Why do people get so triggered about introducing LGBT characters into movies?

[Old]

Political violence is not a good thing, and I absolutely can not support it when violence is not threatened or happening first.

Beating nazis isn't "political violence" in the very same way that shooting a rapist isn't "murdering your sister's lover". Monsters behaving as monsters, nothing "political" about it.

Millions of American GIs - and British SAS - would strongly disagree with your (apparent?) stance on nazism. When one chooses to don that symbol & adopt those 'ideals', he/she forfeits their humanity....

 

[FAST6191]

I'd normally agree, except that any violence coming to white supremacists/alt-right/nazis is retaliatory in nature, considering their ideology calls for entire subsets of the population to be wiped out

Beating nazis isn't "political violence" in the very same way that shooting a rapist isn't "murdering your sister's lover". Monsters behaving as monsters, nothing "political" about it.

Millions of American GIs - and British SAS - would strongly disagree with your (apparent?) stance on nazism. When one chooses to don that symbol & adopt those 'ideals', he/she forfeits their humanity....

On shooting a rapist then assuming it is not in flagrante then that gets tricky.

I have heard the "their ideology calls for therefore" thing before (I think it was a video on someone going through the antifa handbook and the reasoning for things). I don't buy it for a moment. No violence unless violence is first started, simple words themselves are not violent. Let them speak and espouse what they want. Sunlight is a wonderful disinfectant.

Were I there when he was sucker punched then the one doing the punching would have got a kicking from me, assuming it was looking like it was going to continue anyway.

 

[gamesquest1]

Beating nazis isn't "political violence" in the very same way that shooting a rapist isn't "murdering your sister's lover". Monsters behaving as monsters, nothing "political" about it.

Millions of American GIs - and British SAS - would strongly disagree with your (apparent?) stance on nazism. When one chooses to don that symbol & adopt those 'ideals', he/she forfeits their humanity....

exactly how Nazis rationalized their decisions to kill millions of people, the real issue is collectivism, gang up and use your collective power and group identity to force your will on others, anyone who has that mindset would have happily joined the Nazi party if they were in Germany during the Nazi uprising, many people just jump on the most popular collectivist mantra in the hopes of gaining power and resources via preferential treatment.

yes Nazi-ism is terrible, but its a mentality that still exists but have found a way to disguise its ugly existence

 

[Delerious]

Millions of American GIs - and British SAS - would strongly disagree with your (apparent?) stance on nazism. When one chooses to don that symbol & adopt those 'ideals', he/she forfeits their humanity....

You say that they forfeit their humanity, but I don't necessarily agree with that. I do believe that they forfeit a good portion of humanity, but does that necessarily make them wicked as a whole? What about those people who are racist, and yet they devote themselves to service for others, like being a caretaker, or a fireman. And what if that nazi fireman just so happened to save your child from a fire? Would you still want that person to be beaten? The fact is that one wicked aspect of a person doesn't make them entirely evil. The American constitution states that we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness unless we start using those rights to infringe on the rights of others. Sure, someone may be a nazi, but until they start infringing upon the rights of others, they still have those same, inalienable rights. You may not like it, and you don't have to. But freedom of belief is what the western world takes great pride in.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

You say that they forfeit their humanity, but I don't necessarily agree with that. I do believe that they forfeit a good portion of humanity, but does that necessarily make them wicked as a whole? What about those people who are racist, and yet they devote themselves to service for others, like being a caretaker, or a fireman. And what if that nazi fireman just so happened to save your child from a fire? Would you still want that person to be beaten? The fact is that one wicked aspect of a person doesn't make them entirely evil. The American constitution states that we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness unless we start using those rights to infringe on the rights of others. Sure, someone may be a nazi, but until they start infringing upon the rights of others, they still have those same, inalienable rights. You may not like it, and you don't have to. But freedom of belief is what the western world takes great pride in.

Alternatively, what if it's a Nazi firefighter that REFUSES to rescue someone. Or, more realistically, a Nazi police officer that uses their authoritative position to either get away with murder or refuse life-saving assistance?

Not saying I necessarily disagree with everything you said, but "what if" is an awful argument because nobody really knows

 

[Delerious]

Alternatively, what if it's a Nazi firefighter that REFUSES to rescue someone. Or, more realistically, a Nazi police officer that uses their authoritative position to either get away with murder or refuse life-saving assistance?

Not saying I necessarily disagree with everything you said, but "what if" is an awful argument because nobody really knows

Then that person needs to be charged to the fullest extent of the law. True, what ifs aren't always great arguments. All I'm saying is that one wicked aspect of a person doesn't make them entirely wicked, and until they do commit an act, or in the case of the fireman or policeman, refuse to act for the sake of someone over something as petty as race, then why wish the worst upon them until you know the full content of their character?

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Then that person needs to be charged to the fullest extent of the law. True, what ifs aren't always great arguments. All I'm saying is that one wicked aspect of a person doesn't make them entirely wicked, and until they do commit an act, or in the case of the fireman or policeman, refuse to act for the sake of someone over something as petty as race, then why wish the worst upon them until you know the full content of their character?

Well... When you ARE the law, that's really not an option, as your buddies at the station are the ones who have the choice whether or not to charge you. That's why the recent 'bout of expositions from Antifa have come about, because at this point the only way to even force a racist officer out of the police force is public pressure

 

[Old]

Well... When you ARE the law, that's really not an option, as your buddies at the station are the ones who have the choice whether or not to charge you. That's why the recent 'bout of expositions from Antifa have come about, because at this point the only way to even force a racist officer out of the police force is public pressure

Yep, the 'blue wall of silence' is VERY real. It's foolish and ignorant to believe otherwise. Racist doctors refusing to touch patients of color, homophobic rescue workers purposely denying services to trans people, etc. etc. Welcome to the real (sick) world, kiddies. I've experienced it firsthand. Nazi pigs abound, and sadly they've been feeling even more empowered as of late for obvious reasons.

 

[the_randomizer]

I hate to ask this, but why do people get triggered when movies, TV shows, etc don't include said characters? They're just actors, or in some cases, entirely fictional (i.e. characters in novels).

 

[Delerious]

Well... When you ARE the law, that's really not an option, as your buddies at the station are the ones who have the choice whether or not to charge you. That's why the recent 'bout of expositions from Antifa have come about, because at this point the only way to even force a racist officer out of the police force is public pressure

Hard to debate the policeman thing, as federal and state laws are different. I would imagine that if an investigation is called for, then such investigations could, and probably should happen. Policeman aren't the law, nor are they above it. They are only supposed to enforce it. If they are doing something that puts them into question, I would assume, or at least hope that there is a system in place for these types of people to be investigated. Either way, I'm not trying to defend these types of people, as these are the type of d-bags that probably ought to be subject to capital punishment.

I hate to ask this, but why do people get triggered when movies, TV shows, etc don't include said characters? They're just actors, or in some cases, entirely fictional (i.e. characters in novels).

As others have stated before, it's not so much the inclusion of the character, but when it either A) Feels forced, or B) Feels like just another piece of marketing bait, which - well - Hollywood has been guilty of plenty of times. In both cases, it's kinda degrading to the group, especially when it doesn't feel genuine.

 

[weiff]

My issue is when they take a character with no established or partially established preferences and make blanket statement of "They have always been 'x' since the beginning of canon until we decide that it no longer suits us to be that way." Without consulting the original creator to determine if they were, they are forcing pointless agenda on characters just to as some said "represent." I have no problem with people creating a new persona that is established as LGBT, just stop forcing it on the pre-existing ones.

I am mostly referring to the Iceman and Lando reveals for evidence.

 

[spotanjo3]

Oh boy. Here we go again. Sighing. Drama. Why can't we just get along and move on ? Jeez.

 

[Old]

My issue is when they take a character with no established or partially established preferences and make blanket statement of "They have always been 'x' since the beginning of canon until we decide that it no longer suits us to be that way." Without consulting the original creator to determine if they were, they are forcing pointless agenda on characters just to as some said "represent." I have no problem with people creating a new persona that is established as LGBT, just stop forcing it on the pre-existing ones.

I am mostly referring to the Iceman and Lando reveals for evidence.

To be fair, Lando was always portrayed as a freewheeling player. 'Freaky deaky', as it were. I saw ESB in the theater, and the general consensus at the time was "maaaaannn, this guy exudes sexuality....seems like the type of dude that would stick his dick in ANYthing!"
The sort of character that the term 'omnisexual' was designed for.

 

[Delerious]

Oh boy. Here we go again. Sighing. Drama. Why can't we just get along and move on ? Jeez.

No. We all hate each others faces.

Joking aside, nothing wrong with debate until it becomes hateful. Which, hopefully it doesn't reach that point again. I realize I'm rather late for the party on this one though, so maybe I ought to have left the discussion alone.

 

[SimonMKWii]

ok

1. Can people just accept one another? Acceptance is a two way street. The homo-phobics deserve acceptance too.
   
2. We're civilised human beings, so can we please all just get along and coexist happily? LOL no Rodney. Civilized? Please. People fight.
   
3. Issues like this shouldn't exist. Lots of things shouldn't exist. But they do.
   
4. The issue shouldn't be "oh, there's an LGBT character in a movie, so it's shit and I'm not gonna watch it", it should be "oh, that movie's got terrible reviews, so it's shit and I'm not gonna watch it." I have heard " There is not enough LGBT@#$% in this movie, TV show,network etc.. don't watch it. It's a two way street.

If you have a right to say or do whatever you want, than so does the other guy. You are not special.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



And damaged minds make the same bad decisions repeatedly.

Why should homophobes be accepted?
They specifically choose to hate gay people for ridiculous reasons.
Why accept a mindset that is rooted in hate and nonacceptance?

 

[Navonod]

Why should homophobes be accepted?
They specifically choose to hate gay people for ridiculous reasons.
Why accept a mindset that is rooted in hate and nonacceptance?

Everyone has a right to believe or think what ever they want. They are human. Be a better human and accept the fact that you can't change their hateful minds to fit your believes.

 

[SimonMKWii]

Everyone has a right to believe or think what ever they want. They are human. Be a better human and accept the fact that you can't change their hateful minds to fit your believes.

Except they can change their beliefs, unlike gay people and their sexuality.

 

[Old]

Except they can change their beliefs, unlike gay people and their sexuality.

Cheers!

 

[Navonod]

Except they can change their beliefs, unlike gay people and their sexuality.

Yes you're right they can if they wanted to. You can't force people to change their beliefs. Just like you can't force a gay person to be straight.

 

[The Catboy]

I hate to ask this, but why do people get triggered when movies, TV shows, etc don't include said characters? They're just actors, or in some cases, entirely fictional (i.e. characters in novels).

It's not so much that people are upset that they aren't including them, but more (myself included) are upset by lack of representation and or proper representation. Take Deadpool for a second, he's a known pansexual character, yet they almost never show this and when they did they only make a joke of this fact. In the comic he was commonly shown in both a joking and serious manor flirting with pretty much everyone, especially Spider-man. So it's upsetting to see such an open character be so reserved for whatever reason.
Most people want LGBT+ characters to have just a better representation in media instead of being one of the common tropes (joke character, stereotype, struggling character, etc.) It's very rare to see an LGBT+ that isn't shoehorned in and not a trope. Going back to Deadpool 2, they actually did a decent job with Negasonic and Yukio, not the best, but better than most. Their characters and relationship is an example of what people want more of with LGBT+ characters.