To put it lightly, the LGBTQI+ community has had it rough in Hollywood for the past couple of decades. From underrepresentation to misrepresentation, the list of transgressions against and wrongful portrayals of homosexual characters on the big screen have created some pretty awful stereotypes that perpetuate the wrong idea about what it means to be queer. After you watch a couple of movies and TV shows, you’ll start to notice a few shared, and rather offensive, stereotypes in the representation of onscreen LGBTQI+ personalities. Looking at the bigger picture so to speak, these repetitive and exasperated tropes contribute to the culture of homophobia present in colloquial society and day-to-day speech. Current media tropes result in audiences envisioning gay men as “gay best friends” or queer women as “goth lesbians” which, blatantly, is abhorrently homophobic. Did you know that 1 in every 10 people we know, and will meet, have homosexual attractions – that is, to say that 1 in every 10 people you know are queer? Having no gay characters in a movie, at all, act to marginalize this demographic and repress our society’s views and mentalities on homosexuality and queer characters. Perhaps an in-depth view would help to materialize the concept in your mind. Character tropes are certain archetypes that you may see on screen that are widely used for audiences to be able to instantly recognize what the characters stand for and are associated with. For instance, some character tropes include the ‘hero’, who stands for good or the ‘villain’ who symbolizes evil. Some of the most common gay character tropes in media include: 1. The token gay character. This character is one who dies in service of, or much earlier before, a straight, cisgender protagonist. The inclusion of homosexuality on the big screen is great, don’t get me wrong, but to have the only representation be seen as expendable and die FOR another character is abhorrent. This is also the case when a homosexual/queer character dies in order to further the plot progression or character development of the protagonist. Gay characters can, and should, be the protagonists of their own films and certainly should not be reduced to a prop for their heterosexual counterparts. This, of course, isn’t to say that straight characters never die in films but rather that they are never included solely for the sake of superficial representation. Some of the most famous examples include V for Vendetta’s Valerie, who was killed off meaninglessly and Lexa from The 100. 2. Excluded Sexuality. This occurs when an adaptation of source material onscreen, whether it be from a comic, novel or otherwise changes a character’s official. This is extremely prevalent for comics, with a lack of LGBTQI+ representation in blockbuster superhero universes like the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) or the DC Cinematic Universe. An example of this is Mystique, from Marvel’s X-Men. From her original source material, she is described to be bisexual and yet this is void in all of her onscreen adaptations. This overlooking, or perhaps even purposeful exclusion of her character details the carelessness and apathy of producers/screenwriters in Hollywood, and even worse promotes the message that sexuality is insignificant to individuality. 3. Effeminate Males. Tying into the aforementioned ‘Gay Best Friend’ trope, homosexual males are near inexorably depicted as overtly effeminate – i.e. having characteristics that are stereotypically ‘unmanly’ or ‘girly’. This specific, and admittedly singular portrayal of gay men detriment the lives of homosexuals in reality and act to incite the pre-existing stigma that contemporary films seem to refuse to abandon. This lack of versatility enforces the belief that all gay men are interested in stereotypically feminine activities such as that of fashion/shopping and refuse to take part in activities that would have masculine connotations such as that of sports. Similarly, Hollywood seems to adore the physically able, emotionless and rather hollow archetype of a male which creates an unnecessary culture of toxic masculinity seen today almost everywhere both in media and real life. 4. No Bisexuality There is a severe discrepancy between the depiction of heterosexual to homosexual characters, but even more so between homosexual to bisexual characters. Typically, the inclusion of LGBTQI+ culture in movies is centered solely on gay/lesbian characters and rarely is there any focus on a bisexual protagonist – or for that matter, even a bisexual supporting character. Brooklyn 99’s Rosa Diaz is probably the only onscreen personality I can remember off of the top of my head that is bisexual, and in addition to that, portrayed well (i.e. without the stereotype that bi females are ‘masculine’ and bi males are ‘feminine’). Movies and films may make a note of a character being bisexual, but for the majority (or sometimes even the entirety) of their portrayal, will only engage in heterosexual romantic relationships. 5. The Psychotic Lesbian. Perhaps a little more infrequent, the “psychotic lesbian” trope portrays exactly that of which its namesake entails – a crazy lesbian character. Mental instability is a common archetype in Hollywood, with some common examples being Suzanne from Orange is the New Black, who is dubbed by the rest of the cast as “Crazy Eyes.” I probably don’t even need to go into any further detail for you to understand why this is problematic and harmful towards lesbian women in real life… These portrayals, although seemingly of minimal significance to the lives of the LGBTQI+ community, do more to society than what meets the eye. 6. Cisgender People Cross-dressing for Comedic effect. Like example number five, there shouldn’t be much surprise as to why this trope would be considered offensive. Belittling the lives and actions of transgender individuals and turning them into comedic value for cisgender audiences creates a sentiment that they aren’t worthy of being admired or respected. In particular, a running gag is to have cis men dress up as female and be considered ‘ugly’ by the rest of the case. This implies that masculine looking females, even if they are cisgender, deserve to be ridiculed, mocked and scorned by the rest of society. These examples are just some of the stereotypes that are inflated and utilized by Hollywood. Superficial attempts at diversity and inclusion aren’t helpful, and even more than that aren’t necessary if all they are going to do is tokenize homosexuality. Change is progressive, and although we probably won’t see these tropes completely dissipated in our lifetimes, diversity is slowly creeping its way into Hollywood. We can only wish that perhaps one day, we’ll see a more inclusive cast on the next Netflix movie or a gay protagonist on the big screen of Hollywood. A change in representation will go a long way towards making life easier for all queer individuals, as their fears of being mocked or rejected could be drastically reduced with movies screening compassion and acceptance rather than ridicule and discrimination. If anything, the recent positive strides in entertainment at inclusion like Love Simon, Moonlight or Brokeback Mountain, are what current filmmakers should strive to replicate and reproduce for the sake of the LGBTQI+ community.
Comments