Almost every gay Disney character has a one-off line that reveals that they're gay so it can be written out in different language dubs. I don't know how you can get less gay than that.
The reason for having it be just one line is so Disney can have these movies screened in countries where homosexuality is illegal. Long story short, they need money from audiences in those countries to guarantee a hit just in case it doesn’t perform well in other more accepting countries, so they make it a character who mentions they’re gay in one line of dialogue that can easily be edited out or dubbed over so the movie doesn’t get banned in those countries.
Less homosexuality DOES make more money because some countries don't allow movies with gay people but most of these countries pirate movies more anyways :D
Yeah but we're in the third world what are you gonna do? I'm pretty sure I've never seen an actual official blu ray sold where I live @@ABlizzardIsClose
It's more like... more queerness where it's allowed, but easy to cut out for countries where it's not i imagine After all, representation stuff does make money, hence why corpos do it, but it also means losing some markets if it's beyond something what can be edited out... which, to be fair, do prefer to pirate stuff usually
Here, a word of advice to Disney, you don’t need more gay representation.. nor do you need less… what you need is… *MORE BETTER WRITTEN RELATIONSHIPS AND ACTUAL ORIGINAL MOVIES INSTEAD OF CASH GRABS!!*
*The Owl House becomes gay* *Disney no like gay* *Owl House make money* *Disney like gay* *Lightyear has gay but no money* *Inside out has no gay and make money* *Disney no like gay* I'm starting to see a pattern here... Edit: y'all I really would prefer you guys not to have a war in the replies. Just move on please
I feel Disney is disingenuous when it tries to cater to the LGBT crowd. They'll insert a gay character into a movie or show, but then edit them out when they release in their most profitable country, China. I feel it's just a way for the executives to pat themselves on the back for being inclusive when not even caring about the community at all. My opinion, Disney should cater to everyone, and not just one specific group.
an example of this being the owl house. sure, it's a TV show, but remember the large uproar it caused after "mysteriously" being canceled after the 2 main characters being gay and sharing a same sex kiss?
There's a bit of a flaw in your argument though, as by censoring lgbt characters they are actively being exclusive and not catering to everyone. It's entirely possible to have a gay character in a movie and a straight person watch and enjoy it, it just has to be a _good_ movie, which Lightyear was not due to its writing.
@@ilikespaghetti4458 Won't argue there. Whose idea was it to make basically making Buzz the villain and ultimately putting him in the wrong for trying to do the right thing? Also, what I mean is that Disney should not be on one side of the political spectrum, but instead be somewhere in the middle.
@@crispychipzzz_officialand the two girls from sailor moon that are "close cousin" Or from a anime I watched called Yuri on ice where the two mains went to a church to get "matching friendship rings" Honestly that made me laugh at the explanation
Not really..I think the two are actually pretty similar, it's just that Disney gets most of the attention. DreamWorks also seems too afraid to really commit to having any queer characters ot relationships in their movies. I think the DreamWorks fandom in recent years has been a lot more toxic toward minorities as well. Though I've noticed both studios have done a good job at hiring queer voice actors, so that's a plus I guess.
@@bradyd.6332Bros definitely deserved to fail. Multiple points in the movie they insult people for being straight but the main lead actor Billy Eichner still complains about the movie failing only because of homophobia. Not because he made a movie that wasn’t good and was catering to a small audience.
@@JuicyBurger29 they canceled the owl house I think when season 3 was in the middle of production. I do know how you haven’t heard about this unless you’ve been living under a rock
Cowards. They have no problem with race swappings but they do have problems with LGBT, Apparently. Is this the education you want children to grow into, Disney? Is it?!
I’m glad they didn’t make Riley gay. And you bet that if they made her Gay, although it might’ve made a lot of money, be honest: it would not make as much. Also, if putting LGBTQ themes and characters is “taking a risk” than movies are not about storytelling anymore. When movies take risks, it should be about doing something unique with: story, art direction, character development, or something like that. Like what Spider Verse did. Not simply, add diversity. Like bruh, movies have characters, whether boys, girls, men, women, white, black, Hispanic, Brazilian, American. Just make sure it makes sense to the setting, and we’re good.
I don’t care about a charecter's sexualty. All I care about is a well written story. I liked TOH because it was a good story and show. Lumity didn’t affect it at all for me.
Exactly. People freaking out about a character's sexuality is weird. You can have a gay character in a film and not go crazy about it, the only thing that matters is if the movie is good or not.
Imagine finishing working a MASSIVE project with your colleagues that will become absolutely successful and they fired you before the project was released globally. Pain And yeah. Disney blamed the same-sex kiss for Lightyear failing at the box office when the actual reason it’s because it didn’t do well with audiences. Honestly, Disney are such hypocrites.
If it makes less money then can't blame it. Many countries doesn't air Lightyear because of it so having LGBT in it means less money from those countries.
He wanted a gay couple in his show and Disney said no. And now earlier this decade they finally started allowing gay couples to appear in Disney productions. And now Disney is backtracking because they have no soul and their lustrous greed is continuing their current and colossal downfall of which has been going on for about 19 years.
It's worth reminding that the same-sex kiss in Lightyear was a thing that journalists used excessively in their news portals and it blew up more than the movie's marketing, which of course made most of the audience step back.
There were people calling theaters to ask if Wish was safe for kids to watch. Disney gained a reputation of being a bunch of G----ers. A lot of families decided to cut out Disney and the stock has reflected that.
As a pan dude, YES! FINALLY!!!! I'M SO TIRED OF THE NOTHING GOOD FOR NOTHING REPRESENTATION THAT WAS JUST THROWN IN TO MAKE MONEY OFF US. If you want to make an LGBTQ rep or relationship, at least give it character rather than "hey guys, look! It's gay! We're all for LGBTQ! Don't mind our shady background!" Edit: look guys I'm an pan
If anything, it should at least just be seen as if it were normalized and not just flat out "oh hey look, gays!" like you were saying. Hell, even if it were just in the background to where it's noticeable it still counts, right? Asking genuinely
On the bright side, hopefully because of Inside Out 2’s success Disney can realize animation is what people want and not the live action remake crap they’ve been doing for years now.
“Yeah, the movie flopped because people hated the gay characters. It definitely wasn’t because of the time travel stuff and Zurg being Future Buzz instead of an actual robot.”
Disney flipping a coin to decide whether they want atleast 2 gay characters in all their movies or not having a single gay character in anything they produce
Who cares if characters are gay? Why does all this LGBLT stuff have to be in our faces? Religion is rarely touched on with characters, and if it is, it's played as a joke, but this whole gay stuff isn't something to joke about?
"We want to be straight" is Bob Iger's Era of Disney and It wasn't Bob Iger's Fault for making the character gay on Strange World, it was Bob Chapek. Two Different Disney CEOs.
Bro you dont need an lgbtq+ or straight relationships to be cool or make money You need a story The owl house before and after including lgbtq+ stayed successful due to story
Is it so hard for Disney to focus on the ACTUAL story instead of ‘appealing to more audiences’? No joke, an elementary schooler could write a more creative plot than whatever they’ve been spouting out
Well not really, she is 13 years old and a bunch of gay kids realised it when they were in middle school cause it's in this ages that you start puberty and having crush and stuff like this, though I don't think it would have been necessary to have made Riley gay or bi since it would have been unrelated to the plot
Exactly! Even A24 and Vivziepop are able to to accurately represent the LGBTQ+ Community with more than half of the characters from Hazbin Hotel and its sister series Helluva Boss being members of the LGBTQ+ community with very few characters being represented as allies. While Disney is going backwards just so they can make more money but what’s really happening outside of the inside out 2 box office opening end result is that they’re practically being self destructive to their business for again, money with things like live action remakes of classic era movies and less representation.
@@dailysiren9000I don’t think Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss are a perfect example of good LGBTQ+ representation….The gay characters are depicted as dramatic, daddy issues, AND INSANELY HORNY. Which is a terrible stereotype. For characters who’re pansexual, it depicts them as “Oh I wanna fuck everything” besides Beelzebub and Husk. Also, Vaggie, her entire character is solely around Charlie which is wasted potential and views lesbians as codependent. In my all honesty, Nimona has better representation with how the characters have moral ambiguity and have character arcs with layers- “Layers! Ogres have layers!” I had to say the quote.
@@froppygurl07 ok you got me on that but can you blame me for trying? It was the first thing that popped into my head when when I was proving my point. Besides if you think about it even bad representation is still better than no representation at all.
THIS IS SO TRUE! They blame one community, while it's not even that! They just force things into places instead of making a good one. This is even hurting the parks with how they force in IP anywhere. The company has no one to blame, but themselves for forcing things and making other people look bad.
This is most companies. I don't know who needs to hear or read this, but most of these big companies and corporations don't actually care about anybody. They just want money. Disney doesn't care for black people, for example. They race-changed Ariel and so they could their "representation points" rather than make another movie about a black character, make a live action Princess and the Frog, etc. It's not true representation, it's just casting someone with melanin, changing the "design" for the princess and calling it a day. The screenwriter and costume designers weren't even experts on Chinese culture for Mulan, they did bare minimum and the movie flopped too. There's no clear passion or attempts at trying to make the film of trying to put a marginalized group's experiences in the spotlight. They just want your money, and this is even more likely if there's an old, straight white man (Bob Iger) at the helm. So many of you fail to see that and it is sad
Disney listen to me, the only thing you have to do is not change the sexuality of already existing characters. You have to make original characters if you want more or less gay characters. You can do representation without pissing people off, there's no reason to get rid of gay characters completely. BUT be smart about who your audience is, don't change the sexuality of existing characters just add new ones and write them well!
this is an existing character sure, but sexuality was never discussed to begin with so you can't use that argument here. If the sexuality is ambiguous, it should be fine for them to be gay, no?
@@ZacharyC2000 If the character is sexually ambiguous before hand that is fine. I'm just making an argument in general. I know Disney likes to do low effort diversity, by just saying a character is gay but not following through with anything.
Having a gay scene that's only there to appeal to people on Reddit and is quickly scrubbed for China isn't diversity. It's shallow pandering. That's what people are tired of. Not diversity. I'm happy Disney is no longer trying to have their diversity cake and eating it too. For real. Anyone who actually thinks these companies genuinely care about diversity needs to sit in front of a mirror and try to have an original thought.
They just have to create actual well-written characters that happen to be queer. That is diversity not a 2 second clip of "gay person wow". The executives don't understand this because they don't understand we want complex queer characters not these fake attempts of representation.
@@UserName-zb8ql the goal isn't necessarily to have an equal amount of queer and non-queer characters in media, it's for that minority to be accurately represented. the percentage of queer people isn't as small as you think, and all that's wanted is to have the amount of queer characters in shows and movies accurately reflect the percentage of queer people in the real world.
It is technically make them lost money as many countries cannot air them and Disney doesn't allow to censored them too. The solution will be letting the countries to censored the movies back.
@@UserName-zb8qlhonestly as someone who is gay many times I roll my eyes with these characters cause they come off as boring or annoying as hell. Nobody wants be around a character who won’t shut about their sexuality like it’s their only trait. Heck sometimes they come off as unlikeable and narcissistic
Disney needs new leadership ASAP. The creatives know how to make a good movie. Just let them create good stories without filtering every last thing in favour of more precious pennies.
What's funny is despite the rework to make Riley "less Gay", the amount of people I saw online theorising that Riley might be gay or Bi really tells me it really didn't work, lmao
I love how the looked at scene of two women kissing for like a second and though "Ah yes, thats why movie failed!" Thats like if I baked a cake with rotten ingredients and burned it to crisp and I blame the cakes faliure to the size of a bowl I was using to make it.
“Inside Out 2” as a title, definitely got people hooked in for the first two weeks, but it’s the fact that it doesn’t pander (as well as being an actually great movie) that encourage people to continue watching it more and more past those first two weeks.
They cater to your every whim when there is money to be made, then pretend you don't exist when there is money to be lost. Anyone who doesn't realize that is a fool.
Bi people exist my man. She can like cute boys AND girls. Honestly it would be refreshing to see some bi representation. Since they get shit on by both straights and gays.
I don't think Disney was "very gay" to begin with. The Owl House was their one cartoon with full LGBTQ represntation and got canceled because it "didn't fit their brand". 💔🦉
I’m going to be honest with you. I do not care if you’re gay straight black or white or any other race or sexuality if you make the movie good I’ll be happy.
Remember those “ Disney versus DreamWorks” edits in 2023 showing LGBTQ stuff from Disney and then showing Puss in boots the last wish edits saying dreamWorks is better? I hope those editors are happy or something .
Disney:our stuff is less gay now! Viewers:…you do realize we’re gonna see it as gay anyway? And now that you’ve done that we’re going to make it even more gay? Disney:…what
to be fair, agatha all along was in the works probably before they made that decision, however due to it's failure maybe disney might be more inclined to make their shows less gay.
Hot take here: unless the story is specifically exploring the experiences of a straight person or an LGBTQ+ person, sexuality shouldn't matter. In general cases, an LGBTQ+ character should be just as effective as a straight one for conveying a good story. Regardless of things like sexuality, audiences should be able to see a part of themselves in or relate to a well-written character. It is for this reason that companies should neither push LGBTQ+ representation just for the sake of seeming trendy or try to sweep it under the rug like it's something to be ashamed of. LGBTQ+ is as natural as straight, so just write naturally.
This is a bit misleading. Disney told them to make sure Riley wasn't gay, when the writers were already planning on not making her gay. This is not nearly a situation like Turning Red. Yes, Disney sucks, but it's not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be here.
Why do companies like Disney never think of the possibility that people simply hate their bad writing? It just seems like, they truly consider their customers to be idiots, who can be "satisfied with mediocre shit, as long as we slap progressive labels and nostalgia ontop!"
Are you going to make a video about the "Byeee multiverse collection", the upcoming crossover merchandise drop between Amphibia, The Owl House, and Gravity Falls that will be launching a Kickstarter soon and was worked on by the creators of all three shows?
Lightyear flopped because literally NOBODY asked for THAT at all. What we wanted was the Lightyear we grew up with, the series AND the already done movie! Nobody asked for the "what if Buzz was based on real adventures and Zurg was actually him due to a time warp". 🙄
It seems that these old men Disney executives are trying their best to find a reason to affirm this speech that "the reason for their current failures It's because of representation" at all costs. this is one of those days where Vailskibum makes a serious video from beginning to end about a tragic topic😐
Insert typical comment saying “Whaaaaat? Disney being hypocritical of LGBT 🏳️🌈 representation saying “they support the gays but not really supporting the gays”? My god! What a revolutionary discovery that people haven’t pointed out before”😒 Brought to you by an Owl House fan
I mean if it turned into an actual relationship that would be problematic but Riley having a crush on someone slightly out of her age range isn't necessarily bad if they confront that in a healthy way. Like Dipper's crush on Wendy in Gravity Falls for instance.
In fact, I think Inside Out 2 would make less money if it included LGBTQ themes because a lot of families would choose not to watch the movie, especially religious families, which is basically Disney's target audience also the movie would not come out in several countries including China the most important market for Disney. Sad reality.
God I hate that Disney is like this. If it wasn't bad enough this is atrocious. Shrek came out like 22 years ago and still has queer representation better than anything Disney has ever done.
@@leshecapri3280eeeeeh … that might be a stretch.. I know they joke about it in the movie but it’s just because he’s like that in the book … you know … dressing up as the grandma to eat Red … Now the two ugly step sisters I can see … All though they don’t confirm it in the movie, I always thought they looked like that because they where supposed to be ugly and unattractive thus having masculine traits but they are actually girls.
@@WhatEvenIsTheInternetAnymore hmmm.... why did you immediately assume i was talking about a character being black? Don't be so sensitive. If a character is white they should stay white, if a character is black they should stay black. Why? Because race changes are not done to make the movies etc. more inclusive. Race changes happen so that people like you spend their money on the movie for 'black representation', especially Disney is taking massive advantage to cash in on the blm community. But the REAL reason i don't want race changes is simple. Because it takes away from that character, it feels like a bad reboot.
@@WhatEvenIsTheInternetAnymore alexa, pull up the list of blackwashed ginger characters oh also i'm sure a black character being white shouldn't affect a movie either, by your own logic.
while there is an age gap, it’s more likely they’re talking about how there *could* have been a romantic queer relationship if Disney wasn’t so scared it would be a flop
@@moss_the_superstar-n6s Yeahhh but val is 18 so I think it’s good they didn’t go that route. Even if she wasn’t 18 seniors just don’t date freshman, they just don’t it’s a general rule. Honestly it’s good they’re no more than friends
Took them 84 years from the first animated family film release to include a main protagonist that wears glasses (Snow white and the seven dwarfs & Encanto), the fact it took so long to represent such a common & simple thing (admittedly 1937 was a very different time from the present but sight-supportive glasses had existed for many centuries atp) doesn't surprise me that they're hesitant about LGBT+ themes. Aside from Lightyear I can't think of any family films to include that at all.
I think that they made the right choice, there really was no point in making the relationship not platonic and it would’ve taken away from the new character emotions
I support LGBTQ+ just as much as the next guy, but Disney has been saying 'hey we support gays just like you so give us your money', so it might be best that they give it a rest and stop acting like they care, we all know they don't.
Isn't funny how South Park despite it's reputation of consider to be a violent and offensive cartoon have a better LGBT representation than Disney?
Right? The Trans part needs to do better though.
Thats how it is when you still live in a world where LGBT in general is considered NSFW, PG-13, R-rated, whatever you’d like to call it.
Yea lol
@@baryardeni9731 As it should be. Actually I think that it should all be R-rated.
@@pugpartyproductions9499 💀
Almost every gay Disney character has a one-off line that reveals that they're gay so it can be written out in different language dubs. I don't know how you can get less gay than that.
Totally remove the whole point that they're gay I guess
The reason for having it be just one line is so Disney can have these movies screened in countries where homosexuality is illegal. Long story short, they need money from audiences in those countries to guarantee a hit just in case it doesn’t perform well in other more accepting countries, so they make it a character who mentions they’re gay in one line of dialogue that can easily be edited out or dubbed over so the movie doesn’t get banned in those countries.
Or are revealed in the very, very, very last episode at the very, very, very end.
I know, make them not gay😊
@@TheLegendaryBillCipher😱😱😱 ITS BILL CIPHER
Making a good film should always be top priority.
yeah, good script over anything
This
Tell that to recent Disney
Ok?? That relates to what we are talking about, how??
@@mindshockz nevermind recent Disney
God damn everybody ought to know it
Less homosexuality DOES make more money because some countries don't allow movies with gay people but most of these countries pirate movies more anyways :D
It's also illegal to that D:
Yeah but we're in the third world what are you gonna do? I'm pretty sure I've never seen an actual official blu ray sold where I live @@ABlizzardIsClose
@@ABlizzardIsClosebut everyone does it lol
It's more like... more queerness where it's allowed, but easy to cut out for countries where it's not i imagine
After all, representation stuff does make money, hence why corpos do it, but it also means losing some markets if it's beyond something what can be edited out... which, to be fair, do prefer to pirate stuff usually
Are you saying they should cater to every country by not having gay representation in their media? Come on, now.
Disney is weird. Do you want to do representation or not? CHOOSE ONE! You cannot have both ways!
Oh, they tried and will always try to go both ways.
Sadly, they've been getting away with both, making forgettable rep than can be easily edited out, so I doubt they'll change much
Making money or pander the audience, difficult choices.
Let's be real, Disney wants money more than anything. That's their endgame, just like every other mega-corporation.
They want money, and people are getting sick of the bs pandering, so companies are losing money. Not surprised by this at all.
“Who made the console orange?” “HEY ITS ME GOKU!”
"ive heard you are strong"
@@Hungeroftheworld "Did someone say STRONG mind?"
- Goku
Oh hell naw
LMFAO
“Who made the console white?”
“THY END IS NOW”
Here, a word of advice to Disney, you don’t need more gay representation.. nor do you need less… what you need is…
*MORE BETTER WRITTEN RELATIONSHIPS AND ACTUAL ORIGINAL MOVIES INSTEAD OF CASH GRABS!!*
@@SUTABANI69 agree
Tell it how it is, my brother!
Agreed 💯
AND TO MARKET THEM LIKE YOU KNOW THEY WILL GO BIG!!
The point of a company is to profit. What's your problem.
*The Owl House becomes gay*
*Disney no like gay*
*Owl House make money*
*Disney like gay*
*Lightyear has gay but no money*
*Inside out has no gay and make money*
*Disney no like gay*
I'm starting to see a pattern here...
Edit: y'all I really would prefer you guys not to have a war in the replies. Just move on please
Yeah, but I guess they just do it for the money
its almost as if catering to small % of the population for representation is not wise but I could be wrong
Bob Chapek hated LGBTQ this is when before Bob iger became CEO again
Owl house isn't that famous, I mean cartoon shows becoming less popular
🤔 this a brain teaser
I feel Disney is disingenuous when it tries to cater to the LGBT crowd. They'll insert a gay character into a movie or show, but then edit them out when they release in their most profitable country, China. I feel it's just a way for the executives to pat themselves on the back for being inclusive when not even caring about the community at all. My opinion, Disney should cater to everyone, and not just one specific group.
an example of this being the owl house. sure, it's a TV show, but remember the large uproar it caused after "mysteriously" being canceled after the 2 main characters being gay and sharing a same sex kiss?
There's a bit of a flaw in your argument though, as by censoring lgbt characters they are actively being exclusive and not catering to everyone. It's entirely possible to have a gay character in a movie and a straight person watch and enjoy it, it just has to be a _good_ movie, which Lightyear was not due to its writing.
@@ilikespaghetti4458 Won't argue there. Whose idea was it to make basically making Buzz the villain and ultimately putting him in the wrong for trying to do the right thing? Also, what I mean is that Disney should not be on one side of the political spectrum, but instead be somewhere in the middle.
@@crispychipzzz_officialand the two girls from sailor moon that are "close cousin"
Or from a anime I watched called Yuri on ice where the two mains went to a church to get "matching friendship rings"
Honestly that made me laugh at the explanation
They need to stop with the SJW representation and just focus on making good films
To repeat what I said a moment ago, DreamWorks handles relationships better than Disney.
Even Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network handle them well.
Despite the whole Quiet on Set thing and the WBD purges.
That is true.
There was Lumity!
Not really..I think the two are actually pretty similar, it's just that Disney gets most of the attention. DreamWorks also seems too afraid to really commit to having any queer characters ot relationships in their movies. I think the DreamWorks fandom in recent years has been a lot more toxic toward minorities as well. Though I've noticed both studios have done a good job at hiring queer voice actors, so that's a plus I guess.
@@FightingBug0523 I mean... TVA is the only Disney studio that did them right.
Surprised they're finally coming out and saying it outright, instead of hiding behind a smokescreen like they usually do
@Mrbrorealofficial3917-o7breported.
They knew it would just fail- like that movie Bros
Getting ready for the elections.
@@bradyd.6332Bros definitely deserved to fail.
Multiple points in the movie they insult people for being straight but the main lead actor Billy Eichner still complains about the movie failing only because of homophobia. Not because he made a movie that wasn’t good and was catering to a small audience.
Ironically, they are just using the who LGBT thing as just **another** smokescreen for why their writing to terrible in their movies.
“We hate supporting lgbtq! Unless It’s June, for no specific reason 🤑🤑🤑”
-Disney if they were honest
*june
Me and hella kids at my middle school be making fun of gay kids
My country is super religious and they would never accept gay characters in any movies and shows.
@@patricktoplak7149 Ok?
@@patricktoplak7149 what country
I figured they wanted to be "less gay" when they said to Alex Hirsch that gravity falls couldn't have LGBTQ (and when they cancelled the owl house)
Yeah he could only squeeze one on screen couple and a few hints in the latest book of bill
Wait… since when did they cancel the owl house? That show was peak for me
@@JuicyBurger29 they canceled the owl house I think when season 3 was in the middle of production. I do know how you haven’t heard about this unless you’ve been living under a rock
@@limezazzy2813 I do indeed live under a rock, and 3 miles of ice, and 17 miles of rock.
If this is the trans dipper thing I’m pretty sure it’s false
They capitalized off of the money of diversity and now they're backtracking
Just in time for elections.
@@RubyCarrots3232 Very sus...
DEI=Die
Cowards. They have no problem with race swappings but they do have problems with LGBT, Apparently. Is this the education you want children to grow into, Disney? Is it?!
@Mrbrorealofficial3917-o7bI JUST UPLOADED A VIDEO OF YOUR PARENTS LEAVING YOU AND I’M LAUGHING AT YOUR SADNESS!
*Lightyear flops*
random gay: “what?”
Disney: “i blame YOU for this”
tadc reference??
@@cipherpool5965 was it the capitalization that have it away?
I know,She-Ra Reboot kinda start this first.
Lightyear was gonna fail anyway
The staff uprising after they removed it so they put it back probably had some ill effects.
I’m glad they didn’t make Riley gay. And you bet that if they made her Gay, although it might’ve made a lot of money, be honest: it would not make as much.
Also, if putting LGBTQ themes and characters is “taking a risk” than movies are not about storytelling anymore. When movies take risks, it should be about doing something unique with: story, art direction, character development, or something like that. Like what Spider Verse did. Not simply, add diversity. Like bruh, movies have characters, whether boys, girls, men, women, white, black, Hispanic, Brazilian, American. Just make sure it makes sense to the setting, and we’re good.
I don’t care about a charecter's sexualty. All I care about is a well written story. I liked TOH because it was a good story and show. Lumity didn’t affect it at all for me.
Exactly. People freaking out about a character's sexuality is weird. You can have a gay character in a film and not go crazy about it, the only thing that matters is if the movie is good or not.
@@The100percentRealWaluigiget out then
@@The100percentRealWaluigi That's so pathetic 😂
@@The100percentRealWaluigi You don't have to watch it then. Nobody is forcing you to. And this is coming from a h0mophobe myself.
@@efemme420You_kkitty when they find out muslims and Christians exist (scary)
Imagine finishing working a MASSIVE project with your colleagues that will become absolutely successful and they fired you before the project was released globally. Pain
And yeah. Disney blamed the same-sex kiss for Lightyear failing at the box office when the actual reason it’s because it didn’t do well with audiences.
Honestly, Disney are such hypocrites.
If it makes less money then can't blame it. Many countries doesn't air Lightyear because of it so having LGBT in it means less money from those countries.
Gay kiss is a big part of why it didn't do well with audiences/at the box office.
@@kingkongsz No, Lightyear didn't flop the box office because of the gay kiss, it failed because it was a bad movie in its own right
@@nataliecoronado4206 t'was, and in part because of that
@@nataliecoronado4206 2 things can be right at the same time yk?
That Alex Hirsch tweet keeps aging like a fine wine.
The one with the narrated emails?
He wanted a gay couple in his show and Disney said no. And now earlier this decade they finally started allowing gay couples to appear in Disney productions. And now Disney is backtracking because they have no soul and their lustrous greed is continuing their current and colossal downfall of which has been going on for about 19 years.
@@ssesssusman9417 Ty for the context. I was lost
Imma sound like a fake sherlock but this shows Disney never cared about LGBTQ+ representation lol
never should've anyway
Wasn't it obvious? Alex Hirsch exposed them a while ago for that on twitter, and look what they did to the Owl House...
This didn't show it, it was already obvious Disney never cared about gay people or rep unless it earned them money
It's worth reminding that the same-sex kiss in Lightyear was a thing that journalists used excessively in their news portals and it blew up more than the movie's marketing, which of course made most of the audience step back.
Indeed
I personally can't wait for Disney to be less gay
I don't remember them focusing on the gay kiss in ads
@@TheAllSeeingEye2468 Did you not read and comprehend OR's reply?
They didn't show it in the ads, the journalists talked about the one scene.
There were people calling theaters to ask if Wish was safe for kids to watch. Disney gained a reputation of being a bunch of G----ers. A lot of families decided to cut out Disney and the stock has reflected that.
As a pan dude, YES! FINALLY!!!! I'M SO TIRED OF THE NOTHING GOOD FOR NOTHING REPRESENTATION THAT WAS JUST THROWN IN TO MAKE MONEY OFF US. If you want to make an LGBTQ rep or relationship, at least give it character rather than "hey guys, look! It's gay! We're all for LGBTQ! Don't mind our shady background!"
Edit: look guys I'm an pan
look guys hes an pan
look guys hes an pan
Have you ever googled gay syphilis rates?
Right, it’s so fucking fake
If anything, it should at least just be seen as if it were normalized and not just flat out "oh hey look, gays!" like you were saying. Hell, even if it were just in the background to where it's noticeable it still counts, right? Asking genuinely
It's not surprising considering that time the S&P tried to censor Blubs and Durland's relationship.
Scripted Lesbian kiss in Lightyear that doesn’t even last half a second: [Exists]
The Walt Disney Company: Guess no more gay for now.
Thats pretty gay if you ask me
i was about to Comment the same
that’s so real
Real
Sir, you have officially won the award for the best comment here
Hatsune Miku?
2:15 the way he said "NO GAY" is hilarious
So true 😭
Bro sounded like Cartman☠️
On the bright side, hopefully because of Inside Out 2’s success Disney can realize animation is what people want and not the live action remake crap they’ve been doing for years now.
I couldn't care less about the representation part. I just want an entertaining movie!
“Yeah, the movie flopped because people hated the gay characters. It definitely wasn’t because of the time travel stuff and Zurg being Future Buzz instead of an actual robot.”
@Mrbrorealofficial3917-o7b why os the thing backwards
yeah, because everyone complained about the time travel
There definitely were a lot of people who avoided the film bc of the gay stuff tho.
Super weird how they just did a full 180 between SJW and anti-SJW mindset this quick, I'll tell you.
It sucked that Future Buzz was Zurg. If it was his dad, it would have been 8/10
Disney flipping a coin to decide whether they want atleast 2 gay characters in all their movies or not having a single gay character in anything they produce
Ally or homophobia? Can't decide today. Will flip a coin on the next movie release
Neither bothers me.
Disney: we want to be straight
Also disney: *makes the main character of strange world gay*
Strange World was only a few months from release after Lightyear, so of course they left the representation in that movie.
And Strange World was bland!
Who cares if characters are gay? Why does all this LGBLT stuff have to be in our faces? Religion is rarely touched on with characters, and if it is, it's played as a joke, but this whole gay stuff isn't something to joke about?
You imply Disney even remembers Strange World even exists... And that they made it.
"We want to be straight" is Bob Iger's Era of Disney and It wasn't Bob Iger's Fault for making the character gay on Strange World, it was Bob Chapek. Two Different Disney CEOs.
Bro you dont need an lgbtq+ or straight relationships to be cool or make money
You need a story
The owl house before and after including lgbtq+ stayed successful due to story
Is it so hard for Disney to focus on the ACTUAL story instead of ‘appealing to more audiences’? No joke, an elementary schooler could write a more creative plot than whatever they’ve been spouting out
3:31 The reason the movie succeeded was because there was no other kids movie at the cinemas (besides Despicable Me 4).
Its weird how people wanted Reilly to be gay when shes literally a litttle kid
And also, it wouldn’t make any sense because she had a crush on that boy in the first movie
You can't spell properly
@@TheSOutherner94 well bisexuality, no?
Well not really, she is 13 years old and a bunch of gay kids realised it when they were in middle school cause it's in this ages that you start puberty and having crush and stuff like this, though I don't think it would have been necessary to have made Riley gay or bi since it would have been unrelated to the plot
Disney is already “less gay.” All the gay scenes in their movies are like 3 seconds long so they can be easily cut out in the international releases.
Disney executives: “Am I so out of touch? No. It’s the gay people who are wrong.”
Exactly! Even A24 and Vivziepop are able to to accurately represent the LGBTQ+ Community with more than half of the characters from Hazbin Hotel and its sister series Helluva Boss being members of the LGBTQ+ community with very few characters being represented as allies. While Disney is going backwards just so they can make more money but what’s really happening outside of the inside out 2 box office opening end result is that they’re practically being self destructive to their business for again, money with things like live action remakes of classic era movies and less representation.
It's both, really. But "virtue" signalers are the ones that truly deserve the blame for putting words into the mouths of minorities.
@@dailysiren9000I don’t think Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss are a perfect example of good LGBTQ+ representation….The gay characters are depicted as dramatic, daddy issues, AND INSANELY HORNY. Which is a terrible stereotype. For characters who’re pansexual, it depicts them as “Oh I wanna fuck everything” besides Beelzebub and Husk. Also, Vaggie, her entire character is solely around Charlie which is wasted potential and views lesbians as codependent.
In my all honesty, Nimona has better representation with how the characters have moral ambiguity and have character arcs with layers-
“Layers! Ogres have layers!” I had to say the quote.
@@froppygurl07 ok you got me on that but can you blame me for trying? It was the first thing that popped into my head when when I was proving my point. Besides if you think about it even bad representation is still better than no representation at all.
THIS IS SO TRUE! They blame one community, while it's not even that! They just force things into places instead of making a good one. This is even hurting the parks with how they force in IP anywhere. The company has no one to blame, but themselves for forcing things and making other people look bad.
If you talk like a person on Twitter, you'd say Disney just wants to be the Old Norm instead of the New Norm.
Well the New Norm ain’t the same as the Old Norm after all
im the old norm, i want normal cartoons
Thank god for elon musk 🗣️🔥
Speaking of Twitter, I am consider leving Twitter entirely at the end of the year and move to BlueSky entirely
@@widdlepocketmarcy And his shitpost memes ‼️🗣️🔥💥
This is most companies. I don't know who needs to hear or read this, but most of these big companies and corporations don't actually care about anybody.
They just want money. Disney doesn't care for black people, for example. They race-changed Ariel and so they could their "representation points" rather than make another movie about a black character, make a live action Princess and the Frog, etc. It's not true representation, it's just casting someone with melanin, changing the "design" for the princess and calling it a day. The screenwriter and costume designers weren't even experts on Chinese culture for Mulan, they did bare minimum and the movie flopped too. There's no clear passion or attempts at trying to make the film of trying to put a marginalized group's experiences in the spotlight. They just want your money, and this is even more likely if there's an old, straight white man (Bob Iger) at the helm. So many of you fail to see that and it is sad
Disney listen to me, the only thing you have to do is not change the sexuality of already existing characters. You have to make original characters if you want more or less gay characters. You can do representation without pissing people off, there's no reason to get rid of gay characters completely. BUT be smart about who your audience is, don't change the sexuality of existing characters just add new ones and write them well!
this is an existing character sure, but sexuality was never discussed to begin with so you can't use that argument here. If the sexuality is ambiguous, it should be fine for them to be gay, no?
@@ZacharyC2000 If the character is sexually ambiguous before hand that is fine. I'm just making an argument in general. I know Disney likes to do low effort diversity, by just saying a character is gay but not following through with anything.
1:15 no heavy don't cry
"WEEEEEEEEH."
Heavy is dead
NOOOOOOOOOOO
Scouts Caps.
That’s where the clip is from
@@FrostyTheNightmare thanks
Having a gay scene that's only there to appeal to people on Reddit and is quickly scrubbed for China isn't diversity. It's shallow pandering. That's what people are tired of. Not diversity. I'm happy Disney is no longer trying to have their diversity cake and eating it too. For real. Anyone who actually thinks these companies genuinely care about diversity needs to sit in front of a mirror and try to have an original thought.
They just have to create actual well-written characters that happen to be queer. That is diversity not a 2 second clip of "gay person wow". The executives don't understand this because they don't understand we want complex queer characters not these fake attempts of representation.
Proof or cap.
Have representation, but don't make the representation the whole character
i love how disney makes one of the most shit spinoffs to a franchise ever (Lightyear) and then blame it on the gay people having a singular kiss.
This title is the best title in all of youtube 💀
@Mrbrorealofficial3917-o7bshut it.
Lmao
@Mrbrorealofficial3917-o7bdude literally nobody cares
@Mrbrorealofficial3917-o7b the only hilarious thing is you think that somebody in this entire universe cares
@Mrbrorealofficial3917-o7bwho asked?
It's not the gay people it's the boring storytelling. I'm bisexual and I don't care if the character is gay i just want to watch amazing stories
its almost as if catering to small % of the population for representation is not wise but I could be wrong
@@UserName-zb8ql the goal isn't necessarily to have an equal amount of queer and non-queer characters in media, it's for that minority to be accurately represented. the percentage of queer people isn't as small as you think, and all that's wanted is to have the amount of queer characters in shows and movies accurately reflect the percentage of queer people in the real world.
It is technically make them lost money as many countries cannot air them and Disney doesn't allow to censored them too. The solution will be letting the countries to censored the movies back.
@@UserName-zb8qlhonestly as someone who is gay many times I roll my eyes with these characters cause they come off as boring or annoying as hell. Nobody wants be around a character who won’t shut about their sexuality like it’s their only trait. Heck sometimes they come off as unlikeable and narcissistic
@@Yoshixandir That is why making shows pandering to only a few people who have that lifestyle will fail
"who made the console orange?" "Hey apple"
"What?"
@@DarkInvader1800 "knife"
Disney needs new leadership ASAP. The creatives know how to make a good movie. Just let them create good stories without filtering every last thing in favour of more precious pennies.
What's funny is despite the rework to make Riley "less Gay", the amount of people I saw online theorising that Riley might be gay or Bi really tells me it really didn't work, lmao
exactly
Yep
Pixar going against Disney's orders
Very based
Honestly thought the same lol
its almost as if catering to small % of the population for representation is not wise but I could be wrong
I do feel like it and pretty much sus with it.
Let’s face it, this won’t be the last time this will happen.
Probably not.
I would not have taken my niece to see this if there were any queer elements in it. So yes. It does have an impact
Disney: I ain't exactly gay but I ain't exactly not gay
I love how the looked at scene of two women kissing for like a second and though "Ah yes, thats why movie failed!" Thats like if I baked a cake with rotten ingredients and burned it to crisp and I blame the cakes faliure to the size of a bowl I was using to make it.
Good comparison.
that's the reason why the movie was banned though, and you know what are the consequences or being banned.
@R_wir3 it's would of still failed if it wasn't banned in those countries
@@jeremybottoms7619yeah, because your average parent doesn't want their kids to see this stuff on movies dedicated to them
@@R_wir3 "Average parent". Bro shut up already
Turns out people want characters that are more than their sexuality
They already had them, yall just make a fuss about their sexuality
@@Bareq_99 cope
@@fly463Cope that you’re a bot. Good day.
@@Bareq_99Preach 👏
@@Bareq_99 nobody ever cared.
“Inside Out 2” as a title, definitely got people hooked in for the first two weeks, but it’s the fact that it doesn’t pander (as well as being an actually great movie) that encourage people to continue watching it more and more past those first two weeks.
They cater to your every whim when there is money to be made, then pretend you don't exist when there is money to be lost. Anyone who doesn't realize that is a fool.
To be fair, if they introduce LGBTQ in Inside Out 2, it would kinda contradict what we saw in Raily's interests in the first movie
So you hate gays and lesbians?🤨
Bi people exist my man. She can like cute boys AND girls. Honestly it would be refreshing to see some bi representation. Since they get shit on by both straights and gays.
@@Celethio That would still just piss people off though
Then how do u explain The Owl House, Disney?
Guess it's time for Disney to change their ways. Be more open and kind and stop buying everything
W DISNEY KEEP IT UP! I HAVEN'T BEEN THIS PROUD OF DISNEY IN A LONG TIME!!
Dear Disney, please just let the children be children and keep politics out of OUR movies. Yes, OUR movies.
Omg shut up please if it was a straight couple y’all wouldn’t care🙄
That's prob why they removed owl house for that "bE aN aLpHa😎😋😍" crap
"I worked for Disney, he's a FRAUD!"
Inside out 2 was one of those movies like “it’s over already?!” And light year was one of those movies like “when does it end 😫😩😫😩😫😩😩?!”
I swear, former employees get *HIGH* after leaving their job. 💀💀💀
I don't think Disney was "very gay" to begin with. The Owl House was their one cartoon with full LGBTQ represntation and got canceled because it "didn't fit their brand". 💔🦉
disney own a crab ton of studios how that don’t fit their brand
its almost as if catering to small % of the population for representation is not wise but I could be wrong
It got cancelled because it was gay. Disney just didn’t want to seem homophobic
The Owl House is Not Cancelled, Is Concluded
@@Bushman26 No, The Owl House is Not Cancelled, Is Concluded
2:26 wdym something more? One is a high schooler and the other is a middle schooler💀
Ha they screwed that up then, shit didn't look platonic at all
Riley was crushing HARD
Bro just don’t make any relationship a big issue, and just focus on a good movie in general.
I’m going to be honest with you. I do not care if you’re gay straight black or white or any other race or sexuality if you make the movie good I’ll be happy.
Disney movie: *flops*
Mickey mouse: those damn QUEERS 😡
Disney movie: *succeeds*
Mickey Mouse: HA! WE REALLY SHOWED THOSE CONSERVATIVES AM I RIGHT MY FELLOW FOLX?!
Please let this be part of Disney's downfall
yes kill the greedy mouse
It always has been, tbh
@@tailsfan10 yay
Sheeshhhhhh That insult was fire 🔥
Hopefully Pixar stays alive
Remember those “ Disney versus DreamWorks” edits in 2023 showing LGBTQ stuff from Disney and then showing Puss in boots the last wish edits saying dreamWorks is better?
I hope those editors are happy or something .
Yup, Minions made money, Lightyear didn't.
@@R_wir3 remember people used to hate minions?
@@R_wir3
Lightyear did, just not enough. (I liked the movie, so despite the box office I hope we get a follow-up.)
Ima be honest, those mfs thought they were the shit making those edits
Disney:our stuff is less gay now!
Viewers:…you do realize we’re gonna see it as gay anyway? And now that you’ve done that we’re going to make it even more gay?
Disney:…what
Disney : "We want to be less gay"
Also Disney : "Make Agatha All Along the gayest show in existence"
to be fair, agatha all along was in the works probably before
they made that decision, however due to it's failure maybe disney
might be more inclined to make their shows less gay.
yeah, AAA was one of Victoria Alonso's latests craps before leaving.
I'm more interested in the show now
Hot take here: unless the story is specifically exploring the experiences of a straight person or an LGBTQ+ person, sexuality shouldn't matter. In general cases, an LGBTQ+ character should be just as effective as a straight one for conveying a good story. Regardless of things like sexuality, audiences should be able to see a part of themselves in or relate to a well-written character. It is for this reason that companies should neither push LGBTQ+ representation just for the sake of seeming trendy or try to sweep it under the rug like it's something to be ashamed of. LGBTQ+ is as natural as straight, so just write naturally.
I'm proud to support LGBTQ and gay couples because is so cute love is beautiful at any way
This is a bit misleading. Disney told them to make sure Riley wasn't gay, when the writers were already planning on not making her gay. This is not nearly a situation like Turning Red. Yes, Disney sucks, but it's not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be here.
*10 days later* :Disney wants to be more gay
Why do companies like Disney never think of the possibility that people simply hate their bad writing?
It just seems like, they truly consider their customers to be idiots, who can be "satisfied with mediocre shit, as long as we slap progressive labels and nostalgia ontop!"
Are you going to make a video about the "Byeee multiverse collection", the upcoming crossover merchandise drop between Amphibia, The Owl House, and Gravity Falls that will be launching a Kickstarter soon and was worked on by the creators of all three shows?
Yoooo, I never heard of that! :D That's so cool!
Lightyear flopped because literally NOBODY asked for THAT at all. What we wanted was the Lightyear we grew up with, the series AND the already done movie! Nobody asked for the "what if Buzz was based on real adventures and Zurg was actually him due to a time warp". 🙄
It seems that these old men Disney executives are trying their best to find a reason to affirm this speech that "the reason for their current failures It's because of representation" at all costs. this is one of those days where Vailskibum makes a serious video from beginning to end about a tragic topic😐
3:41 Stanley jumpscare
This is the story of a man named Stanley
i literally jumped when i saw him. like. what is that pathetic man doing here [i love him in an ill way]
@@SkyleTheFrench Stanley worked for a company in a big building where he was Employee Number 427.
Insert typical comment saying
“Whaaaaat? Disney being hypocritical of LGBT 🏳️🌈 representation saying “they support the gays but not really supporting the gays”? My god! What a revolutionary discovery that people haven’t pointed out before”😒
Brought to you by an Owl House fan
Meanwhile me who wasn’t aware of their homophobia until just now:
@@FizzyLikesDeerDisney isn't homophobic at all. It's just putting homosexual stuff in their films is making them lose money apparently.
@@mindshockz then explain why Disney donated money to Floridas “Don’t Say Gay” Bill a few years ago
@@alibrennan5977 because they can bro. let them be homophobic if they want to 🔥🔥
its almost as if catering to small % of the population for representation is not wise but I could be wrong
I think maybe it had less to do with her being gay and more that riley is 13 and val is 18💀
I mean if it turned into an actual relationship that would be problematic but Riley having a crush on someone slightly out of her age range isn't necessarily bad if they confront that in a healthy way. Like Dipper's crush on Wendy in Gravity Falls for instance.
Val’s 18?
@@awkwarddrawings Yes bro😭😭😭
How is Val 18 if she’s a sophomore?
@@Manueltion15 Cuz she’s a senior????
In fact, I think Inside Out 2 would make less money if it included LGBTQ themes because a lot of families would choose not to watch the movie, especially religious families, which is basically Disney's target audience also the movie would not come out in several countries including China the most important market for Disney. Sad reality.
Ya
God Disney You DISGUST ME! Good on Dana Terrace for getting out of there when she finished Owl House!
its almost as if catering to small % of the population for representation is not wise but I could be wrong
@@UserName-zb8ql Why are you replying the same thing under every comment 💀
@@LIMA_36be normal please😢
@@LIMA_36 why are you checking every comment
@@fly463 tf did I do?
How about we start making good movies? No gay is great, love it. Useless if you aren't making good movies anyways.
I actually thought that Riley was pretty fruity in that movie
the worse thing for me is the layoffs & the fact those who worked on the billion dollar sequal, that were "let go", won't receive their bonuses
In conclusion, all that Disney cares about is the money.
Wow really shocker😮
No new knowledge to be obtained here… 😒
HUH, I had no idea😮
As they should, the “represented” did not earn their place. Like it or not that’s just how it is.
@@assassinsknight so did the other, do you hear other people talk about THAT
God I hate that Disney is like this. If it wasn't bad enough this is atrocious.
Shrek came out like 22 years ago and still has queer representation better than anything Disney has ever done.
What queer rep was in Shrek?
@@dylansharp8471The Character, Doris is the Queer Representation of Shrek.
@dylansharp8471 The cross-dressing wolf is one example.
We don't need queer representation in kids movies. Just because there's no gays in a movie doesn't mean a gay can't watch it.
@@leshecapri3280eeeeeh … that might be a stretch.. I know they joke about it in the movie but it’s just because he’s like that in the book … you know … dressing up as the grandma to eat Red … Now the two ugly step sisters I can see … All though they don’t confirm it in the movie, I always thought they looked like that because they where supposed to be ugly and unattractive thus having masculine traits but they are actually girls.
WHAT THE **** DISNEY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
🤑
They better hurry up then.... we're all waiting
And please no race changes anymore
What’s wrong with a character being black..? It doesn’t affect the movie right? Right????
@@WhatEvenIsTheInternetAnymore hmmm.... why did you immediately assume i was talking about a character being black? Don't be so sensitive. If a character is white they should stay white, if a character is black they should stay black. Why? Because race changes are not done to make the movies etc. more inclusive. Race changes happen so that people like you spend their money on the movie for 'black representation', especially Disney is taking massive advantage to cash in on the blm community. But the REAL reason i don't want race changes is simple. Because it takes away from that character, it feels like a bad reboot.
@@WhatEvenIsTheInternetAnymore oh, let's turn Storm into a white woman then :D
@@WhatEvenIsTheInternetAnymore alexa, pull up the list of blackwashed ginger characters
oh also i'm sure a black character being white shouldn't affect a movie either, by your own logic.
@@WhatEvenIsTheInternetAnymorebut if we have a white actor play a black character people will get butthurt🤷♂️
2:24 💀 tf are they talking about theres 5 years between those two
while there is an age gap, it’s more likely they’re talking about how there *could* have been a romantic queer relationship if Disney wasn’t so scared it would be a flop
@@moss_the_superstar-n6s Yeahhh but val is 18 so I think it’s good they didn’t go that route. Even if she wasn’t 18 seniors just don’t date freshman, they just don’t it’s a general rule. Honestly it’s good they’re no more than friends
@@x._.Angel._.x I meant if they didn’t have an age gap lol, sorry I kinda forgot to specify that lolz
Hey Vailskibum What happend to your old intro theme?
Took them 84 years from the first animated family film release to include a main protagonist that wears glasses (Snow white and the seven dwarfs & Encanto), the fact it took so long to represent such a common & simple thing (admittedly 1937 was a very different time from the present but sight-supportive glasses had existed for many centuries atp) doesn't surprise me that they're hesitant about LGBT+ themes. Aside from Lightyear I can't think of any family films to include that at all.
Aren't there a lot of people in the world that dont wear glasses?
I mean them not having a protagonist that didn't wear glasses isn't exactly that bad
I think that they made the right choice, there really was no point in making the relationship not platonic and it would’ve taken away from the new character emotions
I support LGBTQ+ just as much as the next guy, but Disney has been saying 'hey we support gays just like you so give us your money', so it might be best that they give it a rest and stop acting like they care, we all know they don't.
I absolutely agree, Disney has been lying in the faces of LGBT people for years about how much they care about them.
They’re going to hell