kind of hype drum either, he was answering a question while talking about diversity at an awards show. That seems pretty on point to me.

 

[Something Amyss]

Han shot first, last and only. Anything else was the fevered historical revisionism of a madman.

Ah, but now you're censoring the voice of an artist. This sort of cultural Sithism should not be tolerated, and I will support free speech, even if I have to silence you to protect your right to speak!

 

[infohippie]

It's gonna be Finn and Poe. I'm calling it right now, it's gonna be Finn and Poe. Not only has Tumblr been aggressively pushing the idea of it, because Tumblr is cancerous in its pandering to fanbases and their whims, but also there is the more reasonable and realistic fact that both Oscar Isaac and John Boyega were playing their characters with the idea that they were, in fact, gay and going to end up together. Or, at least, that's what I've been lead to believe.

Now I really hope it's not them, simply because if Tumblr wants it, I don't.

 

[ThatOtherGirl]

Happyninja42
Something Amyss

So now am I allowed to say they're doing it on purpose?
Or do we need to wait for another grand reveal that fits a certain denominator

JJ didn't even confirm there would be a gay character, he only said that there was no reason that there would not be. So what exactly are they doing on purpose now? Not being exclusionary bastards for the hell of it? Not categorically banning LGBT representation from Star Wars? Daring to have a casting chart that isn't 90% straight white male? Why is that so bad? What do you think you are catching them doing? And why do you care?

 

[JimB]

Does owning the property give him moral right to destroy characters dreamed up through collaborative effort?

Since the only way he can "destroy" characters is to implant microchips in my brain forcing me to view my memories a specific way, no, he does not have that moral right. However, since he has not done that thing, and has only put out material that I as a free-willed human being am free to contextualize or to ignore as I see fit, the Special Editions are one hundred percent within his moral rights. He owns the prints, so he gets to decide what to do with them.