LGBT in TMNT

[wyze2099]

I have to ask: why is it suddenly "politics" and "forced" when LGBT characters are in stories? I've never understood that logic. LGBT people exist in real life as well as in stories. Likewise, I've seen plenty of "straight" relationships in media that seem a lot more forced than someone who happens to be gay or bi. That's an aspect of a character, but by no means a defining characteristic.

As examples from IDW: Lindsey Baker's a lesbian. That's an aspect of her character, but it didn't come up until her ex, a fellow scientist, re-entered the picture. There's more going on with the character than just that, such as her relationships with the Mutanimals, and the scientific breakthroughs she's made with mutagen that has resulted in the creation of most of the mutants seen in the series.

Jennika is bi, if her interactions with Sheena are any indication. That's an aspect of the character that's being played as low-key, and nowhere near the only aspect of her character. Her worth as a character is in her growth as a character, and in the dichotomy between being a fighter/killer and being a person with connections. She left behind a tough upbringing and a youth as a juvenile delinquent in favor of joining the Foot, and in the process she remade herself as a weapon. She's first seen trying to assassinate Splinter, and when he shows her compassion, that sets into motion a long character arc in which she has to find her place in the Foot, and figure out what to do with herself. She comes to see Master Splinter as a father figure (perhaps the first positive one she's had), and she begins letting people see her vulnerable, which is difficult for her. She's a conflicted character who's gone through a number of reinventions (some of them her choice, some not). I find that conflict interesting, as well as her attempts to assert agency over her own reinventions. It wasn't her choice to be mutated into a turtle, but this means she can try to form a sisterly bond with the Turtles and see how that works out. The Mutant Town situation definitely wasn't her choice, but she's making the most of it by exploring her interest in music and entering into a new relationship (and closing the door on some past relationships). The fact that this new relationship is with a woman isn't forced; it's part of the ongoing story of this conflicted character who's grown over time.

And those are just two examples. So yeah, the "forced" argument never made any sense to me. They're aspects of a character that happened because the writer(s) made choices. Just like any other part of a character.

[Coola Yagami]

I think it's considered political when it's done wrong, when a gay character is shoved in there, just because, and when gay is their entire personality. At least with Lindsey and Jennika got a lot more stuff going on character wise and personality wise.

Then there's what some people call the 'gay agenda' where some old fashioned folks think more and more gays are being crammed into media to 'normalize' it, which IMO it already kinda is in society. But on the other hand we got nonsense like the Oscars announcing whatever movie they nominate from now on MUST have a gay person in it (as well as other diversity checkpoints), and people always virtue signalling that 'OMG our movie is like, so progressive cause it got gays in it!'

Personally I don't care unless it's painfully obviously token character is shoe-horned in cause gay.

I guess it's called political cause one side pushes for gays more than the other.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

I think it's considered political when it's done wrong, when a gay character is shoved in there, just because, and when gay is their entire personality. At least with Lindsey and Jennika got a lot more stuff going on character wise and personality wise.

Then there's what some people call the 'gay agenda' where some old fashioned folks think more and more gays are being crammed into media to 'normalize' it, which IMO it already kinda is in society. But on the other hand we got nonsense like the Oscars announcing whatever movie they nominate from now on MUST have a gay person in it (as well as other diversity checkpoints), and people always virtue signalling that 'OMG our movie is like, so progressive cause it got gays in it!'

Personally I don't care unless it's painfully obviously token character is shoe-horned in cause gay.

I guess it's called political cause one side pushes for gays more than the other.

What about when you have a character who's sexuality is ambiguous and then they suddenly decide to make the character gay.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

What about when you have a character who's sexuality is ambiguous and then they suddenly decide to make the character gay.

That's called coming out of the closet.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

That's called coming out of the closet.

Nope not at all. Some of these characters dont even show a hint of there sexuality. Its just the people decided to make that person gay because they can.

One of the biggest example of IceMan from the X-Men.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

Nope not at all.

Dude, what do you have against gay people? Don't deny their lifestyle.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

Dude, what do you have against gay people? Don't deny their lifestyle.

Nothing at all. Its just sometimes there are characters whose sexuality is ambiguous on purpose. But then a writer or so decides to change that and make them either straight or gay. You barely see characters out there who are asexual.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

Nope not at all. Some of these characters dont even show a hint of there sexuality. Its just the people decided to make that person gay because they can.

One of the biggest example of IceMan from the X-Men.

Except IceMan was not ambiguous at all, he's had girlfriends off and on over the years.

Ambiguous would be more like he never showed interest in sex at all.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by wyze2099

I have to ask: why is it suddenly "politics" and "forced" when LGBT characters are in stories?

It is forced, when creators turn previously established character Gay all of a sudden.
It is forced when previously Het character ends up being Gay.
It is forced when character being Gay is all their personality.
It is forced when creators pat themselves on the back for a character being Gay.
It is forced when the story which doesn't confront sexuality of characters makes a special point about Gay character.

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

Dude, what do you have against gay people? Don't deny their lifestyle.

This is where some people might call you homophobic for calling sexuality a "lifestyle".

[wyze2099]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

Personally I don't care unless it's painfully obviously token character is shoe-horned in cause gay.

There was a time in the eighties and before when just about the only time gay characters were seen in media was when they existed to be ridiculed. It was rare to see a positive portrayal of a gay person. That's what I think of when I think of a gay character being shoe-horned in 'cause gay. One example that springs to mind is one of the henchmen in the Bruce Lee movie Way of the Dragon; he was a slimy sort of character in a way that seemed completely tied in with his effeminate gay demeanor.

Heck, another Bruce Lee role in the '69 movie Marlowe had him play a triad enforcer who was so enraged by the title character suggesting he was gay that he was baited into taking a flying-kick leap off a tall building.

Even the first two Bill & Ted movies each had the two title characters shout "F*G" at each other in a way that seemed completely at odds with their overall personality. They didn't strike me as the type of people who'd have any problem hugging each other, let alone shout a slur even in jest. That kind of homophobia seemed just as shoe-horned in as people accuse gay characters of being.

The late eighties and nineties began to see a show shift toward having gay characters who were portrayed as people in ways that other

I guess it's called political cause one side pushes for gays more than the other.

Doesn't really seem like a ringing endorsement for the latter party, I gotta be honest.

Originally Posted by Sumac

It is forced, when creators turn previously established character Gay all of a sudden.
It is forced when previously Het character ends up being Gay.
It is forced when character being Gay is all their personality.
It is forced when creators pat themselves on the back for a character being Gay.
It is forced when the story which doesn't confront sexuality of characters makes a special point about Gay character.

So are you saying that 'forced' is the problem or 'Gay' is the problem? Because if the thing that's being forced in fiction is something as mundane as 'person is Gay', then my reaction is gonna be, "...so?"

And there are more possibilities than just homosexuality. Some people are bi. Some people realize they're some degree of LGBT later in life. It happens to some people. Heck, I'm 41; I was in my thirties before I accepted that I'm bi. I'm friends with a number of trans people. By the logic of the above list, that must mean we're forced or something. That's an amusing thought.

As for back-patting: some creators do that, but that's not always the motive for having LGBT characters in a story. Sometimes it's just a desire to have a fictional world that's varied in ways that real life is varied. In my creative writing, for instance, there are some LGBT+ characters alongside straight folks, and I'm not looking for a pat on the back for that. I just write people, warts and all.

Bringing it back to the Turtles: In a setting like TMNT in which all kinds of bizarre things can and will happen to people, whether it's a Triceraton invasion, the detonation of a mutagen bomb, or getting caught up in a war between various factions. And straight folks aren't the only people the weird things are happening to. Once in a while the fact they're LGBT might come up in the story, but usually it doesn't.

Like Bandit and Puggle, who Mutanimals from the recent comics. The fact they're boyfriends didn't even come up for a number of issues, and when it did it was in context of the two of them trying to start a fight with Jennika to settle a score. And then Leo used it as a tipping point to diffuse the situation before a fight could break out: basically, "we could go outside and fight, or we could just relax and enjoy each other's company, which is the reason we're even at this club, right?" It came up when it was useful to the plot. If Bandit or Puggle had been female, and it had been a straight relationship, the result would have been the same. I don't see a problem with any of that.

[Zulithe]

Originally Posted by Sumac

It is forced, when creators turn previously established character Gay all of a sudden.

Happens in real life all the time. People who you thought were straight or felt they had to feign straightness for any number of reasons come out as gay. Not forced.

It is forced when previously Het character ends up being Gay.

The world is complicated and people who are attracted to the same sex don't always feel free to practice their attraction, but after time and experience, eventually find the opportunity. Same goes for coming out as trans, etc. Not forced.

It is forced when character being Gay is all their personality.

In Scott Pilgrim vs The World, the entire story is about a straight dude winning the heart of a girl, that's literally all it's about. Was it forced? Or maybe you just didn't notice because it's so normalized. Gay characters are entitled to the same freedom. Aside from that, if a character does have to point out they are gay all the time when it doesn't make sense, this can also be bad writing. And a lot of times these bad scenarios are created by straight writers who are fetishizing gay characters.

It is forced when creators pat themselves on the back for a character being Gay.

Tokenism, fetishization, and virtue signaling is a problem in and of itself, not of LGBT characters. They exist in the real world and so they also exist in fictional environments. I also think there is nothing wrong with creators pointing out inclusion when inclusion did not exist previously.

It is forced when the story which doesn't confront sexuality of characters makes a special point about Gay character.

Since we are speaking about TMNT here, yes, sexuality of characters does come up. There are lots of straight relationships, so other types of relationships should be allowed to exist when it makes sense. LGBT people aren't asking for the world here... we know we all together make up maybe 1 out of every 10 people... so by that logic, roughly 1 out of every 10 relationships portrayed in any form of media would realistically be some form of LGBT relationship, roughly speaking. When it falls below that ratio, it's perfectly fine; i personally don't see it as a hard quota or anything. But when it's consistently zero, the motivations for it are up for question. And no, I don't think "random third rate background character might have been gay" counts.

[Coola Yagami]

I mean Scott Pilgrim was awkward, geeky, a gamer and a big fan of references and also a bit of an asshole in his own right. He wasn't just 'straight' and that's it. In fact unless you count dudebro background characters, most straights in media are fully fleshed out characters that aren't just all about their desire for a woman.

Most people don't know how to write gay characters beyond 'omg you guys, look how gay I am, I'm on grinder all day, like I am soooooo gay, btw did you know I'm gay?'. Like that was literally IceMan in the comic when he got his own series, grinder app and all. It's almost as if he forgot he's one if the xmen and should have more stuff going on besides trying to get boned.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by wyze2099

Doesn't really seem like a ringing endorsement for the latter party, I gotta be honest.

It wasn't until party pushing for gays turned into party of raving lunatics demanding to insert LGBs everywhere and when its done they are still complaining that it "wrong" and characters are "too gay" or not "gay enough", which firmly puts them into homophobic territory by their own logic.

Originally Posted by wyze2099

So are you saying that 'forced' is the problem or 'Gay' is the problem? Because if the thing that's being forced in fiction is something as mundane as 'person is Gay', then my reaction is gonna be, "...so?"

The problem is not that its being "forced", but how its being forced, by raging lunatics screaming that creators MUST include gay characters in their works, whether it fits creative intent or not. The same goes for any other categories, to be precise.

I should not change my intent or how I think characters should be, just because someone feels underrepresented. Those people can create something of their own, but I am no-one's servant to oblige to their whims and whining. Unless my work insulting for some people, they don't have right to stomp their feet and scream that I MUST follow their rules.

Originally Posted by wyze2099

And there are more possibilities than just homosexuality. Some people are bi. Some people realize they're some degree of LGBT later in life. It happens to some people. Heck, I'm 41; I was in my thirties before I accepted that I'm bi. I'm friends with a number of trans people. By the logic of the above list, that must mean we're forced or something. That's an amusing thought.

There is a difference between character being straight for 40 years and then turned gay, because it is trendy now and a person's life.
How about making a new character, which could be Gay from the begining?

Originally Posted by wyze2099

As for back-patting: some creators do that, but that's not always the motive for having LGBT characters in a story. Sometimes it's just a desire to have a fictional world that's varied in ways that real life is varied. In my creative writing, for instance, there are some LGBT+ characters alongside straight folks, and I'm not looking for a pat on the back for that. I just write people, warts and all.

In mainstream stuff, more often than not it comes exactly like virtue signaling. Especially, when creators announce on Twitter "Look: this character is GAY!! Aren't we great?"

Create any character you want, but don't make a show out of it. It looks pathetic. Let the work and characters speak for you. It is much more effective and people will appreciate it much more than being told (dictated) by creators what to think of their work.

Originally Posted by wyze2099

Bringing it back to the Turtles: In a setting like TMNT in which all kinds of bizarre things can and will happen to people, whether it's a Triceraton invasion, the detonation of a mutagen bomb, or getting caught up in a war between various factions. And straight folks aren't the only people the weird things are happening to. Once in a while the fact they're LGBT might come up in the story, but usually it doesn't.

Like Bandit and Puggle, who Mutanimals from the recent comics. The fact they're boyfriends didn't even come up for a number of issues, and when it did it was in context of the two of them trying to start a fight with Jennika to settle a score. And then Leo used it as a tipping point to diffuse the situation before a fight could break out: basically, "we could go outside and fight, or we could just relax and enjoy each other's company, which is the reason we're even at this club, right?" It came up when it was useful to the plot. If Bandit or Puggle had been female, and it had been a straight relationship, the result would have been the same. I don't see a problem with any of that.

I wasn't talking specifically about TMNT, but as I said, more often than not creators behind modern movies, comic books and games are trying to include Gay characters solely to get head pats.

Originally Posted by Zulithe

Happens in real life all the time. People who you thought were straight or felt they had to feign straightness for any number of reasons come out as gay. Not forced.

The world is complicated and people who are attracted to the same sex don't always feel free to practice their attraction, but after time and experience, eventually find the opportunity. Same goes for coming out as trans, etc. Not forced.

Forced, when it comes to the character who was never hinted as anything but straight.

Originally Posted by Zulithe

In Scott Pilgrim vs The World, the entire story is about a straight dude winning the heart of a girl, that's literally all it's about. Was it forced? Or maybe you just didn't notice because it's so normalized. Gay characters are entitled to the same freedom. Aside from that, if a character does have to point out they are gay all the time when it doesn't make sense, this can also be bad writing. And a lot of times these bad scenarios are created by straight writers who are fetishizing gay characters.

This argument would have merit, if said character was marketed as "HOLY ****!! LOOK AT THIS!! STRAIGHT CHARACTER!!". Since it is not the case, this argument has no merit.

Aside from that it is not about romance, but about character's personality. Does said character has any other traits aside from being straight?
Because, a lot of times I see modern creators marketing their characters solely on basis of their sexual orientation and when you ask them "What traits this character has?" their answer is: "Gay".
Which is neither personality trait nor represents their talents and abilities.

Also, I don't think I've seen anyone "fetishizing" Gay characters in modern media. And if a character constantly reiterates that he is Gay, no matter what, this IS a bad writing.

Originally Posted by Zulithe

Tokenism, fetishization, and virtue signaling is a problem in and of itself, not of LGBT characters. They exist in the real world and so they also exist in fictional environments. I also think there is nothing wrong with creators pointing out inclusion when inclusion did not exist previously.

I am not sure what do you mean by saying "tokenism, fetishization, and virtue signaling exist in the real world and so they also exist in fictional environments". This is a meaningless word soup, unless you mean there are shows, which deal with this stuff inside the show itself.

There is everything wrong with creators beating up their chests and screaming: "Look how cool we are - we add so and so characters!". No matter how you look at it is just embarrassing.

Also, most of the real efforts in representation were done in the 70s and 80s, so "cool kids" that think that real progressive stuff has started only in 2010s and before there were only white straight males in western media are just ignorant idiots.

Originally Posted by Zulithe

Since we are speaking about TMNT here, yes, sexuality of characters does come up. There are lots of straight relationships, so other types of relationships should be allowed to exist when it makes sense. LGBT people aren't asking for the world here... we know we all together make up maybe 1 out of every 10 people... so by that logic, roughly 1 out of every 10 relationships portrayed in any form of media would realistically be some form of LGBT relationship, roughly speaking. When it falls below that ratio, it's perfectly fine; i personally don't see it as a hard quota or anything. But when it's consistently zero, the motivations for it are up for question. And no, I don't think "random third rate background character might have been gay" counts.

Just to note, no matter who am I or how I feel, I don't feel like I need any validation or affirmation, by "me" existing in any fiction.
In general, I would be angered by mere suggestion, that I put my value on what other people think of me or someone similar to me in fiction. Me is me, I deal with it daily and I don't need anything to reaffirm who am I.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Sumac

Just to note, no matter who am I or how I feel, I don't feel like I need any validation or affirmation, by "me" existing in any fiction.
In general, I would be angered by mere suggestion, that I put my value on what other people think of me or someone similar to me in fiction. Me is me, I deal with it daily and I don't need anything to reaffirm who am I.

Same. Every time I hear someone ask 'why aren't there any black people in...' or 'finally, a black version that my son can look up that I never had a chance to...' and other such nonsense I look at myself and notice I had no problem looking up to Spider-Man, Batman and Captain America despite them not being Hispanic, and I never felt I couldn't relate to some form of fictional media because there aren't any (or not enough) Mexicans in it.

Hell back in my day, most of us acted pretty much 'white' when in school and hanging out. Yeah we were Hispanic, but we only used the Spanish when we went home to our older parents that aren't fluent in English. Any Mexican tradition comes from the home, but when we're outside we're soaking up all the American culture. So I also feel kinda 'not correctly represented' when we finally get a Hispanic character and he's forced to say 'ese' and other spanish words every other sentence to remind the viewers 'oh, they're Hispanic'. Like dude, a lot of us don't talk like that. But even so, It never bugged me enough to make a 'The Problem with Bumblebee Man' documentary or such nonsense cause I actually have a life.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

So I also feel kinda 'not correctly represented' when we finally get a Hispanic character and he's forced to say 'ese' and other spanish words every other sentence to remind the viewers 'oh, they're Hispanic'. Like dude, a lot of us don't talk like that.

Oh, man, dude. This is entirely off-topic but I'm sure you'll get what I mean. Big Eddy Guerrero fan from way back, but I couldn't stand his WWF run partly for that reason. I'd heard him talk for five years, and suddenly he's in the WWF and everything is "Mamacita" and "Esse vato" every third word. Like he couldn't speak a single sentence without throwing in "Esse", "Esse vato" or "Holmes". Like holy SH*T, dude. I know he was just doing his job but for f*ck's sake. The guy grew up in Texas (El Paso, but still) and his first language was ENGLISH.

But then, his boss at the time also infamously told Carlito Colon to "Spic it up" whenever he talked, in front of a room full of people without irony. "Because of the Hispanic audience", you see. Like they wouldn't know Carlito was from Puerto Rico unless he had a thick accent and all that. Just brutal.

Oddly, in Eddy's case, despite having him over-play his Mexican heritage, they also Anglicized the spelling of his name from "Eddy" to "Eddie" because "That's how white people spell it". Crazy! For the record, it was properly "Eddy" so that's how I always spell it.

But yeah, this sh*t can go wrong any number of ways. In stuff like the above, they were trying to be "inclusive" while only making things worse. How the Carlito stuff went by while Freddie Prinze Jr. was on the writing staff, I'll never know. This stuff has a habit of coming back around.

[Coola Yagami]

So weird. I wasn't into WWF during his era. I remember Eddy Guerrero more for his WCW run and being a massive heel.

[Leo656]

Lucky you.

I mean, he remained a great wrestler, but in the WWF his entire personality became "Get it? He's Mexican!" and unfortunately stayed that way until the day he died. Just brutal.

He wasn't the kind of guy to ever say no to the boss, but he definitely should have.

[skylord]

I'd be curious to run some numbers to see a comparison of LGBT characters in TMNT IDW vs real world in NYC. Sources vary but NYC in the real world has roughly 5%.

figuring it out would be difficult though since many characters show no romantic interests. I suppose the best way would be to place those characters in an undetermined field and set 5% of that group as LGBT. To be fair I would only count characters that live in New York City. I can't imagine the numbers being way off.

I'm not entirely caught up on IDW (barely know Jennika) but from what I remember the LGBT representation is pretty good. As a gay man myself, it never rubbed me the wrong way like some other properties have.

[ABrown]

What is with this topic coming up in forums for all of my favorite franchises lately?

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by ABrown

What is with this topic coming up in forums for all of my favorite franchises lately?

Cause it's everywhere.

IDK, it's funny in a way. A few years back I don't recall a single black dude saying they wish (insert whatever fandom here) had more black people in it unless it was something that would have made sense, like say X-Men (Storm) or Blade or whatever that actually had black people in it. Not that long ago everyone wants at least one gay character in everything. Recently there's been a bigger emphasis in female led series, even if it means replacing a male lead, and to be honest even when the Spike Girls were a thing and they were all about Girl Power, we didn't have female ghostbusters or 'women-only showings' back then like we do now. Now it's everything must have at least one trans character in everything.

I wonder what's next? Will the furry fandom finally take over and demand that every form of entertainment now has at least one furry character in it.