What is so wrong about gay romance being in Star Wars? — Page 4

Handman said:

You put it so well.

Why, thank you.

DavidMerrick said:

I’m not gay or transgender but I can guarantee you those who are would hate to see their lifestyles and struggles deemed “too controversial” to be depicted in escapist fantasy.

You know what helps these things to he less controversial? Normalization and representation. Treating people not as taboo subjects to be avoided in polite conversation but as human beings worthy of the same respect and recognition as straight white guy you and me. 40 years ago people would have raised a stink about John Boyega being the lead in an escapist blockbuster film–hell, people raised a stink JUST LAST YEAR–but thanks to Hollywood giving actors like Will Smith and Morgan Freeman a chance Boyega’s casting isn’t controversial, or not nearly as much as it might have been.

Avoiding “controversial” subjects in mainstream entertainment only continues to ostracized the oppressed and maintain the status quo. With The Force Awakens, Star Wars is now a relatively progressive franchise for the first time in its existence (even more so than Star Trek) and it would be great to see it keep going down this path with sensitivity and care.

YES!

Lok I’m noh focking büftie and thah’s the endovet!

DavidMerrick said:

I’m not gay or transgender but I can guarantee you those who are would hate to see their lifestyles and struggles deemed “too controversial” to be depicted in escapist fantasy.

You know what helps these things to he less controversial? Normalization and representation. Treating people not as taboo subjects to be avoided in polite conversation but as human beings worthy of the same respect and recognition as straight white guy you and me. 40 years ago people would have raised a stink about John Boyega being the lead in an escapist blockbuster film–hell, people raised a stink JUST LAST YEAR–but thanks to Hollywood giving actors like Will Smith and Morgan Freeman a chance Boyega’s casting isn’t controversial, or not nearly as much as it might have been.

Avoiding “controversial” subjects in mainstream entertainment only continues to ostracized the oppressed and maintain the status quo. With The Force Awakens, Star Wars is now a relatively progressive franchise for the first time in its existence (even more so than Star Trek) and it would be great to see it keep going down this path with sensitivity and care.

You put it so well.

Francis Begbie said:

Lok I’m noh focking büftie and thah’s the endovet!

I don’t know whose sock you are, but I’m certain you are one and I hope you both get banned.

So Handman are you going to respond to the Lando thing or…

Additionally, for a supposedly controversy-avoidant franchise, Star Wars has featured villains clearly based on real world monsters, with the Imperial officers just a Swastika armband away from looking exactly like the Nazi high command. The Force Awakens made this analogy even more unavoidable with the clearly Triumph of the Will-inspired scene on Starkiller Base (also “the First Order” is the most neo-Nazi-ass name I’ve ever heard). It also addressed radicalization for the first time in the form of Kylo Ren. It’s very difficult not to look at Ren and his relationship with his parents and think of the young men who’ve joined ISIS, or mass shooters like Elliot Rodger or Dylann Roof.

So if Star Wars can depict touchy and controversial subjects like those above, why not the harmless relationship between two men or two women? Or someone choosing to live as the gender they identify as?

Escapist as Star Wars might be, it is as influenced by ideology as any other work of fiction. The Lord of the Rings has a very concrete environmental message. Die Hard is saying there is a specific way police should use force and handle terrorist scenarios. Batman is about a super-rich white man using his endless funds to make his city a better place (and/or beat up the mentally ill). You can’t tell a story without including some measure of ideology in it. Star Wars is no different.

imperialscum said:

DominicCobb said:

I’m all for it. Honestly I can’t think of an argument against it that isn’t homophobic.

When it comes to Poe and Finn specifically, you are wrong.

Good friendships have been known to turn into romantic relationships.

I keep coming into this thread all ready to contribute only to find that DominicCobb and DavidMerrick have already stated my thoughts perfectly. Good job, guys.

imperialscum said:

DominicCobb said:

I’m all for it. Honestly I can’t think of an argument against it that isn’t homophobic.

When it comes to gay romance being in Star Wars in general, you are right. When it comes to Poe and Finn specifically, you are wrong.

Oh darn, you’re back.

This is one of the reasons why I find it exhausting going over to the off topic side.
The idea that showing two fictional characters going from friendship to romance is pandering to something and should be avoided. This is the basis for some part of at least 70% of Western culture, the only difference being it’s a girl and guy story arc usually.
Han and Leia start of all sparky and too not into each other to be a coincidence and then they come to admire each other and then they fall in love and get married and have babies who kill them.
That’s life right?
But some books compiled from various sources over thousands of years have a couple of passages saying that an invisible being that created everything doesn’t like something enough that stoning to death is permissible and this means we have to treat people differently in the 21st century and somehow it’s controversial to say that this is questionable??? Even in a fictional setting???
If I question this it’s oh…here we go again…gay man talking about gay things which is why David’s post up the page is so welcome. But I’ve not done the thing (the naughty stone the abomination thing) in the book people get so upset about for a couple of years because I’m in a monogamous relationship.
I don’t live my life watching gay movies or gay television shows or reading gay novels about gay people doing gay things to gay music.
My barber is married to a woman, my boss has a daughter which he contributed making by being very intimate with a woman. Most of the people I know are not gay but I am and a few other people I know are.
There are people I am very friendly with I have no idea what they prefer sexually or romantically. I would not be shocked if I found out they preferred people with red hair or green eyes.
If a fictional man said he preferred people with red hair or green eyes I would be just as not shocked.
Is that pandering to the ginger agenda or the green eyed agenda? Both sets of people historically considered evil BTW.

Also a potential Finn and Poe romance–one built upon mutual respect, admiration, affection and that sweet, sweet jacket–is much more natural and less off-putting than Han constantly mocking and antagonizing Leia before cornering her in a maintenance closet for the kiss.

If you want a legitimate argument against the pairing, here’s one: as far as I know, neither John Boyega nor Oscar Isaac are gay (Boyega is a practicing, abstinent Christian so I think it would be fairly unlikely for him to swing that way). I would love to see more same-sex and queer relationships in fiction and the two actors in question have fantastic chemistry, but Hollywood already has a bad habit of casting straight actors as gay characters, denying actual LGBT folks acting opportunities. It’s called erasure, wherein the status quo dictates how stories of less represented groups are told, often without said groups’ input or participation. The most notorious example at the moment is straight, cisgender guy Eddie Redmayne up for an Oscar for his portrayal of a gay, transgender woman in The Danish Girl, which is really messed up when you think of it.

Which is not to say I would be against such a relationship in the sequels. In fact, I think there’s a massive net positive to depicting a loving same-gender romance in Star Wars, the same way seeing Rey, Finn and Poe up on the screen in pivotal, heroic roles is already a major self-esteem boost for young girls and black and Latino kids. It would be preferable if they consulted actual gay folks for the writing of that, though.

Bingowings said:
The idea that showing two fictional characters going from friendship to romance is pandering to something and should be avoided.

It happens in real life so why not? I’m not saying it happens in 90 percent of blossoming relationships but it’s a common enough occurrence that people start out as friends and end up realizing that they would be better off in a relationship with each other. As DavidMerrick pointed out it’s more realistic than two people being almost completely antagonistic towards each other only to then fall in love. And in my view it’s more realistic than people falling in love with each other at first glance.

Lord Haseo said:

I think it was a joke…

Johk’s a focking johk mention thah’ again and I’ll gev ye the tönning of a liyftiym!

Lord Haseo said:

So Handman are you going to respond to the Lando thing or…

I was trying to get out of this thread. Identity politics are usually something I want to avoid. In any event, I don’t find the two comparable at all. I really don’t want to continue in this thread though.

DavidMerrick said:
It’s called erasure, wherein the status quo dictates how stories of less represented groups are told, often without said groups’ input or participation.

I have enjoyed music from both groups 😄

I never felt watching John Hurt playing Quentin Crisp was off and when Derek Jacobi played Alan Turing and Francis Bacon I didn’t feel their shared sexual preference helped him get into the mind of a mathematician or a fine artist. It’s called acting.
Neither were actually emperors of Rome.

Handman said:

Lord Haseo said:

So Handman are you going to respond to the Lando thing or…

I was trying to get out of this thread. Identity politics are usually something I want to avoid.

You should have thought about that before posted what you posted. Hell, if you really wanted to avoid all of this you should have never posted in this thread.

I don’t find the two comparable at all

How? There were zero black people in ANH and then now suddenly black people exist in ESB and ROTJ. That can be seen as pandering.

DavidMerrick said:

Escapist as Star Wars might be, it is as influenced by ideology as any other work of fiction. The Lord of the Rings has a very concrete environmental message. Die Hard is saying there is a specific way police should use force and handle terrorist scenarios. Batman is about a super-rich white man using his endless funds to make his city a better place (and/or beat up the mentally ill). You can’t tell a story without including some measure of ideology in it. Star Wars is no different.

Yep. Joe Campbell would argue that mythic narratives aren’t about escapism at all, but more about dealing with real hopes and fears in a safe, cathartic space (I guess literally in the case of Star Wars). Films with such a huge audience have an opportunity to offer support and identity to those who may be struggling to find it - playing it safe results in shallow entertainment and even shallower resonance for all (see the PT).

Lord Haseo said:

Handman said:

Lord Haseo said:

So Handman are you going to respond to the Lando thing or…

I was trying to get out of this thread. Identity politics are usually something I want to avoid.

You should have thought about that before posted what you posted. Hell, if you really wanted to avoid all of this you should have never posted in this thread.

True, but I felt compelled to offer my viewpoint, since it’s literally the only one here that isn’t the same as everybody else’s here thus far. If I didn’t post, this thread would have just been one huge circle-jerk, so why even make the thread in the first place?

How? There were zero black people in ANH and then now suddenly black people exist in ESB and ROTJ. That can be seen as pandering.

Showing gay romance and the existence of gay people are totally different.

Let me leave this thread.

Handman said:
Showing gay romance and the existence of gay people are totally different.

Both can still can be seen as pandering. Many things such as Lando’s existence, Finn being a main character who happens to be black and Rey being a woman who is the main character can be seen as pandering as well. Why would this particular attempt at “pandering” be so wrong when the history of Star Wars if filled with it? Seems mighty hypocritical to me.

Let me leave this thread.

You’re free to leave but that’s not going to hinder me from responding to you.

EDIT:

Handman said:
so why even make the thread in the first place?

To see whether there is an actual argument against the prospect of having a gay romance in Star Wars. I have yet to receive a satisfactory answer.

As a gay man I can relate to straight fictional relationships and be perplexed by gay fictional relationships. It does make the Star Wars universe feel more complex and realistic even in it’s fantastic sense. Gay people, unlike darker skinned people are defined by what the do rather than how they look. It’s easier to put more variety of skin tone in front of the camera than sexual/romantic preference. For all we know there may be more gay people in Star Wars than straight. It’s just the straight characters talk on screen about it.