Contents:
‘WHY DO YOU HAVE TO MAKE EVERYTHG GAY?’
Whether the homoerotic subtext is dismissed as yaoi fanfictn or wrten off as “actors’ chemistry, ” on-screen characters have had their sexuali pigeonholed for s.
If they’re heterosexual, then their sexual orientatns are hardly discsed, or rather, they’re homosexual characters on the other hand, large swaths of plotle and character velopment are dited to mg their sexual proclivi. The end rult is a fetishizg of gay relatnships, which screenplays put an undue foc on the sex liv of gay characters, while assumg that all explicly gay characters are all leads me to ask, “Why make straight the first place? The fallout om makg that assumptn when characters stray om that flt, bee then film and TV media fixate on how gay they to name the last movie you saw that foced on a gay character, but didn’t foc on their sexualy or relatnships.
WHY IS EVERYTHG SO GAY?
Oooh, they’re gay?
Why hello, the same time, I’m not tryg to dismiss the queer films we have today – nsirg the stigma gay culture has endured, mt have taken a hell of a lot of urage jt to make anythg. Gay movi are great. Gay shows are a thg now.
It may sound hypocril, vyg for actual gay characters while shamg dienc for rg about their sexual orientatn, but the perceptn that dienc are sred of change is a paralyzg problem wh the film dtry. “Queerbag” is when TV shows imply, suate or heavily allu to the possibily of a same-sex uple to attract gay dienc. Although there’s always hope for a show to end up surprisg all (hello, season 12), ’s unlikely to rult anythg substantial between the two ma characters, as ’s asserted time and aga that the gay upl are there for ic relief and creatg awkward suatns (unwanted attentn or flirtg, assumg partners to be siblgs, assumg siblgs to be partners, etc.