356
u/DarthArtero 6d ago
I read that three times and I still have no idea what they're trying to say.
Are they saying that writers who use LGBTQ+ characters lack empathy? That's the part I can't wrap my brain around.
The same writers also actively refuse to understand racist transphobic incel chuds??
227
u/BitOBear 6d ago
You can sum it up with one sentiment: "I know you are but what am I"
The longer translation is:
I'm not the one obsessed with gay and trans people and keeping them out of literature you're the one obsessed with putting them in and if you would just be un-obsessed like I'm not at all obsessed, then none of us would be obsessed because there would only be straight people in the books and movies.
If these woke writers would just understand that their entire audience is entirely straight and only wants to hear about straight things then we wouldn't have to have this conversation.
60
u/Suitable-Pride9589 5d ago
I felt there was some projection going on with this one. "Hypergay" this guy is processing in real time, hopefully has irl support.
52
u/a3wagner 5d ago
Hypergay
Sigh... okay everyone, we have to add another letter.
26
u/seaQueue 5d ago
Sign me up for the hypergay agenda, I could use a good hyperbrunch with bottomless hypermimosas this weekend
14
11
u/PixelPuzzler 5d ago
Hypergay hyperspace hypercommunism
5
u/seaQueue 5d ago
Fully automated hyperluxury hypergay hyperspace hypercommunism
1
u/Thyme4LandBees 4d ago
Fully hyper-automated hyperluxury hypergay hyperspace hypercommunism.
The word hyper has lost all meaning.
9
2
21
u/Vyzantinist 5d ago
If these woke writers would just understand that their entire audience is entirely straight and only wants to hear about straight things then we wouldn't have to have this conversation.
This is a commonly overlooked component of their grievance. They think conservative chuds are the "core audience" or "real fans" of an IP. It's part of their "silent majority" delusion where they believe they're the default.
I see this most egregiously in the Warhammer 40k community, where the reactionary element of the fandom are a loud minority who genuinely believe 90%+ of the community is just like them. They have a conniption fit every time a character is shown or described as anything other than a straight, white, male and their rhetoric turns to "why would Games Workshop hate their fans so???" They fundamentally cannot puzzle out the company has not crashed and burned, and diversity representation is only growing, because there are more people in the community, than them, who are happy with such things or simply do not care.
7
u/BitOBear 5d ago
Will Warhammer 40K is very appealing the masculine modern fantasy. Real men with real guns fighting real wars forever because rah.
I've never liked the grim dark for grim dark's sake fantasy worlds. It has always wreaked of some corner case of quote real masculinity quote. Not just Warhammer 40K but the entire subgenre.
This is also why it's terrible to try to play D&D or other role-playing games when one of the characters wants to be "the loner" . The dark and brooding character that's truly the main character even if no one else knows they're really the main character.
t's actually why I never had trouble understanding the concept of toxic masculinity. I watched it Express itself in statistics on a character sheet or measure the little distances between the dolls far too many times since I started playing these games in 1977.
And Lord save us from the anime cat girl characters "that only a true man can dominate" being played by a man child named Francis who can only dominate a cat girl by controlling her character sheet,
So with those as your gatekeepers and your loudest and largest paying demographic it's easy to overlook the tens of dozens of other demographics that cumulative reform the actual market.
Turns out there is no core demographic if your game doesn't blow donkey balls.
4
u/Vyzantinist 5d ago
This is also why it's terrible to try to play D&D or other role-playing games when one of the characters wants to be "the loner" . The dark and brooding character that's truly the main character even if no one else knows they're really the main character.
Hahahaha you just brought up some memories of when I was DM for my gaming group back in the day. Thanks for the snort-laugh!
4
u/BitOBear 5d ago
The other killer trope was that we had one guy who would wander in and out of our group who would join the game and then refuse to play the main conceit of the campaign.
For instance we play a campaign where the main characters find themselves drawn to each other from across the globe and this guy, this terrible player dude, bringing the entire time, talks about how he's not going. Like he wants to have an entire separate plot line where he was the smart one who didn't go or whatever.
I never understood why it kept letting that guy come back into any games. He just thought it was the cleverest possible thing to subvert the game.
You could be playing a dragon slayer campaign and his character just doesn't believe in dragons or something.
1
u/Vyzantinist 5d ago
I was lucky not to have railroaders like that. If someone tried to go "off script" I'd spank them back on track. See, my leverage was literally no one else in our social milieu could be bothered to DM - they wanted to show off their edgy, brooding, outcast characters xD
7
u/BitOBear 5d ago
It wasn't even about railroading. He was trying to subvert the inciting incident.
Literally the DM says "each of you has woken up with a strange ability or unexpected strength and you feel this urge, this compulsion to converge on St petersburg."
"Well I'm not going to go and you can't make me."
It's like refusing to go to the tavern where everybody is supposed to meet for the first time because my character doesn't drink or something.
DM: This is going to be a mystery and heist taking place on an interstellar Cruise ship. ... GRINNING TOOL: Well I'm going to stay at home because my character hates cruise ships and vacationing.
There was no railroad in the campaign, he was literally trying to fort the framing device and demanding that we keep cutting away to his character puttering around the house or whatever.
2
u/Vyzantinist 5d ago edited 5d ago
Lol I'd just ask them why they're playing if they're gonna be that way?
3
u/BitOBear 5d ago
You and me both. Like I said I had no idea why he kept getting invited back. He was a nice enough guy but he just grinned the entire time he was trying to submarine the game. I wasn't the person in charge of the group so it wasn't like I had the ability to veto his presence.
3
u/BitOBear 5d ago
Were you ever in a group where at least half the group wanted to be the loner and they would just spend the sessions trying to out-brood each other?
2
u/Vyzantinist 5d ago
Never near half, thankfully, haha but I did meet a few with cookie cutter character types; trench coats, shades at night, names like "Katana", mysterious dark past and no friends lol. It was the very early 00s, as well, so everything had to be edgy.
2
u/NightofTheLivingZed 5d ago
The Matrix was still wildly popular then. I wanted a trenchcoat so bad but my grandparents were like, "them columbine shooters wore those things. You're not getting one."
I'm glad I didn't because stoner, skater, punk hair, and an unbuttoned button-up and wife beater tank top combo made me popular... Lol
14
5
u/AttitudeAndEffort2 5d ago
"Now if you'll excuse me, i have some transgender porn i have to go watch"
https://lawsuit.org/general-law/republicans-have-an-obsession-with-transgender-pornography/
5
u/Revegelance 5d ago
Or, if you would just give me what I want, I wouldn't have to scream all the time.
4
3
217
u/Sedu 6d ago
The message is “If you write queer characters you’re the true bigot, because you are incapable of anything else.” It’s just mindless stupidity, insisting that anything but stories about white men getting women is bad.
22
u/yourfriendthebadger 5d ago
Once the author Orson Scott Card said exactly this to me, and I will never read his books again.
20
u/ZenDruid_8675309 5d ago
Which is ironic given all the homoerotic subtext in the book “Ender’s Game”.
8
u/KiijaIsis 5d ago
Yeah, as soon as his real face started showing I couldn’t read any more of his books. I do have my originally bought copy of Enders Game still from 25+ years ago because it was so impactful for me.
62
u/Bake_My_Beans 6d ago
Translation:
LGBTQ characters are often written two dimensionally because the writers mistakenly believe that a character's queerness is inherently compelling enough to make up for shortcomings elsewhere in their characterisation. Audiences consequently dislike these characters and push back, not out of bigotry but out of distaste for the poor writing of these characters. Authors of these characters lack empathy because they are unable to empathize with audiences that push back on these characters. These authors fail to understand the failures of their character writing and instead place the blame on social forces like racism, sexism and transphobia.
I mostly disagree with this take, I am simply trying to clarify what I believe OOP was trying to convey. The only part I partially agree with is the first sentence, but that is typically in the case of straight/cis/white/male authors writing queer/trans/POC/female characters and failing due to a lack of understanding in regards to the characters they're writing. It's also something that you see from many amateur writers but that's simply because their writing has not developed yet. Neither case is the type of character the bigots usually point to though.
17
u/TheJungLife 5d ago
It's definitely interesting to flip it around and ask why, then, isn't the pushback on flat straight characters focused on their straightness?
Imagine a bad Uncharted game came out and this version of Nathan Drake was flat and uncompelling. Then critics came out of the woodworks claiming that if the writers/developers had only not assumed his straightness would be so compelling, they could have written him as a more multidimensional character.
Edit: Also, they're usually complaining before the game even comes out, so before the writing is even available.
3
u/MichaelDeucalion 5d ago
Not to give the post any benefit of the doubt, but I do think straight characters who's whole personality revolves around flirting or pursuing the opposite sex are generally not well received?
3
2
u/krossoverking 5d ago
Johnny Bravo is this but everyone loves him.
3
1
u/Bake_My_Beans 5d ago
I honestly can't think of one off the top of my head? The only ones that come to mind are Stirling Archer and Barny Stinson but both characters were pretty well received at the peak of their series' popularity
1
u/TrueCrimeSP_2020 4d ago
James Bond
2
u/Bake_My_Beans 1d ago
I wouldn't exactly call one of the most iconic characters in fiction and one of the longest running film franchises "not well received". Although there's a significant and vocal minority of people that detract the character and his writing for the overt misogyny (and at times racism) of the character and his stories, he is still well received by wide audiences and admired/emulated by many men today.
28
u/VinnieHa 6d ago
I agree this is what they think they mean, but the argument falls apart when they ignore that writing is just generally bad now across the board and hyper focus on just the ones with women or LGBTQ+ etc.
31
u/saintalbanberg 5d ago
Two dimensional characters who look like (an idealized version of) me make it easy to insert myself into their lack of characterization. Two dimensional characters that look like people who I don't like are just badly written, why would I ever want to imagine myself in their position? It reminds me of how people have explained the popularity of Donald Trump's word salad. It is acceptable that he isn't saying anything because he says just enough to let his adherents insert their own ideas and opinions in the gaps
13
u/Immediate-Season-293 5d ago
Writing was always mostly bad across the board, as well as music, plays, paintings, etc etc etc. This isn't new. That there is so much of it available instantly online is the only part that is new(ish).
Most people who claim to be authors/screenwriters/etc don't have the skills to write three dimensional characters, of any stripe, including their own demographic. Empathy or lack thereof cannot be assumed, because they don't have the skills to write themselves out of a prison made of wet toilet paper.
This is a huge part of why there are so many threads on r/fantasy and r/scifi (and r/metalcore and r/flashlights and r/ergomechkeyboards) asking for recommendations. This is putting aside everything to do with OOP's nonsensical statement - 90% of everything is garbage, most people would like to avoid the garbage, and some people come to reddit to look for ways to avoid that garbage. OOP might even have a legitimate complaint about whatever he was reading - without knowing the source material, it's very possible he was reading something with two dimensional characters or other bad writing, and that he has foolishly misplaced the blame for the poor writing and characterization.
That said, OOP's first mistaken assumption is that all writers want to write for mass audiences. There have been an increasing number of writers that are writing for their fans, or people like them, or some other particular group. I don't see it as a different thing when a writer targets a YA audience, or white women, vs when a writer targets gay men, or whatever.
While it would do all of us some good to read stories that aren't written for us, and attempt to empathize with the characters and/or story, a lot of e.g. gay/trans/lesbian authors (among others, but those are who the OOP was talking about) aren't interested in courting the broader public.
15
u/lowpass 5d ago
writing is just generally bad now across the board
This is probably just survivorship bias. You don't remember the garbage of yesteryear. It remains to be seen what works of today will be regarded as good 10, 20, 50 years hence.
2
u/VinnieHa 5d ago
I get what you mean, but I would say the standard of writing is generally lower in mass media even if there are still amazing shows and amazing writing on display.
Everything has become samey and some very bad writers (Abrams, Lindelof, Goyer) have all failed upwards and influenced the writing of those that came after in a way that is not good imo.
5
u/salanaland 5d ago
This is definitely survivorship bias! If you can find a secondhand bookstore, go in and look for older paperbacks written by authors you've never heard of. See how bad their writing is. See how many of them wrote multiple books.
Now, copy editing has become much worse lately, because publishers don't want to pay humans to do it.
3
u/gentlemandemon5 5d ago
Not to mention mention we live in an era with so much more media: TV, film, podcast, theater, novels, essays, and so much more. There's so many people doing creative work, and a lot of it will be crap.
12
u/SageWindu 5d ago
The thing that I noticed is that those guys think the writing is bad because of the so-called "WokeTM" elements rather than despite them.
I like to make the challenge where if the alleged "WokeTM" parts were removed and nothing else, would the product actually be improved?
12
u/Briloop86 6d ago
I think your spot on in your interpretation. I also tend to think their is merit in the argument, just not as much as the op intended. Some writers make orientation or gender identity central to the character to the detriment of really developing them. Others are bang on and create richer, realer, and more rewarding narratives because of it.
Bad writers use gender and orientation as a crutch. Good writers make compelling characters - with identity taking a back seat to essence.
21
u/Nuka-Crapola 6d ago
Yeah, it’s not like tokenism, Flanderization, etc. aren’t things that happen to “woke” characters… it’s just that people like OOP conflate cause and effect. Bad writers write bad characters, not because of whatever trait(s) they’ve assigned those characters, but because they’re bad writers. All that’s changed is that bad writers are now more likely to write characters from backgrounds they and/or the reader aren’t familiar with, which makes it harder to fill in the blanks and try to see depth in the character.
2
u/BlindedByNewLight 5d ago
Honestly, it's not even just straight writers that fail to write compelling diverse characters. HUMANS fail to write diverse characters, in the majority. And often even if a character IS compelling to start...they get flanderized almost immediately.
My best example is Captain Jack Harkness on Doctor Who/Torchwood. He's initially created as "Omni-sexual". This was pivoted almost immediately into 99.9% gay male relationships exclusively. That entire series was almost exclusively "ok..but the twist is..they're gay in this episode."
Doctor Who in particular has had this issue multiple times even.
"Hi, I'm the Doctor's companion Bill. I'm gay!" Was practically a verbatim quote.
Ok...I don't care..write better stories!
50
u/KeyAgileC 6d ago
Yes, they lack empathy, because they can't understand what gamers enjoy, which is exclusively big titty anime girls. See, they're so blinded by their social issues, they can't see that if they go woke they go broke because I won't buy it. In conclusion, they're lacking empathy for other people, because they're thinking of people other than me.
7
u/tevs__ 6d ago
They're saying that writers make a person's sexuality their identity, and that they find that makes for 1-dimensional characters - a person is more than their sexuality, and we should be interested in a character for those reasons, and not their sexuality. They're also saying that when writers do that, because they are displaying a shallow view of that character, it's not empathetic to that sexuality.
I tend to disagree, I think they are probably stopping looking at character development once they see the characters sexuality in a way that they do not do when the character is hetero. That second bit is just trying to justify that?
14
u/Wismuth_Salix 5d ago
It means “I stopped paying attention and started screaming the second I found out that a character was LGBTQ, so obviously it is their only character trait.”
They hyperfocus on that one aspect, then claim the character has no other aspects of note.
6
u/nowTHATSakatana1999 5d ago
They don’t even have to actually be LGBT, they just have to effectively look like they could be.
1
u/krossoverking 5d ago
This is a more succinct way to say what my comment did. Well put. Token characters absolutely are a thing, but these people don't seem to think a non white man can ever not be a token.
8
u/joeph1sh 5d ago
OOP is basically saying "I don't see color" but making it about queer people.
They get disinterested when stories have queer characters, but they are saying that is happening because the writers that address queerness don't have anything worthwhile to say. Regardless of the quality of the writing, it will break OOPs engagement because they will view it as a debate and get defensive rather than hearing what the writer is addressing through their queer characters. Basically he is saying you can have queer characters but don't have them talk about being queer in meaningful ways or ways that challenge the traditional worldview.
And that is what a Token character actually is. One who is there to show that they are cool actually with their place in society. They are seen but not heard when it comes to important things and they validate the main characters.
2
u/krossoverking 5d ago
I think they are trying to say that writers think lgbt makes characters compelling and add nothing else of value to actually make them compelling and then are mad when people don't like LGBT characters.
I think sometimes something akin to this does happen, but more often than not, guys like this cry about LGBT characters (or minorities) existing before they have a chance to even find out if the characters are good or not because they see everything through the lens of a culture war.
If it was actually about character, they'd critique that instead of caring about their sexuality or gender identity.
3
u/A_norny_mousse 6d ago
Same here. What point are they trying to make? Who are they accusing or defending?
Just a confused reddit rant. It probably sounded unambiguous in their head. And tbf, that has happened to me and most of us.
1
u/MythologicalRiddle 3d ago
They're saying that gay and trans characters are put in stories because writers think that simply being gay or trans is interesting. Gay and trans characters aren't interesting because being a complex, interesting character is only possible if the person is a straight, cis, White guy. Writers think they're being inclusive for writing about people other than straight, cis, White guys but actually they're being discriminatory because they're not thinking about all them straight, cis White guys who need more representation in culture because they're the only ones who buy novels/movies/video games.
1
u/the_calibre_cat Gets it right 3d ago edited 3d ago
they're basically just describing conservatives being conservative, and claiming that all the horrible lib game developers who have the temerity to write stories that include a black woman or a gay man approach the world in the same way that... all... conservatives... do.
to be clear: the notion that one can write a gay character or a black woman into a work FOR the pure purpose of having a gay man or a black woman in a work is real, diversity for diversity's sake is real, and it IS bad - but it's a STRETCH to say that this is all, or even MOST works that feature these characters. But, the right-wing antipathy towards ANY inclusion at all is definitely guilty of overstating this problem - to the extent that you'll find them raging at even historical dramas that TELL these stories that ACTUALLY FUCKING HAPPENED.
Like, there is credible evidence that Alexander the Great had homosexual proclivities, which weren't even that uncommon in Ancient Greece at the time, but that conflicts with their fetishized, macho masculine rendition of Western history, so they rage at it. There's credible evidence that Moe Berg was bisexual. It's a documented historical fucking fact that Katherine Johnson did officer work at NASA during the Apollo program in the 1960s, and these idiots rage at all of these things, which are rooted in historical evidence, not some writer's whims.
If they can't abide that, their "oh i just object to diversity for diversity's sake" "argument" falls apart. They don't object to "diversity for diversity's sake", they object to diversity. They want straight white men to be the main character, and anyone who doesn't meet that rigid, narrow identity must work doubly or triply as hard to get the gig or to belong - and even then, their honest identity will either be overwritten (the "gay" part of a gay man will be ignored and unmentioned) or subordinated ("yeah, she's black, but one of the good ones").
this is, I should add, conservative 101. they're very good at doing evil with some pizzazz. those hugo boss uniforms are sharp, those eagles look nice on buildings and hats - but they're pretty bad at art that actually SPEAKS to people's souls.
113
u/BiggestShep 6d ago
Hilariously, I would consider this an excellent critique of corporations partaking in rainbow capitalism if I knew it was aimed at them, and not the amorphous boogeyman called 'the Left.'
44
u/map-staring-expert 5d ago
capitalists managing to convince people that the corporate status quo is somehow leftist is one of the greatest tricks they've ever pulled off
5
u/venetian_ftaires 5d ago
It all comes down to who "they" is meant to be referring to, which this post doesn't make very clear.
7
u/BiggestShep 5d ago
It doesn't state them outright, but I do think who "they" refers to is fairly self-evident from the language used, which is why I said as such.
49
34
u/BowsettesBottomBitch 6d ago
Didn't you know? Putting queer/POC characters in any media property for any reason at all makes you the real bigot!
47
u/ItsChloeTaylor 6d ago
as an intersex weirdo, amab, determined to be intersex, than went m(i)tf with the medical evidence to back it, and the scientific and historical reasearch to prove it very much does happen, and always has... This is this is the absolute dogshit stupidest thing ever read in weeks. I knew who i was from a very young age, despite growing up deep in the bible belt and not even knowing what a trans person was until i was 20.. i prayed and begged to god every night, every. single. night. that id wake up in the right body. i was traumatized by the fear of damnation because i knew i was queer and quEeRs gO tO HeLL. I believed for a while that god created me just to suffer and go to hell. it was deeply traumatic. lmfao and these fucking actual demons say its us without empathy simply because we choose not to conform to their miserable lies. they can go to hell for all i care, but i wont be.
10
u/sheeponmeth_ 5d ago
I'm really sorry to hear you were so alienated as a child, and by your own body, no less. Your comment caught my eye with the "m(i)tf" (my AuDHD brain snaps to brackets and parentheses). I assume the "(i)" part pertains to intersex, but I'm finding myself too ignorant to make sense of it. If it's something you're comfortable explaining, would you mind clarifying that as well as the relationship (not necessarily yours specifically) between intersex and trans? My only understanding of that correlation is when someone is born with both reproductive organs and a surgical choice is made on their behalf. Again, I'm not asking you to share anything you aren't comfortable with sharing.
I hope you've found peace and acceptance between your body, past, and present.
5
u/ItsChloeTaylor 5d ago
im intersex because my body doesnt respond well to the miniscule ammounts of testosterone i produce naturally (my levels prior to hrt were as low as the 40s (even 100 is considered low) and i had about the same levels of estrogen. I always experienced pretty major dysphoria as well and found that my body and mind responded much better to estrogen, so I transitioned to f. Nobody knew i was intersex until i went to see a doc as to why i always felt like shit, and would be periodically sick, and found out then. a year or so later id learn that being trans is nothing more than coming to terms with my body being not what I am inside and doing something about it. I've been alot happier since, my mind doesnt fight against my soul as it once had
m(i)tf = male (but actually intersex) to female
4
u/sheeponmeth_ 5d ago
Ah, I see. I'm glad that you were able to find your personal authenticity. Thank you for the explanation.
2
23
u/GarageQueen 6d ago
The entire 2nd paragraph is chef's kiss.
I feel like this is from a review of "The Acolyte." That show was a hot fucking mess, but it wasn't bad because of the "Lesbian Space Witches." It was bad because of the writing. And the acting. And the directing. And the plot.....
8
4
u/armadachamp 5d ago
The Acolyte had a great premise, and I think the story would've been super interesting with a few small changes and more setup for the resolution. It wasn't Andor, but it was still enjoyable enough for me to watch the whole thing. But my god, the troglodytes who would not shut up about it from even before the pilot had aired have made me never want to talk about it again.
2
u/GarageQueen 5d ago
The Acolyte had a great premise, and I think the story would've been super interesting with a few small changes and more setup for the resolution.
100% agree. The whole "Rashomon" storytelling conceit ended up hurting the show more than helping it. (I mean, if you're going to copy Kurosawa you better have your shit together). The Space Witches weren't adequately fleshed out. Qimir's personality was all over the damn place. (He's goofy! He's evil! He's pensive Thirst Bait!) Master Sol's sudden obsession with the twins was weird... and a bit creepy tbh.
I wish they had spent more time just fleshing out the world of the Force-wielding space witches: how do they view the Force? How is it the same as the Jedi? How is it different? Why did the Jedi seem to instantly view them as a threat?
All that being said, we seem to agree that the show's shortcomings were not because the protagonist was female, or that her parents were lesbians. But try telling that to the internet choads.
14
u/StillLearning12358 5d ago
This reads like a paper that a college kid has to write when they are told they need 1 page, but they only have 1 paragraph worth of info. Just filler and nonsense
6
u/buttery_nurple 5d ago
If their issue with these characters was only the writing, they would only complain about the writing.
9
u/LFK1236 5d ago
This completely sounded like a criticism of right-wing fear-mongering and phobias at first. I'm impressed they typed out all that and didn't at any point stop to think about what they were typing.
2
u/sheeponmeth_ 5d ago
As much as I disagree with the sentiment, I'm kind of impressed that this one actually took the time to try and explain something. It wasn't just name calling and hate, there was some thought there. There's hope for this one.
4
u/Inevitable-Map-2979 5d ago
As someone who works in the film/TV industry, I do think the thoughts here have some validity.
There is the meaningless defense that pops up all the time: "We just want good stories". It does have a very dog whistle feel to it, but let me defend it a little.
Writing is really hard and a lot of it especially in screenwriting has been compared to more mechanical crafts like carpentry. Tools just happen to be words. Information has shapes and while we cant articulate it, we know when the story "feels" right. For a good writer two skills of extreme importance are creating/sustaining tension (stakes and compelling conflict) and having a sharp understanding of "theme" (what is the key question and a point)
Now, maybe due to lack of experience and time, so much of narrative media is made by people who havent properly developed these skills. They are not doing the grunt work of forming a story.
I want to be emphasize that having a hold of writers craft makes you a passable writer, but having something to say is what actually makes you a worthwhile writer. The two extremes are 1. A trivial story told well 2. An important story told badly. Reasonable minds can differ, but 9/10 times I choose the first.
Where this gets frustrating is when writers see themselves primarilly as social activists. Where the point of everything they do is some kind of messaging and the actual craft of writing is a haphazardly recognized means to an end. Intentions may be good, but at worst this squanders a rare opportunity to present someone or something in a compelling way. And then when the end product doesn't work, the discourse is framed as a moral battle where character judgments are made of the creators and the viewers. Production and viewing of content just becomes a way of procuring moral capital.
Buuuuut all of this is pretty impractical. Fact is that a lot of inane nonsense is produced, but it is/was easier to recognize it just as crap when it was just white cishet characters on screen. Now, when the inane nonsense has diversity, a higher standard is implemented where something bad becomes a political affront and anything less than "brilliant" is just "woke gone mad". That's not to say that that "brilliant" is safe from this kind of complaining. But for the vast majority, if the craft of storytelling and a strong subject meet, they will see it as good.
I hope one day we can look at a piece of media of any subject and with any kind of character and just declare it as shit with no need to elaborate.
3
u/Rakanadyo 5d ago
Oddly, I think their first two sentences could be valid, but not for the reasons they think they are.
Obviously they're imagining this evil, sinister cabal of liberals who are putting chemicals in the media to make characters gay. But on the opposite end of the spectrum, I do think there are a lot of corporations who fall into "rainbow capitalism" and have a problem of writing a character and saying "This character is gay. That's their one character trait, that'll make 'the gays' like it, right?"
This isn't unique to LGBT, POC, and so forth characters of course. And it certainly isn't as wide-spread as the OOP thinks, since they're likely the "two genders: male and political, two sexualities: straight and political, etc." type. But every now and then you do get a character who seems like a blatant token, or their other character traits get sacrificed to emphasize their sexuality or race or whatever, and their presence feels more offensive than if they just didn't include them at all.
3
4
u/FreebasingStardewV 5d ago
Wow. That second paragraph. It's like if you asked ChatGPT to make a selfawarewolves post, read the result, then asked it to be more selfawarewolves.
2
u/translove228 5d ago
This comment has the air of someone who sniffs his own farts, and they all smell like day old Taco Bell farts.
2
1
u/BobbleBobble 5d ago
But like who is "they?" They've strawmanned this excellent image of a hypergay author who only writes two dimensional hypergay characters, but I suspect they'd struggle to make even one serious author who fits that description
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
Reply to this message with one of the following or your post will be removed for failing to comply with rule 4:
1) How the person in your post unknowingly describes themselves
2) How the person in your post says something about someone else that actually applies to them.
3) How the person in your post accurately describes something when trying to mock or denigrate it.
If your post consists of Reddit content, please note: If you haven't redacted usernames (or not done it thoroughly enough) than delete and repost. If the content comes from Conservative, or other toxic right-wing subs, then delete it and DO NOT repost! We're sick of that shit.
Thanks!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.