Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 21, 2014 at 7:39 pm in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274848
TheWatcher
ParticipantI would love to see Archie đ or Tinkerbelle. But more than a thing, I’d love to catch up on Mulan
[adrotate group="5"]"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 21, 2014 at 6:31 pm in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274837TheWatcher
ParticipantAnd no one is forcing LGBT down the throats of anyone. If those parents donât approve, then they can stop watching. Their hatred should not dictate everything.
Its not hatred. Some people just don’t prefer certain things.
Do you want an exclusive black channel? An exclusive Asian channel? What if a white person just so happens to like something on âblackâ programing? Do we start separating by every possible âtypeâ of person?
I was actually going to bring this up đ For those who haven’t heard the news, I am black đ And just as many of you have expressed dissappointment in the lack of LGBT characters and role models in not just OUAT but the media in general, I feel the same way about how blacks are represented. We have no black characters in cast of OUAT who play a significant role. When we have gotten one, they go away. I read a lot of fantasy books, watch a lot of fantasy shows and horror and Sci fi and my race is horribly absent from a LOT of those genres. So if someone came along and said “Hey, we are making this brand new network called Black Magic ( đ ) thats programming is specifically for those African Americans out there who love fantasy, horror, Sci fi, whatever and want to see their kind apart of the action, who wants to see black heroes, and witches, and fairytales in action!” Would I be on board for that!? YES!!!! Would I think that’s discrimination? No. Because I know everyone isn’t interested in seeing movies with people they aren’t…familiar with. Should we make tv channels for every kind of “type”? Perhaps not, but its not like it would be an EVIL idea. There are plenty of networks with programming intended for specific races or groups (not that others can’t tune in of course). Oxygen, WeTV, and Lifetime is intended for women, Spike for men, BET and TvOne for African Americans,etc. Even LOGO is aimed at a LGBT audiences. So having a channel that would promote, celebrate, and encouraging young LGBT kids who are tired of not seeing themselves represented, to me, isn’t like its the end of the world or discrimination.
If a white person wants to watch something that comes on a black channel, let them. If a straight kid wants to watch something on a LGBT childrens channel, let them.And umâŚhistory lesson. America tried something like that once. It was called Jim Crow. Didnât go well.
Not what I mean. I’m just saying some people want to see films and shows about “themselves” whether they be black or gay or whatever. Everyone doesn’t want to see a movie about a black gay vampire love triangle with a trans werewolf and a bi wizard. Some do (well it does sound kind of interesting :P) Some people don’t want to see gay relationships and gay issues be the focal point in every movie or show. There’s nothing wrong with that. We all have prefrences in what we like to watch.
I am appalled how otherwise prejudices and negative attitudes towards queer people are maintained here.
I am sorry that you feel that way, but I think this conversation has actually been very civil. We may not agree on certain subjects but ultimately I don’t think any of us in here have a negative view or attitude towards queers here. Just differences of opinions.
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 21, 2014 at 5:03 pm in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274819TheWatcher
ParticipantIt seems like we are going in circles. let’s move on to something else (which RG’s comments reminded me of):
So kids who self identify (and there are MANY MANY MANY MANY who do ) shouldnât have role models or shouldnât be given heroes to look up to because of their sexuality
This is intetesting. They should. But all children (since Disney mostly markets to kids) aren’t LGBT and a LOT of kids wouldn’t want to see a movie about a lesbian ice queen or a gay prince as well as a lot of parents wouldn’t want their kids to watch said movie. This reminds me of something I read about a while back.
Idk if you all have heard of this show, but there was this show awhile back called She-Zow (I think) and the premise involved a young boy who (after stealing some super ring) becomes a female crime fighter whenever he powers up. Parents went ballistic because they felt it was pushing young boys to want to be women/trans (cause they would want to dress up as the female superhero that they main character becomes). One person suggested that having a channel with a LGBT programming for kids was better than just having shows like that on “normal” television. What do you guys think about that? Do you think LGBT programming should come on specific channels for kids who identify as such? Should we just mix it in with every other show on whatever network? Would mixing it be forcing LFBT down the throats of other children and parents who don’t approve of such?
OUAT has an older audience for the most part. I think we could handle Elsa being a lesbian even if it isn’t so in the Disney cartoon version. But making Elsa a full on lesbian in actuality of the film, I’m a bit iffy about, personally. Let’s discuss đ
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 21, 2014 at 4:23 pm in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274811TheWatcher
ParticipantBut this is the POINT. You donât have to prove someone is straight because everyone assumes that the person is straight because thatâs NORMAL. Gay is something that must be clued into because it is âotherâ
I’m not saying being straight is “normal”, this is 2014. I’m saying that if they want us to know a character is queer, why wouldn’t they SHOW it? If a character is gay, in order for us to KNOW that they have to clue us in to it or else it just is completely random. Idk. I guess its just a difference of opiniom
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 21, 2014 at 3:37 pm in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274807TheWatcher
ParticipantIn fiction, if you intend a main character to be homosexual, you have to give your audience hints that that character has a sexual preference for their own gender. In real life, that discovery may happen in private, therefore anyone that isnât the person may be unaware of it until the person comes out and says it. In fiction, there are no âclosed doorsâ. The audience is meant to see what is going through the main charactersâ heads otherwise the reveal that the character is homosexual, especially after the audience has gotten to know that character, comes completely out of left field..
 This. Let’s look at it from a different perspective. If you were writing a story, do you go out of your way to give proof to your readers that your main character is straight? Possibly not. But if you want them to know a particular character is gay, what do you do? You TELL them, you SHOW it, and unless its being hidden, rarely do you keep it just in “subtext”. In a real world setting, I get what you all are saying, but in fiction you have to be clear. So if a character isn’t shown to be queer, they probably aren’t. Unless the writer randomly says so *glares at JK Rowling*
Then hereâs a question. Why donât we assume all characters are queer until otherwise noted?
Well when you read Anne Rice, you just have to assume EVERYONE is atleast bi đ
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 21, 2014 at 1:09 pm in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274789TheWatcher
ParticipantQuestion: What does it take to see a character as straight then? It seems that even if a character, Regina, has had a string of hetero relationships, you all are saying she could STILL be queer, even with the whole her true love is Robin thing. Are we just to assume ALL characters could go either way? Just thinking.
What is wrong though, is to automatically assume and then even worse to insist, that a character is hetero, to make it the norm
I wouldn’t say it’s making it the norm, its just that if they want us to know the character is gay, they will usually make it clear. Or it seems to just pop out of nowhere, and while I’m not a lesbian, I’m sure that doesn’t just happen over night.
That is what is wrong: Queer ships have to be explained and defended just because, while hetero ships at best are questioned regarding a certain person but rarely just because
What do you mean by defended? If a queer ship, like SwanQueen, isn’t something that has actually happened, then those who ship it will have to defend like any other ship that hasn’t happened on the show like Ruby/Graham or Emma/August. For some, its not because its a LGBT ship, some people just don’t see romantic chemistry between certain people. For others, they just don’t see certain characters as being gay or lesbian until the show actually says they are. Has Regina been with a woman as far as we know? No. Is she attracted to women as far as we know? No. Can that change in the future if the writers choose to? Definetely. But for now, a lot of us dont see Regina as queer. I get what’s been said about just because we haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it isn’t possible and I agree, she COULD be. But, thats not definitive. She’s had Daniel, Graham, and now Robin. If they want us to ship Regina with Emma, they are doing it wrong.
we had to do justify queer ships as long as we can remember, regardless if there were tons of chemistry and closeness and flirting, we had to explain. Each and every time. We even have to justify way too often when a same gender relationship has become canon
Closeness, flirting, all that can be a matter of intepretation. Its entirely different than if the ship actually becomes canon. There was a scene in S3A where Hook said something about winning David over, and a lot of DaveyJone shippers loved that and added that to their reasons why hook and David might get together bid, but for me it was just Hook being old playful Hook. It wasn’t flirty in my eyes,but if Dvid and Hook had actually got together, that scene would have looked different in retrospect. Thats how I feel with SQ. A lot of “evidence” for it is just how one inteprets the relationship between those two.
Do hetero ships need much build up?
 Yes. If on the next OUAT ep we found out that Granny is dating Archie, wouldn’t we all be a tad surprised? You can’t just throw everyone together. You have to ease into it, regardless of sexuality.
there have been enough scenes between Regina and Emma that very well can be read in queer subtext as flirting and attraction, though in plain text they were merely read as tension. Besides some, what we like to call at times âeyesexâ there were things like, Regina giving Emma red apples (that was so subtext on many levels not just queer, but as well queer), them doing magic together. I very much agree in this point with Swanqueen shippers, if one of the two were a guy less people would question a possible romance, because it would be not the first time an antagonist and protagonist ending up us couple, even more so when sharing some interest, in this case they share love for Henry. People shipped Angel and Buffy, Spike and Buffy, so what is the difference?
A&E made it clear that they never wrote chemistry between Emma and Regina. That they were just two strong women who loved there son. That, for me, kills the SwanQueen ship. Even if Emma were a male, I honestly haven’t seen that much….romanticism? between Regina and Emma, and wouldn’t ship them. I didn’t even ship August and Emma and thought he was Henry’s father at one point so its not just because one person is male and the other is female. And I have no prob with the hero and villain being together. None at all that rocks đ
As one more reason to be taken serious than the other? Why should that be? We interpret every piece of fiction, actually everything even non-fiction, from our points of view, including our wishes, hopes, fears.
Yes. What A&E write trumps what we feel because they control the show. They’ve written alot I dont like but I can’t change it. You are right, we interpret everything from our own experiences (if only you knew my life, you’d understand why I LOVE regina) but that doesn’t make them what A&E are trying to do. And no matter how we feel, A&E are writing their story so if they say Elsa isn’t a lesbian (for example) in OUAT, who are we to argue? We’d have to deal with it. Our interpretations have no effect on the reality of the show.
It is then not just discussed as a matter of different interpretation but the queer view is frequently belittled as âover-interpretationâ â and that is highly annoying.
 This is a bit tricky. But I stand by what I said. If the character is intended to be queer, usually they will show us and “subtext” is SOMETIMES just a matter if how one is looking at the show.
Why do there have to be suggestions and build up? Tara is exploring queerness now, so what? Not even in real life there is always a (noticeable) process for some going on, they just start dating someone of the same gender
I wouldn’t say she is exploring, it just poofed and happened literally at the start of a new season, no build up, no hints, Tara just became a lesbian like she just changed clothes. Again, I don’t know much about that but I seriously doubt it is something that you just decide on at the drop of a dime. I think there is a process to it, maybe you question it, talk about it, etc, you don’t just start dating someone of ur gender just instantly if it isn’t something you were used to and True Blood could have given a few hints in that direction but they didn’t which is why a lot of people didn’t like it (well that, and the fact that almost every black main character on True Blood has been gay and/or but thats another issue). And yes it would have been more comprehensible for the audience if there had been hints. Steve Newlin cane out as gay (probably in that same season?) and there had been mild hints about it early on so I was able to hop on that more so than Tara as a lesbian.
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 21, 2014 at 2:55 am in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274755TheWatcher
Participant@Myril I was talking about Tara from the tv show True Blood, not Tara from Buffy (sorry, I’ll have a response later, I just wanted to check in before i went back to bed đ that’s how much I love this place)
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 21, 2014 at 1:08 am in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274752TheWatcher
ParticipantYes. Yes it is. Thatâs heteronormativity and itâs wrong. You shouldnât need âproofâ a character is gay. If a characterâs sexuality is not declared, it could go either way.
While I understand what you are saying Crystal, I have to agree with POM.
To create a (hopefully) parallel situation, when i meet new characters i assume they are good until I see evidence that my assumption may be wrong *looks at Blue Fairy* It’s the same concept for me with sexuality though I rarely ever have questioned that with characters. If the character is supposed to be intended as gay then usually a show will make that clear eventually or else when it does come out (heh heh I think I made a pun) it’ll seem like it came out of nowhere. Example: Tara in True Blood. I never had any inkling Tara was a lesbian (or even bi?) until poof, here she is in bed with another woman after about 3 or 4 seasons where they could have atleast had some build up to it or suggested it.
What I’m saying is that in real life, sure, just assuming a person’s sexuality could be wrong *shrug* But there are plenty of people I know that I have never seen in relationships of any kind and I’m still pretty sure they are straight until they tell me otherwise. In TV Land though? If the writers want us to know a character is gay then they would probably make that clear.
queer characters are often relegated to subtext in the first place so that evens it out a lot
Ehh, I slightly disagree. Look at SleepingWarrior, it was hinted and in subtext that there was in attraction before it became full on obvious, I get that. But on the other hand….(and this might get some backlash)… Look at SwanQueen.. A lot of people ship SwanQueen saying there has been plenty of subtext within the writing and acting when in reality there was never any intended subtext at all. So saying LGBT are just given in subtext could just be one’s opinion and interpretation of a character.
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICJune 20, 2014 at 2:40 pm in reply to: Out in Storybrooke: Who should have a Queery Tale romance? #274695TheWatcher
ParticipantTiny waist my foot! ha! xD Disney should really start breaking the mold in more ways than one. Not only having an openly LGBT princess, but like what about a plus size princess? Great way to teach girls that you don’t have to look like a twig to be beautiful. Or what about a princess who isn’t “beautiful” in conventional standards. Disney has the power to speak to a lot of young girls with the princess franchise. Time to start being a little different.
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICTheWatcher
ParticipantI wonder if the actresses will actually be there. Remember they announced Jafar would appear in Wonderland at Comic Con and then brought out Naveen Andrews to join the panel. Thatd be kinda cool
"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsisâs Glasses , Arielâs Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Panâs Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGIC -
AuthorPosts