Disney casts their first openly gay character, is played by a straight man, will be a stereotype

SieteBlanco said:

They're posters of critically acclaimed movies with straight actors playing the gay protagonists, they have been recognized and awarded by LGBT organizations

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Do you believe that Jungle Cruise will treat gay themes nuanced and with respect as these movies did?

Eatin' Olives said:

Something tells me Disney's not looking to make the next Moonlight with this film. Just a hunch.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Also love the implied statement that because those two films had straight actors playing gay characters and won awards, that should be the case always and queer actors or up-and-comers in the industry just have to deal with it

this a real stupid idea, disney.

If I didn't know the premise and only heard the controversy, I'd think Jungle Cruise was the follow up sequel to Boat Trip.

Sexual Orientation is tricky because film is a visual medium so how an actor looks and acts the part is going to be what's important. Has sexual orientation ever been used as a prerequisite on a character breakdown sheet?

Nepenthe said:

(Also, I disagree vehemently that straight people playing trans roles os akin to blackface in terms of historical context and intent.)

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's closer to it, for the sake of analogy, than whitewashing, which isn't really analogous at all. Whitewashing is usually an issue of erasure in front of the camera, while this is a case of erasure behind it

Shizuka said:

Why not cast a gay actor? Is that so hard?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I love how much of this bullshit "but acting!!" argument breaks down when people ask this simple question.

Eatin' Olives said:

Something tells me Disney's not looking to make the next Moonlight with this film. Just a hunch.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Fraktur said:

Do you believe that Jungle Cruise will treat gay themes nuanced and with respect as these movies did?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Of course not, that wasn't my point. If the character is portrayed stereotypically and offensively campy, then the problem is that the character was portrayed stereotypically and offensively campy. And yes, I agree that a gay actor could have made the portrayal more sensitive and believable.

Sweeney Swift said:

Also love the implied statement that because those two films had straight actors playing gay characters and won awards, that should be the case always and queer actors or up-and-comers in the industry just have to deal with it

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Gay actors aren't limited to playing gay characters. Stop appropriating the very real issues of African-American, Latino and Asian actors.

SieteBlanco said:

Of course not, that wasn't my point. If the character is portrayed stereotypically and offensively campy, then the problem is that the character was portrayed stereotypically and offensively campy. And yes, I agree that a gay actor could have made the portrayal more sensitive and believable.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

"But the gays liked Moonlight and Call Me By Your Name!" doesn't negate the fact that proper LGBT representation is a very real problem with mainstream movies that don't set out to be boundary-pushing films.

The real test of acceptance and representation isn't in groundbreaking film. It's in the pedestrian mass-market space. It is in this space that openly gay characters are still written as flamboyant stereotypes and they don't even get cast by openly gay actors either.

SieteBlanco said:

Gay actors aren't limited to playing gay characters. Stop appropriating the very real issues of African-American, Latino and Asian actors.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Are you serious with this? We aren't saying it's the exact same issue; we're saying we want more queer people involved in the portrayal of queer characters and stories on film; instead of stereotypes done by and for straight people.

It's not appropriation to talk about a similar issue.

ZeoVGM said:

The LGBT community wants and deserves more representation in media.

So no, they should not be hiring straight actors as gay characters anymore when gay actors are available.

You are going to bat for less representation to a disturbing degree.



And your bullshit "people just want to be outraged!" schtick, as if gay people are just pretending to care, is offensive.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This thread has me absolutely seething. Very disappointed in some of these responses and attitudes from " Straight ERA "

Grace surprisingly gets it right.

VegiHam said:

Are you serious with this? We aren't saying it's the exact same issue; we're saying we want more queer people involved in the portrayal of queer characters and stories on film; instead of stereotypes done by and for straight people.

It's not appropriation to talk about a similar issue.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's not even close to being similar because whitewashing eliminates roles for African American, Latino and Asian actors. Unlike Ian McKellen, a black actor would face racist backlash if he was cast as Magneto.

Agar25 said:

This thread has me absolutely seething. Very disappointed in some of these responses and attitudes from " Straight ERA "

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Agreed completely. Certainly not surprised at this point but still disappointed.

SieteBlanco said:

It's not even close to being similar because whitewashing eliminates roles for African American, Latino and Asian actors. Unlike Ian McKellen, a black actor would face racist backlash if he was cast as Magneto.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

By similar, I mean it's another issue a marginalised community has with getting roles in film; both on and off screen. Obviously there are a lot of differences, I mean that it's a problem in the same family of problems rather than a close variation on the same thing. You seem really keen on invalidating queer concerns in some kind of oppression olympics thing though. Just cus other communities have a more sever problem doesn't mean we shouldn't fight for representation.

"It would show respect if they hired a gay actor to play a gay character" =! "Would you cast Robert Downey Jr. as Obama and Chris Evans as Simon Bolivar?!"

VegiHam said:

By similar, I mean it's another issue a marginalised community has with getting roles in film; both on and off screen. Obviously there are a lot of differences, I mean that it's a problem in the same family of problems rather than a close variation on the same thing. You seem really keen on invalidating queer concerns in some kind of oppression olympics thing though. Just cus other communities have a more sever problem doesn't mean we shouldn't fight for representation.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's an explicitly different problem because openly gay actors don't face nearly as many problems getting cast as African American or Latino actors who can only play African American or Latino characters. It's an issue of representation? Yes. But it's not an issue of being discriminated by a casting sheet that clearly reads "Caucasian" and not "heterosexual".

litebrite said:

Grace surprisingly gets it right.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That's a great video, she makes some excellent points backed up with research, everyone here should watch that video.

Yikes at the description of the character, LGBT people are some of the strongest people because of all the bs we have to go through in life. Disney fooled me once with Le Fou, I don't have any hopes for this one. Tone deaf as all hell.

I actually don't have an issue with campy, effeminate, gay men. I just have an issue when the actor is played by a straight man.

If gay people were underrepresented as actors in Hollywood (like transexual people are) I'd consider this a big issue.

But gay people seem to find plenty of work in Hollywood, usually playing straight people. There need to be more gay characters, but I dont think it's necessary that gay people play that character. It's acting after all.

umop 3pisdn said:

Dude I think you're the one feigning outrage.The 'lol' was supposed to denote a bit of well-meaning hyperbole. Obviously gay people sometimes play straight roles, but it's arguably even more clear that straight or maybe closeted actors get the better deal in what is supposed to be 'meritocratic casting'.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm confused. My post about outrage wasn't in response to your lol post, but a different user who said they wouldn't dignify my post with a response. You also responded to my post earlier as though you'd meant what you originally said. So either way, if you didn't mean it as I may have mistakenly took it, other users hold that belief.

Fraktur said:

The problem is that there is an abundance of flamboyant gay characters in movies and many people still believe that only gay guys act like that and that everyone who does so must be gay. They could have used this role to fight this stereotype, instead they reinforce it. This is the first open gay character in a disney movie which is significant. A flamboyant character could work, especially if he is nuanced, but i don't expect the people working on this movie to be able to create a fully fleshed out flamboyant character.
A seperate issue is of course the discrimination (even by gays) of feminine gay (and nongay) men in our society that values masculinity.


Two of those movies were made in the nineties, gay represantation back than was even worse than it is now. And even then, two of those movies were made by gay directors.


Just take Neil Patrick Harris, who would've never been cast as Barney, if he was out back then. Same goes for many roles especially the role of the "leading man", because somehow straight men delude dthemselves so much, that they believe gay men couldn't act straight roles. A few years ago a famous director (or was it producer?) said so himself (that he would never cast a gay man for a straight role, as they wouldn't be believable) Times are changing (i.e. luke evans getting the role as Dracula), but it's still a long way to go. So if you believe that these cases aren't just exceptions you're plainly wrong.


Just wanted to say, you're killing it in this thread. Thumps up!

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not sure how your post relates to mine. It feels like some want to intentionally take it out of context to repeat the same points that don't relate to what I wrote.

They could cast a straight actor sure. But if they think he's the best person for the job, does it really matter what his sexuality is?

Neil Patrick Harris a gay man played one of the straightest, womanizer on television as Barney Stinson.

Darren Criss played a gay man as Blaine Anderson on Glee, and he is straight.

I can understand where people are coming from, but is this really the same as white washing? In acting, you can act gay or straight. You can't change the color of your skin. If Disney think he's the best person for the role, then let's see what happens.

We don't know if Disney auditioned any gay actors. They may have, may have not. In the end I have no problem of the sexuality of said actor, if they're the best person for the role.

Nepenthe said:

I, for one, cannot wait for the Obama biopic starring Tom Hanks.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Hilarious. But for the casting call for the Obama they're going to specify the skin color they're looking for.

On the other hand, a black man, gay, single with no child can absolutely play the role of Obama, who cares ?

Now I agree that a straight man playing a complete stereotype of a gay is indeed problematic and dumb.

TheMango55 said:

If gay people were underrepresented as actors in Hollywood (like transexual people are) I'd consider this a big issue.

But gay people seem to find plenty of work in Hollywood, usually playing straight people. There need to be more gay characters, but I dont think it's necessary that gay people play that character. It's acting after all.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Just because gay actors are being employed doesn't mean there's a proper LGBT representation on-screen.

Shadownet said:

They could cast a straight actor sure. But if they think he's the best person for the job, does it really matter what his sexuality is?

Neil Patrick Harris a gay man played one of the straightest, womanizer on television as Barney Stinson.

Darren Criss played a gay man as Blaine Anderson on Glee, and he is straight.

I can understand where people are coming from, but is this really the same as white washing? In acting, you can act gay or straight. You can't change the color of your skin. If Disney think he's the best person for the role, then let's see what happens.

We don't know if Disney auditioned any gay actors. They may have, may have not. In the end I have no problem of the sexuality of said actor, if they're the best person for the role.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This character's defining trait is flamboyantly gay. Is there really no gay actor who can properly do that role that they have to turn to a straight actor?

I won't defend this but I do find it interesting that people think actors should play their sexuality.

The whole idea of acting is pretending to be someone who isn't you, and gay actors play straight all the time.

Obviously race and gender are different because of the physical differences. Sexuality, while biological, isn't something you can see with your eyes.

I do think having the character be a stereotype is poor form.

Eatin' Olives said:

This character's defining trait is flamboyantly gay. Is there really no gay actor who can properly do that role that they have to turn to a straight actor?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Maybe not, it's like asking. Is Neil Patrick Harris the straightest, most charming womanizer in Hollywood that they could have found to play Barney Stinson?

We don't know. We'll see the end product and see if this casting was a good choice or not.

HotHamBoy said:

I won't defend this but I do find it interesting that people think actors should play their sexuality.

The whole idea of acting is retending to be someone who isn't you, and gay actors play straight all the time.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I mean it's the framing mostly and how minimal gay characters are in major movies. For example Disney are treating this like a big thing a major character that's LGTB but that actor isn't, It's a weird decision that honestly pleases no one.

Principate said:

I mean it's the framing mostly and how minimal gay characters are in major movies. For example Disney are treating this like a big thing a major character that's LGTB but that actor isn't, It's a weird decision that honestly pleases no one.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I think the character being a camp stereotype is a bigger problem than the actor being straight.

Shadownet said:

Maybe not, it's like asking. Is Neil Patrick Harris the straightest, most charming womanizer in Hollywood that they could have found to play Barney Stinson?

We don't know. We'll see the end product and see if this casting was a good choice or not.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Err you do realize he came out AFTER he got cast, right?

HotHamBoy said:

I think the character being a camp stereotype is a bigger problem than the actor being straight.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That too no doubt.

Disney and gay are like oil and water, tasting funny together. The mouse should fix that

HotHamBoy said:

I won't defend this but I do find it interesting that people think actors should play their sexuality.

The whole idea of acting is pretending to be someone who isn't you, and gay actors play straight all the time.

Obviously race and gender is different because of the physical differences. Sexuality, while biological, isn't something you can see with your eyes.

I do think having the character be a stereotype is poor.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Coming from the perspective of someone in the queer community who would love to see more queer representation and would have found immensely reassuring had I seen more growing up, I think that straight actors playing gay characters isn't inherently any kind of problem. But from a point of representation where seeing people who are like you in media can be reassuring, that effect can be substantially reduced were you to realize that nobody involved or portraying those people actually was like you, and the portrayal came only from a place of second-hand understanding and observation. That representation which might have assured you that there are more people out there like you gets a bit turned on its head because you realize nobody involved with that piece of media actually sympathizes first-hand with how you identify.

There's a degree to which I think having some gay characters be played by gay actors is a comfort to those who really do want and need that representation to be there.

It's a nuanced issue, and I don't think we have any need to come down on the side of "straight actors can't play gay characters", but I think there's good reason to hope for it in some cases and speak out in hopes for it.

Eatin' Olives said:

This character's defining trait is flamboyantly gay. Is there really no gay actor who can properly do that role that they have to turn to a straight actor?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

If it were up to straight people, and many like the people here on Resetera, gays wouldn't have ANY prescence in movies at all.

Because "it's just acting" and "He's the best person for the role" would spew like diarrhea, just like it's happened in this thread.

They talk about meritocracy, but in this magical meritocracy, most roles would go to straight white people. Hmm...

These people don't know shit, can't put themselves in the shoes of LGBT people for shit, but want us to look at the situation from a purely "logical" view. And by logical, I actually mean a heterosexual view that has been the default since forever.

Were it up to this people, we'd still be stuck on the Hayes code and Disney gay coding all the bad guys. But it would be okay, because gays can play straight people and merit trumps EVERYTHING (which anyone who's ever been discriminated against can tell you that's BS).

Straight people want to ignore the history of films, the history of the LGBT community. They want to force feed us this "I don't see color/gender/sexuality" utopia where we supposedly are treated equally. But you have to leave your identity behind in order to do so.

Fuck no. It took me ages to come to terms with myself. No thanks to the media who gleefully vilified everything that was considered "gay". And then society fed on that, and it becomes a feedback loop we can never escape.

It's time to question our biases, people. Maybe the reason you don't is because you're actively benefiting from them, while everyone else is fucked just because your ass cannot concede "well Maybe we SHOULD let the first openly gay Disney film character be played by an actual gay man, because that would be a GOOD thing".

That's all you have to do, the bar couldn't be any goddamn lower. But instead you're too busy splitting hairs and arguing semantics.

This is why people don't reach across the room. Because as soon as we open our mouths, it's suddenly too incovinient for straight people and THEY want to tell US how things should be.

BuddyDharma said:

Both of you guys are looking at this wrong. It's not about who can play a gay guy better, it's about minorities getting the shaft for decades and now we can start making up for it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I've said a bunch of times that is an issue. And it should be remedied. But not by pigeonholing gay people into gay roles, but rather by letting them have any role they're qualified for.

oops

Pekola said:

If it were up to straight people, and many like the people here on Resetera, gays wouldn't have ANY prescence in movies at all.

Because "it's just acting" and "He's the best person for the role" would spew like diarrhea, just like it's happened in this thread.

They talk about meritocracy, but in this magical meritocracy, most roles would go to straight white people. Hmm...

These people don't know shit, can't put themselves in the shoes of LGBT people for shit, but want us to look at the situation from a purely "logical" view. And by logical, I actually mean a heterosexual view that has been the default since forever.

Were it up to this people, we'd still be stuck on the Hayes code and Disney gay coding all the bad guys. But it would be okay, because gays can play straight people and merit trumps EVERYTHING (which anyone who's ever been discriminated against can tell you that's BS).

Straight people want to ignore the history of films, the history of the LGBT community. They want to force feed us this "I don't see color/gender/sexuality" utopia where we supposedly are treated equally. But you have to leave your identity behind in order to do so.

Fuck no. It took me ages to come to terms with myself. No thanks to the media who gleefully vilified everything that was considered "gay". And then society fed on that, and it becomes a feedback loop we can never escape.

It's time to question our biases, people. Maybe the reason you don't is because you're actively benefiting from them, while everyone else is fucked just because your ass cannot concede "well Maybe we SHOULD let the first openly gay Disney film character be played by an actual gay man, because that would be a GOOD thing".

That's all you have to do, the bar couldn't be any goddamn lower. But instead you're too busy splitting hairs and arguing semantics.

This is why people don't reach across the room. Because as soon as we open our mouths, it's suddenly too incovinient for straight people and THEY want to tell US how things should be.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Absolutely perfect post, couldn't agree more.

It's the grand Disney tradition.


(If you thought part of Disney's industrial model wasn't churning out stereotypes an masse to make money you're kidding yourself)

Pekola said:

If it were up to straight people, and many like the people here on Resetera, gays wouldn't have ANY prescence in movies at all.

Because "it's just acting" and "He's the best person for the role" would spew like diarrhea, just like it's happened in this thread.

They talk about meritocracy, but in this magical meritocracy, most roles would go to straight white people. Hmm...

These people don't know shit, can't put themselves in the shoes of LGBT people for shit, but want us to look at the situation from a purely "logical" view. And by logical, I actually mean a heterosexual view that has been the default since forever.

Were it up to this people, we'd still be stuck on the Hayes code and Disney gay coding all the bad guys. But it would be okay, because gays can play straight people and merit trumps EVERYTHING (which anyone who's ever been discriminated against can tell you that's BS).

Straight people want to ignore the history of films, the history of the LGBT community. They want to force feed us this "I don't see color/gender/sexuality" utopia where we supposedly are treated equally. But you have to leave your identity behind in order to do so.

Fuck no. It took me ages to come to terms with myself. No thanks to the media who gleefully vilified everything that was considered "gay". And then society fed on that, and it becomes a feedback loop we can never escape.

It's time to question our biases, people. Maybe the reason you don't is because you're actively benefiting from them, while everyone else is fucked just because your ass cannot concede "well Maybe we SHOULD let the first openly gay Disney film character be played by an actual gay man, because that would be a GOOD thing".

That's all you have to do, the bar couldn't be any goddamn lower. But instead you're too busy splitting hairs and arguing semantics.

This is why people don't reach across the room. Because as soon as we open our mouths, it's suddenly too incovinient for straight people and THEY want to tell US how things should be.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Well said

Pekola said:

If it were up to straight people, and many like the people here on Resetera, gays wouldn't have ANY prescence in movies at all.

Because "it's just acting" and "He's the best person for the role" would spew like diarrhea, just like it's happened in this thread.

They talk about meritocracy, but in this magical meritocracy, most roles would go to straight white people. Hmm...

These people don't know shit, can't put themselves in the shoes of LGBT people for shit, but want us to look at the situation from a purely "logical" view. And by logical, I actually mean a heterosexual view that has been the default since forever.

Were it up to this people, we'd still be stuck on the Hayes code and Disney gay coding all the bad guys. But it would be okay, because gays can play straight people and merit trumps EVERYTHING (which anyone who's ever been discriminated against can tell you that's BS).

Straight people want to ignore the history of films, the history of the LGBT community. They want to force feed us this "I don't see color/gender/sexuality" utopia where we supposedly are treated equally. But you have to leave your identity behind in order to do so.

Fuck no. It took me ages to come to terms with myself. No thanks to the media who gleefully vilified everything that was considered "gay". And then society fed on that, and it becomes a feedback loop we can never escape.

It's time to question our biases, people. Maybe the reason you don't is because you're actively benefiting from them, while everyone else is fucked just because your ass cannot concede "well Maybe we SHOULD let the first openly gay Disney film character be played by an actual gay man, because that would be a GOOD thing".

That's all you have to do, the bar couldn't be any goddamn lower. But instead you're too busy splitting hairs and arguing semantics.

This is why people don't reach across the room. Because as soon as we open our mouths, it's suddenly too incovinient for straight people and THEY want to tell US how things should be.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Honestly, this post should just be stickied. This is all that needs to be said about the matter.

Eatin' Olives said:

Just because gay actors are being employed doesn't mean there's a proper LGBT representation on-screen.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah that's what I said. There need to be more gay characters.

Pekola said:

If it were up to straight people, and many like the people here on Resetera, gays wouldn't have ANY prescence in movies at all.

Because "it's just acting" and "He's the best person for the role" would spew like diarrhea, just like it's happened in this thread.

They talk about meritocracy, but in this magical meritocracy, most roles would go to straight white people. Hmm...

These people don't know shit, can't put themselves in the shoes of LGBT people for shit, but want us to look at the situation from a purely "logical" view. And by logical, I actually mean a heterosexual view that has been the default since forever.

Were it up to this people, we'd still be stuck on the Hayes code and Disney gay coding all the bad guys. But it would be okay, because gays can play straight people and merit trumps EVERYTHING (which anyone who's ever been discriminated against can tell you that's BS).

Straight people want to ignore the history of films, the history of the LGBT community. They want to force feed us this "I don't see color/gender/sexuality" utopia where we supposedly are treated equally. But you have to leave your identity behind in order to do so.

Fuck no. It took me ages to come to terms with myself. No thanks to the media who gleefully vilified everything that was considered "gay". And then society fed on that, and it becomes a feedback loop we can never escape.

It's time to question our biases, people. Maybe the reason you don't is because you're actively benefiting from them, while everyone else is fucked just because your ass cannot concede "well Maybe we SHOULD let the first openly gay Disney film character be played by an actual gay man, because that would be a GOOD thing".

That's all you have to do, the bar couldn't be any goddamn lower. But instead you're too busy splitting hairs and arguing semantics.

This is why people don't reach across the room. Because as soon as we open our mouths, it's suddenly too incovinient for straight people and THEY want to tell US how things should be.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Wow, that was biblical.

Well said indeed.

"Maybe Jack Whitehall was best person for the role?"

Have you guys even seen Jack Whitehall in anything? He's one of the worst "comedians" to come out of the UK.

It's more likely his talent agent father's connections helped him get the role than any actual merit.

Pekola said:

If it were up to straight people, and many like the people here on Resetera, gays wouldn't have ANY prescence in movies at all.

Because "it's just acting" and "He's the best person for the role" would spew like diarrhea, just like it's happened in this thread.

They talk about meritocracy, but in this magical meritocracy, most roles would go to straight white people. Hmm...

These people don't know shit, can't put themselves in the shoes of LGBT people for shit, but want us to look at the situation from a purely "logical" view. And by logical, I actually mean a heterosexual view that has been the default since forever.

Were it up to this people, we'd still be stuck on the Hayes code and Disney gay coding all the bad guys. But it would be okay, because gays can play straight people and merit trumps EVERYTHING (which anyone who's ever been discriminated against can tell you that's BS).

Straight people want to ignore the history of films, the history of the LGBT community. They want to force feed us this "I don't see color/gender/sexuality" utopia where we supposedly are treated equally. But you have to leave your identity behind in order to do so.

Fuck no. It took me ages to come to terms with myself. No thanks to the media who gleefully vilified everything that was considered "gay". And then society fed on that, and it becomes a feedback loop we can never escape.

It's time to question our biases, people. Maybe the reason you don't is because you're actively benefiting from them, while everyone else is fucked just because your ass cannot concede "well Maybe we SHOULD let the first openly gay Disney film character be played by an actual gay man, because that would be a GOOD thing".

That's all you have to do, the bar couldn't be any goddamn lower. But instead you're too busy splitting hairs and arguing semantics.

This is why people don't reach across the room. Because as soon as we open our mouths, it's suddenly too incovinient for straight people and THEY want to tell US how things should be.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Sorry I'm gonna call bullshit on this. I have no problem with a gay character being potrayed by a gay person. One of my favorite characters on tv is Kurt Hummel from Glee.

And I'm sure there are certain people online that would want every roles to go to a straight white male. But for you to group everyone who doesn't necessarily agree with you isnt right. There are plenty of people who would be happy to see the first gay Disney character to be portrayed by a gay man. But just cause we're not picking up our pitchfork doesn't mean we want the opposite.

There has been plenty instances of gay/straight people portraying people of the opposite sexual orientation that was met with positive reception.

The stereotypical portrayal and lack of respect is what kills this for me.

I do think many more gay or queer actors should be hired though, but not with the premise that they should always play queer characters (nor vice versa).

Literally no argument defending Disney here or even waffling on this move is original. It was novel in 2008, maybe. It was tired by 2012. And now it's 2018 and we're still on this merry go around.

We don't believe you, it's been 10+ years of this bullshit and that's just on the internet. I'm sure the same things were said two decades ago, three, four. Whatever. The language of majority apathy never changes. You're not fooling anyone, except yourself. Get with the program or stay out of the way. Time has proven those are your only choices, everything else is bunk.

Soft words don't create change, only pitchforks do.

Shadownet said:

Sorry I'm gonna call bullshit on this. I have no problem with a gay character being potrayed by a gay person. One of my favorite characters on tv is Kurt Hummel from Glee.

And I'm sure there are certain people online that would want every roles to go to a straight white male. But for you to group everyone who doesn't necessarily agree with you isnt right. There are plenty of people who would be happy to see the first gay Disney character to be portrayed by a gay man. But just cause we're not picking up our pitchfork doesn't mean we want the opposite.

There has been plenty instances of gay/straight people portraying people of the opposite sexual orientation that was met with positive reception.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Just because it was met with positive reception doesn't mean it should be accepted or that it was an inherently good thing. "Positive reception", a good performance, isn't the be all-end all here. The fact that there are "plenty instances of gay/straight people portraying people of the opposite sexual orientation that was met with positive reception" doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't do better than that

Holy shit. What an idiotic decision.

It's not like there's a dearth of openly gay actors, such a weird decision on Disney's part.

Hassel said:

Why does the sexuality of the actor matter? They are acting right?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's hypocrisy. If they are going to show a gay character for the first time especially if Disney is trying to diversify their movies, at least hire real actors/actresses who represent those communities. It's no different then the real life adaptation of Ghost in the Shell. It's shameful.

While I do love Jack Whitehall and think he is hilarious, I do find this decision odd. And def think a gay person would suit better.

That being said, my wife totally thinks he is gay. Lol