If anything becomes remotely popular in the media, be it a film, television show, or comic book, it’ll attract the social justice crowd who will begin to pick it apart to find something to be angry about.
Case in point, feminists were mad at The Mandalorian for not having enough female characters in speaking roles.
And speaking of Star Wars — tis’ the season with the franchise once again dominating everything from games to the silver screen — executive producer J.J. Abrahms is making it clear that he’s about to introduce Star Wars’s first openly LGBT character into the universe according to Variety:
“And in the case of the LGBTQ community, it was important to me that people who go to see this movie feel that they’re being represented in the film,” Abrams said.
So without spoiling the film, Variety asked, does that mean there will be a queer character in “The Rise of Skywalker”?
“I will say I’m giving away nothing about what happens in the movie,” Abrams replied with a smile. “But I did just say what I just said.”
The question is…why?
As a “live free” kind of guy, people are going to inevitably ask why I care whether or not a gay or lesbian couple is featured within a movie.
The brutal truth is one that we’re typically not allowed to discuss. Homosexuality is sexuality that doesn’t sit comfortably with a lot of people, especially in a family setting. It’s not because people are homophobic and hateful, but if we’re looking at things in a biological sense, homosexuality is an odd thing to see.
The reason is that straight people don’t have the compulsion to be gay and fundamentally don’t vibe with it. It’s not, as some activists believe, a matter of education. It just doesn’t sit right from the perspective of many people whose urges are the natural heterosexuality our species is programmed with. It’s not my place to judge people being for being gay if that’s the way they want to live, and as a libertarian, it’s my personal policy that I’m not your keeper, but frankly, seeing it both on TV and in real life don’t sit right. I tend to avert my gaze or change the channel.
And I’m not alone in this. I live in a country of very high tolerance where most may not approve of something but don’t hate someone for their choices. We’d rather it not be shoved in our faces or the faces of our children. Whether you think it’s a sin or just unsettling, it’s not something many of us would like our children to be forced to bear witness to.
On top of that, the vast majority of people in this nation are heterosexual by a whopping 99.7 percent. Only 1.3 percent of Americans actually identify as being gay or lesbian, with 3.3 percent claiming to be bisexual. That’s an awfully small fraction.
This is why, in the case of a family film like Star Wars, many people roll their eyes when they begin to hear about LGBT “representation.” It means nothing and, in fact, usually ends up feeling shoehorned and forced in. It serves no purpose to the plot and the only people enjoying it are a tiny minuscule fraction of the audience who, in truth, would most likely enjoy the movie without that scene regardless.
And here enters the annoyance and anger.
Activists believe that anger with the LGBT community occurs because of hatred toward gays and lesbians simply existing, but I can tell you from experience that it’s not true. Even Christians who openly think homosexuality is a sin don’t hate gays and lesbians and even have them as friends. I’m one of those Christians.
The anger comes into play when this thing that doesn’t sit right is forced in our faces, and not only that, we’re tasked with acting like this is the greatest thing ever and our society is making huge leaps forward by consuming a product we think tastes bad in the first place. We’re not allowed to simply say “I don’t agree with this and I’d rather not see it.” We have to celebrate it or face social consequences from societal tyrants who know how to incite a raging mob.
Next thing you know, we have destroyed lives, an online war, and mounting hatred toward one another, all because we absolutely had to have a character in a family movie that was homosexual. What purpose is this character serving? If the idea is to normalize homosexuality, then you’ve done the opposite.
This isn’t to say that LGBT characters don’t have their place. If they serve the plot then they become good characters. Renly Baratheon’s character in Game of Thrones was homosexual and it made for a plot point in the show. Damien from Mean Girls was a hilarious character that brought an aspect to the film that would have been far less fun without it.
If the plot calls for a gay character, then by all means, but most of the time, it doesn’t. It just makes for bad cinema for people who aren’t gay and don’t agree with the lifestyle.
We don’t NEED LGBT characters in films unless the plot needs it and the character fits. If not, it’s just a publicity stunt meant to score cheap points to placate angry activists. This is called “gaybaiting,” and many people in the LGBT community aren’t a big fan of that either.