Support NeoGAF

[strange headache]

Why do you take this so personal?

Because I find the REE levels of outrage to be hilarious and the open hate towards same-sex parents in this thread frikkin' disgusting.

DS9 is not a children's movie or tv show, is it?

DS9 literally has a PG rating. Don't be daft, we all watched this a kids.

Why are you in such a hurry to show sexual content to children?

Ah yes, the reactionary's guide to argumentation is to always imply grooming. Yes, quite evidently we want to indoctrinate children and make them all gay
It's a f*cking kiss you stuck up prudist.

Just like the woke crowd, you guys never know when to quit. This thread is a great reminder of the sheer hypocrisy of conservatives.

 

[Dr.Morris79]

Not every single thing that happens is because of some culture war.

Except when most things that happen nowdays are..

But those other things, of course!

 

[Azurro]

Because I find the REE levels of outrage to be hilarious and the open hate towards same-sex parents in this thread frikkin' disgusting.



DS9 literally has a PG rating. Don't be daft, we all watched this a kids.



Ah yes, the reactionarie's guide to argumentation is to always imply grooming. Yes, quite evidently we want to indoctrinate children and make them all gay
It's a f*cking kiss you stuck up prudist.

Just like the woke crowd, you guys never know when to quit.

It seems that the most outraged person at the moment is you by far, tbh.

The comparison isn't proper, toy story and DS9 appeal to different types of audiences. Disney and Pixar animation is meant for children, first and foremost.

I am honestly asking, what is the rush in showing children LGBT content? What kind of benefit do you expect children to get from it? If you mention representation, then every single group in the umbrella needs representation, which includes trans people, drag queens, gender neutral, and so on.

The problem is that in order to explain what those are, it includes teaching children gender ideology, which has lead to drag shows for children, children books with gender ideology and now trans surgeries for children. Why not keep things simple? It's a topic for when kids are grown enough to learn about sexuality, so I don't see the rush.

 

[strange headache]

It seems that the most outraged person at the moment is you by far, tbh.

The comparison isn't proper, toy story and DS9 appeal to different types of audiences. Disney and Pixar animation is meant for children, first and foremost.

I am honestly asking, what is the rush in showing children LGBT content? What kind of benefit do you expect children to get from it? If you mention representation, then every single group in the umbrella needs representation, which includes trans people, drag queens, gender neutral, and so on.

The problem is that in order to explain what those are, it includes teaching children gender ideology, which has lead to drag shows for children, children books with gender ideology and now trans surgeries for children. Why not keep things simple? It's a topic for when kids are grown enough to learn about sexuality, so I don't see the rush.

 

[Azurro]

It seems you are not mature enough to have a conversation about this. Please feel free to continue your meltdown.

 

[Turnt]

People are outraged over a kiss. But how are parents meant to explain to their kids that Stinky Pete was trying to arrange a threesome with twins?

 

[strange headache]

Oh no, more sexual content!
Won't somebody think of the children?

 

[FunkMiller]

The problem is that in order to explain what those are, it includes teaching children gender ideology, which has lead to drag shows for children, children books with gender ideology and now trans surgeries for children. Why not keep things simple? It's a topic for when kids are grown enough to learn about sexuality, so I don't see the rush.

Of course you mean, why not keep things heterosexual? ...which is the point strange headache is trying to make.

Just so you understand what it is you're actually saying, just replace reference to gay people with references to black people, then you'll begin to get it.

For example:

I am honestly asking, what is the rush in showing children black content? What kind of benefit do you expect children to get from it? If you mention representation, then every single group in the umbrella needs representation, which includes hispanic people, asian people, and so on.

See the problem?

 

[Kev Kev]

again ill say i really liked the movie and didnt think the gay marraige was a big deal, and the kiss happened so fast i literally missed it (and it wasnt a big deal either, for the record).

but if i can be on the flip side for a minute, i wonder how this would have all played out if chris evans wasnt talking about it in interviews? it seems like there was a push for this from disney and ultimately from him, like it felt as if there was an agenda there. i wonder if disney did this to score woke points or be more inclusive? did they think it would improve sales? or improve their public image? was this from a push from the gay community that orbit around disney (thats not meant to be an insult, i live in FL which has a HUGE gay community and disney literally has an entire week dedicated to the gay community, happens every year and its a pretty big deal)?

imo, they should just do these things without making a big deal out if it. i think things may have gone over better had chris evans just been like non chalant about it, and not elaborated on it in interviews and stuff. just focused on the movie having a good plot, funny characters and a wholesome message, etc. thats what made it feel a little forced to me. i dont buy into the whole "they are forcing it on our children" or "this is grooming" stuff. im just saying it did feel like they put a spotlight on something that at this point in our society should just be normal and not need a spotlight on it. just put the focus on it being a good movie, and add whatever gay stuff you want without making a big deal over it. thats the sign of something being truly normalized, no?

what do you guys think? if chris evans didnt do those interviews, and disney didnt push this issue into the spotlight, do we still see this same type of pushback? or would it have received pushback no matter what simply bc its gays in a kids movie (or whatever the criticism may be)?

kind of a loaded question lol so if you think im way off feel free to slap a mother fucker down

 

[strange headache]

if chris evans didnt do those interviews, and disney didnt push this issue into the spotlight, do we still see this same type of pushback?

Yes.

 

[Azurro]

Of course you mean, why not keep things heterosexual? ...which is the point strange headache is trying to make.

Just so you understand what it is you're actually saying, just replace reference to gay people with references to black people, then you'll begin to get it.

For example:



See the problem?

That's a false equivalence. Showing different races is not sexual content, not does it include the need to teach children about sexual content they might not be ready for. I mean, I'm totally open to know why being gay is the same as being black/asian/latino, if you can support it.

I'm latino btw, I'd like to know what your logic is that showing someone like me on screen is the same as showing LGBT sexual content.

 

[FunkMiller]

what do you guys think? if chris evans didnt do those interviews, and disney didnt push this issue into the spotlight, do we still see this same type of pushback? or would it have received pushback no matter what simply bc its gays in a kids movie (or whatever the criticism may be)?

I certainly think there would be push back against anyone saying they think it's wrong to have gay same sex couples in a children's movie, irrespective of how much Disney or Evans promoted it.

But... I do get the point you're trying to make. It would have been far better to have just naturally allowed the same sex couple to exist in the film. Disney are not above taking hot button political and social issues and using them to turn a profit and increase publicity for their product. They are an awful fucking company no doubt, just not for a lot of the reasons posited in this thread.

They could, and should, have just allowed the couple to be in the film - the same way there was a gay, female couple in Dr Strange in the Multiverse Of Madness.

 

[WoJ]

The "tolerance" crew at neogaf showing they aren't really tolerant. Also showing they either don't have kids or are bad parents and just want to tell everyone else how to raise their kids because their way is the right way. Shocking it's some of the same people who took authoritarian stances in the Covid thread and are incapable of being nuanced. Shocking I tell you. The same people desperate to expose kids to sexuality at a young age. Shocking.

 

[FunkMiller]

That's a false equivalence. Showing different races is not sexual content, not does it include the need to teach children about sexual content they might not be ready for. I mean, I'm totally open to know why being gay is the same as being black/asian/latino, if you can support it.

Again... what the hell is sexual about featuring a same sex couple in a movie? Where are you getting this? It's a kid's film. They're not going to feature anything sexual in it!

 

[Azurro]

Again... what the hell is sexual about featuring a same sex couple in a movie?

I already told you my reasoning, that representing one aspect of LGBT means pushing for inclusion of all its forms, which means teaching about gender ideology, transgenderism and so on, which is not adequate content for children.

Now, I'd like you to explain why showing a Latino person on screen is the same as showing LGBT sexual content on screen.

 

[FunkMiller]

I already told you my reasoning, that representing one aspect of LGBT means pushing for inclusion of all its forms, which means teaching about gender ideology, transgenderism and so on, which is not adequate content for children.

Now, I'd like you to explain why showing a Latino person on screen is the same as showing LGBT sexual content on screen.

Because both are sections of society that deserve to be seen in children's fiction, so that children who don't mix with them can learn about people different from themselves, which leads to better acceptance.

 

[Azurro]

Because both are sections of society that deserve to be seen in children's fiction, so that children who don't mix with them can learn about people different from themselves, which leads to better acceptance.

Wow, so having a different color of skin is equal to alternative sexuality that needs to be explained to children. I'd find it insulting if it wasn't so silly. How much of a narcissist do you have to be to not even include the well being of your target audience in your thought process?

 

[FunkMiller]

Wow, so having a different color of skin is equal to alternative sexuality that needs to be explained to children. How much of a narcissist do you have to be to not even include the well being of your target audience?

To some children, yes. Of course. Some of them won't have mixed with people of a different skin colour. Therefore positive portrayals of those people in children's media is very important.

And what do you mean 'the well being of your audience'? Are you suggesting that having a same sex couple in a movie is damaging to children?

You do know there have been people in the past - and even today - who would say the same about a black or latino couple being in a children's film, don't you?

 

[Azurro]

To some children, yes. Of course. Some of them won't have mixed with people of a different skin colour. Therefore positive portrayals of those people in children's media is very important.

And what do you mean 'the well being of your audience'? Are you suggesting that having a same sex couple in a movie is damaging to children?

You do know there have been people in the past - and even today - who would say the same about a black or latino couple being in a children's film, don't you?

Yes, actually, distributing LGBT propaganda is already having an effect, with the number of girls transitioning to boys more than tripling in recent years. You use emotional arguments, rather than ones cemented on logic since according to you, being lesbian is the same as being latino.

 

[FunkMiller]

Yes, actually, distributing LGBT propaganda is already having an effect, with the number of girls transitioning to boys more than tripling in recent years. You use emotional arguments, rather than ones cemented on logic since according to you, being lesbian is the same as being latino.

Now you're getting it!

You're born latino.
You're born lesbian.

They don't make a choice any more than you did.

 

[Azurro]

Now you're getting it!

You're born latino.
You're born lesbian.

They don't make a choice any more than you did.

Emotional argument that doesn't take rational thought into account. A race isn't a sexual orientation nor a gender identity Showing a person of a different color on screen to children doesn't require additional explanations on sexuality, while LGBT content does.

And please, don't include me in your insanity groups, thank you.

Actually, yes, please explain to me how races are the same as sexual orientations and gender identities, I'd love to hear your reasoning.

 

[FunkMiller]

Emotional argument that doesn't take rational thought into account. A race isn't a sexual orientation nor a gender identity Showing a person of a different color on screen to children doesn't require additional explanations on sexuality, while LGBT content does.

And please, don't include me in your insanity groups, thank you.

So I take it you’d be just as dead set against a Latino couple sharing a kiss in a children’s movie, as you are a gay couple?

Because that would be sexual content as well, by your definition?

 

[Methos#1975]

Because I find the REE levels of outrage to be hilarious and the open hate towards same-sex parents in this thread frikkin' disgusting.



DS9 literally has a PG rating. Don't be daft, we all watched this a kids.



Ah yes, the reactionary's guide to argumentation is to always imply grooming. Yes, quite evidently we want to indoctrinate children and make them all gay
It's a f*cking kiss you stuck up prudist.

Just like the woke crowd, you guys never know when to quit. This thread is a great reminder of the sheer hypocrisy of conservatives.

Hey, I'm a conservative and really don't care about this stuff, I mean it's just a kiss. It's not like we have full on scissoring or something going on. I find this pretty inoffensive and not sexual in the least and really don't understand the anger. I think at this point most children unless living in complete isolation and like chained into a basement or something, have at some point seen at least one gay couple so.....

 

[strange headache]

The "tolerance" crew at neogaf showing they aren't really tolerant.

Yes, why can't you poor souls be allowed to hate on gay people in peace.

Clearly, we are the intolerant ones.
I can't even...

 

[Azurro]

So I take it you’d be just as dead set against a Latino couple sharing a kiss in a children’s movie, as you are a gay couple?

Because that would be sexual content as well, by your definition?

Please go ahead and explain how races are the same as sexual orientations and gender identities. I'll wait.

 

[Methos#1975]

Please go ahead and explain how races are the same as sexual orientations and gender identities. I'll wait.

Are you daft? His question is perfectly logical and concise and should be easily understood unless just completely stupid or disingenuous. So which is it? If a lesbian couple simply sharing a kiss is by your definition sexual content, then any couple sharing a kiss onscreen should be defined as such within your context. Seems pretty straight forward. So do you actually believe that and stand by it?

 

[FunkMiller]

Please go ahead and explain how races are the same as sexual orientations and gender identities. I'll wait.

Because both can be - and often are - marginalised communities. They're not the only ones. Disabled people, people with mental illness etc.

And therefore it's very important these communities receive appropriate representation in media - including that which is aimed at children. Because the more children are exposed to other people who are different from them, the better adjusted and accepting they will be in later life.

Your position is literally 'I don't want children to be exposed to gay people in their fiction'.

You can just replace 'gay' with 'black' or 'latino' or 'disabled' or 'foreign'. It's all the same thing.

And you haven't answered my question:

So I take it you’d be just as dead set against a Latino couple sharing a kiss in a children’s movie, as you are a gay couple?

Because that would be sexual content as well, by your definition?

 

[TylerD]

THIS is the scene that people are making a fuss about???



I mean... come on... that is so much... nothing.

 

[The Cockatrice]

EDIT: nvm im stupid.

 

[Airbus Jr]

What message Disney tried to convey by putting lesbian kiss in kids movie? Another ridiculous LG HDTV propaganda for children absolutely disgusting

Movie banned in several countries and flops

Congrats

 

[Methos#1975]

THIS is the scene that people are making a fuss about???



I mean... come on... that is so much... nothing.

Welp, goddamn it, I'm a lesbian now!

 

[strange headache]

Please go ahead and explain how races are the same as sexual orientations and gender identities. I'll wait.

FunkMiller is trying to tell you that both are immutable characteristics.
You don't chose to be gay or black, you are born that way.

Hence why these characteristics are not derived from ideology, are a natural thing and deserve representation in media.

THIS is the scene that people are making a fuss about???



I mean... come on... that is so much... nothing.

Oh the horror, how sexual, much wow!

 

[strange headache]

What message Disney tried to convey by putting lesbian kiss in kids movie? Another ridiculous LG HDTV propaganda for children absolutely disgusting

Movie banned in several countries and flops

Congrats

So much for "cancel culture is bad", amirite?

 

[Airbus Jr]

So much for "cancel culture is bad", amirite?

you are free to think kids movie with heavy lgbt propaganda are ok

its also ok for me to think kids movie with heavy lgbt propaganda are not ok

 

[strange headache]

heavy lgbt propaganda

This thread keeps on giving.

 

[Airbus Jr]

This thread keeps on giving.

you are fool if you think this isnt done on purpose

Not everyone shares the same value as you ( evidence as the movie itself are banned in several countries)

 

[Methos#1975]

you are fool if you think this isnt done on purpose

Not everyone shares the same value as you ( evidence as the movie itself are banned in several countries)

Shitty backwards countries, I mean if you want to be in the same company as countries that still stone girls for being raped and throw people off buildings then be our guest I guess...

 

[Turnt]

you are free to think kids movie with heavy lgbt propaganda are ok

its also ok for me to think kids movie with heavy lgbt propaganda are not ok

When does something cross the line from regular lgbt propaganda into heavy lgbt propaganda?

 

[Airbus Jr]

Shitty backwards countries, I mean if you want to be in the same company as countries that still stone girls for being raped and throw people off buildings then be our guest I guess...

So because other people doesnt share the same value and principles as yours that allows you to resort to insults ?

 

[JimmyRustler]

THIS is the scene that people are making a fuss about???



I mean... come on... that is so much... nothing.

I honestly have to say I don't care too much either but it seems you do not know how "propoganda" (or call it whatever you want) works. The steps taken are never truly visable, only when looking back you notice it. Like when you binge a sitcom like Big Bang Theory over a year or so, 1-2 episodes a day. You'll never notice anyone aging at any time, only when you finish the final episode and then go back and wathc the first one again you'll notice the difference. A very similar thing applies with this stuff. No small step will ever be noticed. It will always be just a minor thing until one day you stop and go "woa, how did we get here over the past 10 years".

So yeah, if people do not want this, it makes sense to intervene even at this point.

 

[Methos#1975]

So because other people doesnt share the same value and principles as yours that allows you to resort to insults ?

If a group of people share values that are so disgusting and backwards as the ones I mentioned, pretty much yeah. They certainly aren't worthy of respect.

 

[Airbus Jr]

If a group of people share values that are so disgusting and backwards as the ones I mentioned, pretty much yeah. They certainly aren't worthy of respect.

But other people shares different value and belief than yours and think sodomites are disgusting see it works both ways

 

[Methos#1975]

But other people shares different value and belief than yours and think sodomites are disgusting see it works both ways

Butt sex isn't quite as offensive, disgusting, or barbaric as stoning little girls, throwing gay couples off buildings, etc. If you think the two even remotely similar and worthy of the same level of tolerance I suggest seeking help.

 

[Airbus Jr]

Butt sex isn't quite as offensive

says who ? you ? youre the one who can dictate and tell us how to thinks?

Feel free to think that way the rest of us might think differently have a nice day

 

[belmarduk]

That's a false equivalence. Showing different races is not sexual content, not does it include the need to teach children about sexual content they might not be ready for. I mean, I'm totally open to know why being gay is the same as being black/asian/latino, if you can support it.

I'm latino btw, I'd like to know what your logic is that showing someone like me on screen is the same as showing LGBT sexual content.

How many people here have pointed out how many times that a kiss is not sexual content? I guess it’s ok to show people like you but not people like me?

 

[Methos#1975]

says who ? you ? youre the one who can dictate and tell us how to thinks?

Feel free to think that way the rest of us might think differently have a nice day

Pretty much any decent moral person with real values I'm pretty sure thinks the same. I mean you pretty much have to be a fucking psychotic to think anal sex worse than murdering people.

 

[Airbus Jr]

Pretty much any decent moral person with real values I'm pretty sure thinks the same. I mean you pretty much have to be a fucking psychotic to think anal sex worse than murdering people.

thats a weird whataboutism to bring murder into this conversation but ok

 

[Methos#1975]

thats a weird whataboutism to bring murder into this conversation but ok

That is literally what the post that set you off on your tangent was about.

 

[TylerD]

I honestly have to say I don't care too much either but it seems you do not know how "propoganda" (or call it whatever you want) works. The steps taken are never truly visable, only when looking back you notice it. Like when you binge a sitcom like Big Bang Theory over a year or so, 1-2 episodes a day. You'll never notice anyone aging at any time, only when you finish the final episode and then go back and wathc the first one again you'll notice the difference. A very similar thing applies with this stuff. No small step will ever be noticed. It will always be just a minor thing until one day you stop and go "woa, how did we get here over the past 10 years".

So yeah, if people do not want this, it makes sense to intervene even at this point.

I understand your perspective. I also don't see much of a slippery slope as it pertains to a PG rated Disney cartoon either.

 

[Airbus Jr]

That is literally what the post that set you off on your tangent was about.

no youre the one who try to project and missdirect this thread into something else