Support NeoGAF

[Billbofet]

Agree with WoJ above. As a parent, I don't hide stuff like this from my children, and I think it is ultimately good for this exposure over time. What turned me off, to what already looks like a mediocre movie, is all the rage marketing on both sides. Chris Evan's platitudes and fake moral outrage to support Disney as well as the pearl clutching thinking this is the worst thing you can do to your child. While I care very little either way, it's just enough to make me not what to take time and pay to see more weak product from Disney. I hate when a ridiculous movie about a rocket man fighting space monsters has to be taking sides in this exhausting culture war.

 

[RoboFu]

"Homosexuality is fine, but don't talk about it guys. You don't want your kids to become gay, do you?"

...and you guys seriously wonder why people don't react well to these kinds of comments.

That’s the dumbest take. No one thinks their kids are going be turned gay. Confused != turning gay.

Do you have children?

 

[Azurro]

"Homosexuality is fine, but don't talk about it guys. You don't want your kids to become gay, do you?"

...and you guys seriously wonder why people don't react well to these kinds of comments.

You don't have to react so defensively, nobody said to ban homosexual content. However, given that every generation, the proportion of LGB+ kids doubles and we are at 20% of new kids turning LGBT, it shows that at the very least research what role the environment is playing in shaping sexual identities of children. If it's content aimed at children, then yeah, it doesn't have a place there.

That's why people are having drag queen shows for children and teachers asking children about their masturbation habits, seeing this grooming is at the very least, concerning.

 

[funkygunther]

That’s the dumbest take. No one thinks their kids are going be turned gay. Confused != turning gay.

Do you have children?

no-one?

Bullshit. Kids and media every five minutes changing what gender they are and who they sexually attracted to.

 

[Crayon]

the proportion of LGB+ kids doubles and we are at 20% of new kids turning LGBT, it shows

That though.... It's kinda different. We do have tons of girls identifying as trans/nb over the last decade that seem to be doing it as a fad. Some are getting on hormones and that's serious, but many more just declare it and do something weird with their hair because they're teenagers. (Which I'm fine with as long as kids are not allowed to walk all over their teachers and parents because everyone is afraid of being called a bigot.)

There aren't actually more same-sex attracted people over time. Over the period shown on that chart, things changed a lot in regards of gay acceptance. Roll it back 25 years and being gay was kinda like some people still want it to be: hidden. Even people who knew they were perfectly harmless would rather they "do that in their own home".

So that chart is probably reflecting people coming out more and more, I would imagine till about when marriage was finally legalized. I would bet money that period of rise is in same-sex attracted people, while you'd find the most recent jump to made up of people identifying as trans/nb.

Bottom line, I think those numbers are misleading. Gay rights over decades and the last several years of gender ideology are not the same thing and lumping them together makes for faulty bar graphs.

 

[strange headache]

Meh, sometimes it's okay to just let other people be wrong.

That’s the dumbest take. No one thinks their kids are going be turned gay. Confused != turning gay.

The guy I quoted certainly does and so do many other had you actually bothered to read the thread.

You don't have to react so defensively, nobody said to ban homosexual content.

I'm merely highlighting the absurdity of saying "homosexuals are fine" while trying to make it a taboo with the same breath.
Obviously you don't think homosexuals are fine if they can't be present in media and you feel the need to keep their existence a secret for your kids.

Don't f*cking bullsh*t us.
We get it, you don't like homos, but your too damn coward to say it right out.

 

[RoboFu]

The guy I quoted certainly does and so do many other had you actually bothered to read the thread.



I'm merely highlighting the absurdity of saying "homosexuals are fine" while trying to make it a taboo with the same breath.
Obviously you don't think homosexuals are fine if they can't be present in media and you feel the need to keep their existence a secret for your kids.

Don't f*cking bullsh*t us.
We get it, you don't like homos, but your too damn coward to say it right out.

So you don’t have kids but are demanding parents raise their kids according to what you say.. gotcha ..

 

[strange headache]

So you don’t have kids but are demanding parents raise their kids according to what you say.. gotcha ..

Your baseless assumptions are amusing.

 

[Hari Seldon]

There is no agenda in this film. Take off the tinfoil hat and stop being as crazy as Era.

It doesn’t matter, I think it might, and for this and other reasons I am not seeing it. Disney chose to join the culture wars, and now they have an extremely high bar to pass for me to pay them any money for anything.

 

[Azurro]

I'm merely highlighting the absurdity of saying "homosexuals are fine" while trying to make it a taboo with the same breath.
Obviously you don't think homosexuals are fine if they can't be present in media and you feel the need to keep their existence a secret for your kids.

You are reacting emotionally. Content of a sexual nature is not appropriate for children, and the more complicated topics of sexuality are included in that.

Are children's movies aimed at you? Or at children? You can have whatever content you want. Gay kisses, lesbian kisses, drag queens, nudity, whatever. It's not a taboo, but put it in age appropriate content, that's it. Then when kids are more prepared to understand what is happening on screen, then they can see the content.

 

[IntentionalPun]

You are reacting emotionally. Content of a sexual nature is not appropriate for children, and the more complicated topics of sexuality are included in that.

Are children's movies aimed at you? Or at children? You can have whatever content you want. Gay kisses, lesbian kisses, drag queens, nudity, whatever. It's not a taboo, but put it in age appropriate content, that's it. Then when kids are more prepared to understand what is happening on screen, then they can see the content.

Almost every Disney animated film involving their "Princesses" has romance at the core of the story... and.. stuff like.. *gasp* "kisses." Those stories and a "kiss" that happens are considered endearing... just like couples kissing in public, which happens all the time. It's not a sexual act by default it's just a kiss.

The idea that something becomes overtly sexual when it involves any sort of gayness is blatant homophobia.

 

[FunkMiller]

You are reacting emotionally. Content of a sexual nature is not appropriate for children, and the more complicated topics of sexuality are included in that.

Are children's movies aimed at you? Or at children? You can have whatever content you want. Gay kisses, lesbian kisses, drag queens, nudity, whatever. It's not a taboo, but put it in age appropriate content, that's it. Then when kids are more prepared to understand what is happening on screen, then they can see the content.

Why is having gay people in something content of sexual nature?

 

[strange headache]

You are reacting emotionally. Content of a sexual nature is not appropriate for children, and the more complicated topics of sexuality are included in that.

You are reacting out of ignorance. There is no sexual content in the movie.
A little smack on the lips is not f*cking sexual.

It's what loving parents do all the time, ffs!

 

[Crayon]

Okay I get that some people are seeing the kiss as part of some larger agenda driven by wokesters in production.

But maybe think of it this way- even if it comes from that crazy contingent, a broken clock is right twice a day. Putting in a couple who is incidentally gay and not making (much) of it is great.

Aside from that, if you think it's exposing kids to what should be an adult subject, I strongly disagree with that. Gay people are not uncommon in the least and their showing affection in the exact same way as straight couples do is more than fine. If you think they should hide it, I'm not going to call you a homophobe becasue that's no way to have a civlized disagreement. I will say that I find your suggestion to be inhumane and cruel, though I will assume that it comes from a genuine place of concern for children even if I don't agree.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

Thought it was quite great.

 

[Saiyu]

It's also absurd and hypocritical that they didn't include it in a bunch of other countries because those governments wouldn't allow it.

Is this true? I thought they stuck to their guns and it was banned in certain countries?

 

[funkygunther]

Is this true? I thought they stuck to their guns and it was banned in certain countries?

reports were it was removed, then re-instated but it's actually just out-right banned in some countries now

Saudi Arabia bans Pixar’s Lightyear over same-sex kiss

The Hollywood film has been banned in a number of countries in the Middle East because of a kiss between space ranger Alisha and her partner

www.theguardian.com

 

[strange headache]

reports were it was removed, then re-instated but it's actually just out-right banned in some countries now

Saudi Arabia bans Pixar’s Lightyear over same-sex kiss

The Hollywood film has been banned in a number of countries in the Middle East because of a kiss between space ranger Alisha and her partner

www.theguardian.com

No, they wanted to remove it due to massive outrage in the US.
Then they decided against it due to the whole Florida thing and the movie is now banned in most of middle East and Asia.

 

[funkygunther]

No, they wanted to remove it due to massive outrage in the US.
Then they decided against it due to the whole Florida thing and the movie is now banned in most of middle East and Asia.

massive outrage in the US? I don’t believe it

 

[strange headache]

massive outrage in the US? I don’t believe it

Considering the reactions in this thread, it's not hard to see where the outrage is coming from.
Triggered conservatives and religious nutjobs working in tandem, riding the slippery slope fallacy all the way to questionable glory.

 

[WoJ]

Is this true? I thought they stuck to their guns and it was banned in certain countries?

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. My understanding was there was something like 15 countries where the lesbian kiss was not allowed and taken out of the movie, but Disney still played it there, just without the kiss. If they just didn't play it in those countries I stand corrected. I still find it absurd they had planned to leave it out and then added it back in the US because of a law in Florida.

 

[RoboFu]

You are reacting out of ignorance. There is no sexual content in the movie.
A little smack on the lips is not f*cking sexual.

It's what loving parents do all the time, ffs!

Ignorance!? Lol

It’s been explained to you many times in this thread that most of the people against Disney in this thread isnt about the actual kiss scene in this movie yet you keep ignoring that and you keep acting as if it’s about this kiss and nothing else. That’s true ignorance.

 

[strange headache]

It’s been explained to you many times in this thread that most of the people against Disney in this thread isnt about the actual kiss scene in this movie yet you keep ignoring that and you keep acting as if it’s about this kiss and nothing else.

...and yet here you are, incessantly whining about a lesbian kiss and same-sex parents in a kid's movie.

This thread has reached REE levels of stupidity.

 

[Kilau]

No, they wanted to remove it due to massive outrage in the US.
Then they decided against it due to the whole Florida thing and the movie is now banned in most of middle East and Asia.

I don’t think the kiss was even publicly known about until it was reported to be back in the movie after Disney had ordered it removed.

On March 9, LGBTQ employees and allies at Pixar Animation Studios sent a joint statement to Walt Disney Company leadership claiming that Disney executives had actively censored “overtly gay affection” in its feature films.

 

[strange headache]

I don’t think the kiss was even publicly known about until it was reported to be back in the movie after Disney had ordered it removed.

Here:

In the lead-up to its release, online speculation soared after it was confirmed that Lightyear would include the company’s first same-sex kiss. The film’s producer, Galyn Susman, stated that the female character Hawthorne, voiced by Uzo Aduba, is in a “meaningful” relationship with another woman and a kiss occurs between them.

In March 2022, the Florida Senate passed the Don’t Say Gay bill, which forbids schools from discussing and promoting topics surrounding sexual orientation and gender identity. Given its huge cultural reputation in the state, fans and employees were left frustrated by Disney’s lack of response to, or condemnation of, the bill.

 

[Kilau]

Here:

Ok, but do you have a story that shows it was removed after “massive outrage” because I never saw that.

I’ll stand corrected if so.

 

[jason10mm]

Disney should conduct a little experiment when lightyear comes to D+

Put one version up as the "chaste kiss between two loving women" edition and the "no kiss" version.

I suspect the "no kiss" film gets viewed by a significant majority first, like 70/30. This is parents showing it to their kids the first time. Then, later at night, 90% of that 70% will watch the kiss version and skip to the kiss (the parents are checking it out for themselves). Then, 90% of that 90% of that 70% will just watch the kiss version with their kids from then on because it was no big deal.

Just my theory.

 

[strange headache]

Ok, but do you have a story that shows it was removed after “massive outrage” because I never saw that.

I’ll stand corrected if so.

Disney’s ‘Lightyear’ Controversy Is More Ridiculous Than You Think

Disney’s Lightyear sparked a backlash for featuring a brief same-sex kiss.

www.forbes.com

On social media, right-wing culture warriors and media personalities such as Ben Shapiro had a meltdown over the children’s animation, tweeting panicked warnings about the same-sex kiss, claiming that the film reflected a “moral collapse.”

Ted Cruz went on a bizarre rant about the film in which he complained about “lesbian toys” being sold as Lightyear merchandise.

To name a few examples.

 

[Kilau]

Disney’s ‘Lightyear’ Controversy Is More Ridiculous Than You Think

Disney’s Lightyear sparked a backlash for featuring a brief same-sex kiss.

www.forbes.com

To name a few examples.

I think you are missing my point.

You said the kiss was removed because of massive outrage, that's not the case. Disney had ordered it removed before anyone even knew about it. That's why Disney and Pixar employees were so pissed, in conjunction with the non stance by Chapek on the bill here in Florida.

I think the order of events is important because it shows what Disney was doing behind the scenes with no public pressure.

 

[MacReady13]

Almost every Disney animated film involving their "Princesses" has romance at the core of the story... and.. stuff like.. *gasp* "kisses." Those stories and a "kiss" that happens are considered endearing... just like couples kissing in public, which happens all the time. It's not a sexual act by default it's just a kiss.

The idea that something becomes overtly sexual when it involves any sort of gayness is blatant homophobia.

Agreed BUT, we all are very well aware as to why Disney put this kiss in the film. I don't see an issue with it but for the fact it was put in there deliberately to cause a stir. Unfortunately for them it has backfired and now they can go around saying the alt-right and nazis and bigots and anti lgbt people prevented everyone from seeing this film.

 

[Crayon]

Matter 1: the kiss in the movie in isolation
Matter 2: the ideological agenda at disney
Matter 3: if and how they are related

If someone is talking about one thing to someone who is talking about an other thing it's going to get frustrating.

 

[Tams]

I had a good chuckle at that.

But look at the spurce of that comic. And my point still stands. Many parents just want a movie to watch for entertainment and not end up having to try and explain sex because of it.

 

[Crayon]

I had a good chuckle at that.

But look at the spurce of that comic. And my point still stands. Many parents just want a movie to watch for entertainment and not end up having to try and explain sex because of it.

My 5 year old asked me why those two girls kissed and I realized we were going to have the scissoring talk a little sooner than I had hoped.

 

[Haint]

That’s the dumbest take. No one thinks their kids are going be turned gay. Confused != turning gay.

Do you have children?

Somewhere between 25% and 50% of Zoomers identify as LGBTQRZUV++. You may call that confused, but I'd say about a third of your kids were indeed turned gay.

 

[Crayon]

Somewhere between 25% and 50% of Zoomers identify as LGBTQRZUV++. You may call that confused, but I'd say about a third of your kids were indeed turned gay.

Gay means same-sex attracted. LGB. The rest of the letters aren't neccesarily gay.

edit: should mention I'm not trying to be pedantic. It's a distinction that makes all the difference if we are talking about the things kids are doing because it's cool.

 

[Haint]

Doing because it's cool you say? But we were just assured by the green rat that the Disney's and the Tik-Tak's weren't turning the kids gay.

 

[Crayon]

Doing because it's cool you say? But we were just assured by the green rat that the Disney's and the Tik-Tak's weren't turning the kids gay.

Yeah I caught my son masturbating to gay porn. Peer pressure! Whatcha gonna do?

 

[Tams]

Gay means same-sex attracted. LGB. The rest of the letters aren't neccesarily gay.

edit: should mention I'm not trying to be pedantic. It's a distinction that makes all the difference if we are talking about the things kids are doing because it's cool.

The rest of the letters are nonsense or signs of mental illness.

 

[sol_bad]

You don't have to react so defensively, nobody said to ban homosexual content. However, given that every generation, the proportion of LGB+ kids doubles and we are at 20% of new kids turning LGBT, it shows that at the very least research what role the environment is playing in shaping sexual identities of children. If it's content aimed at children, then yeah, it doesn't have a place there.

That's why people are having drag queen shows for children and teachers asking children about their masturbation habits, seeing this grooming is at the very least, concerning.

So it's OK for kids content to have same sex couplings? The usual father/mother unit?
So kids who in their early teens realise that they are gay can feel weird and that their feelings are wrong? Make them depressed and commit suicide because they don't fit in society?

I'm not saying ever kids show ever produced should have gay couples but I don't find it to be an issue if it's a movie here and there.

 

[Dr. Claus]

So it's OK for kids content to have same sex couplings? The usual father/mother unit?
So kids who in their early teens realise that they are gay can feel weird and that their feelings are wrong? Make them depressed and commit suicide because they don't fit in society?

I'm not saying ever kids show ever produced should have gay couples but I don't find it to be an issue if it's a movie here and there.

Mate, you went 0-100 Really quick there. No kid is going to commit suicide over not seeing same sex couples in movies.

But there is also no reason for folks to be this against having same sex couples in movies. Lots of closeted bigots in here lately.

 

[Crayon]

The rest of the letters are nonsense or signs of mental illness.

Well I can't get on board with that! But that's beside the point.

Treating gay/trans/nb/gnc like it's a homogeneous group isn't always accurate, I'd be glad to agree on that.

 

[sol_bad]

Mate, you went 0-100 Really quick there. No kid is going to commit suicide over not seeing same sex couples in movies.

But there is also no reason for folks to be this against having same sex couples in movies. Lots of closeted bigots in here lately.

Yeah, I went to the extreme. I went to that extreme because kids who are struggling with their sexuality need some sort of support. If their families are accepting that's great but there are kids without that family support, so getting it through fiction might help them a lot.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Yeah, I went to the extreme. I went to that extreme because kids who are struggling with their sexuality need some sort of support. If their families are accepting that's great but there are kids without that family support, so getting it through fiction might help them a lot.

Going to such extremes doesn’t help your point. It only furthers others to double down on theirs and dismiss yours entirely.

 

[sonicwebster]

Where is this right wing aggression and hatred coming from? Surely Disney having a black lesbian in the movie is not grounds to never watch this. If the movie is mid or average, then it might not be worth spending the money to go see it in theaters and just waiting for on Disney Plus which I that is more of a indication that were really having some serious inflation people don't see the value of spending the extra money to go watch a film in the theater. Ithink with in a previous time even a mid-tier Disney film would do gangbusters in the theaters, it's a lot of money to ask a family to spend to go to the movies when you factor in tickets for the family and snacks Etc.

 

[Azurro]

So it's OK for kids content to have same sex couplings? The usual father/mother unit?
So kids who in their early teens realise that they are gay can feel weird and that their feelings are wrong? Make them depressed and commit suicide because they don't fit in society?

I sadly don't have time to write a more elaborate response, I've actually been thinking about this.

However, the second part of your post, I highly dislike this argument. If what you said was true, there should be an epidemic of suicides in the statistics in the last couple of hundreds of years at least. Considering that 20% of children are some variety of LGBT now and with the dramatic increase of trans identities and sex change surgeries for children, then it's rational to think that we could find these statistics of suicides.

Since you presented this point, can you support it with statistics of suicides in the 50s and 60s? Or perhaps we have to admit that there's a sociological component to sexual orientation and identity?

 

[Methos#1975]

Where is Frozen 3? Let's see how woke Disney really is lol!

 

[Crayon]

Where is Frozen 3? Let's see how woke Disney really is lol!

Easy dude, you're going to turn the kids gay.

 

[Methos#1975]

Easy dude, you're going to turn the kids gay.

I'm all for more hot lesbians lmao

 

[strange headache]

Oh noes DS9 is turning kids gay!
Ban this sick filth!

 

[Azurro]

Oh noes DS9 is turning kids gay!
Ban this sick filth!

Why do you take this so personal? You are misrepresenting the point as well, I only said I'd prefer sexual content to not be included in children's entertainment. DS9 is not a children's movie or tv show, is it?

Why are you in such a hurry to show sexual content to children? Sexual orientation is innate, isn't it? Kids will figure out on their own what they like once they are ready, there's no need to expose them to LGBT content.