So the various tropes include (but are not limited to): We will imply a character is LGBTQ+ but never show it. We will outright say a character is LGBTQ+ but never show it. We never intended a character to be LGBTQ+ until a retcon later on. We have an LGBTQ+ character. The writers pretend that anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment doesn't exist. Despite this, the writers manage to send harmful messages that reveal their true feelings towards LGBTQ+ people. We have an LGBTQ+ character whose sole purpose is to take up a support role such as a "best friend". If we're feeling generous, they may even have a useful skill such as tech expert or a sidekick who thinks outside the box. We will have an LGBTQ+ character and we will constantly remind you of this. We have an LGBTQ+ character who is a super annoying caricature used for comic relief. We have an LGBTQ+ character who is only revealed in the expanded universe (books, video games etc). This will be explored in support materials but never shown in the TV show. We have a bigot who turns out to be an LGBTQ+ character all along. The potentially fascinating implications of this obvious denial are never explored because this was purely done for shock value. We have an LGBTQ+ character who has been made as boring as humanly possible because we're trying not to offend anyone. However, by doing this, everyone forgets about the LGBTQ+ character and they end up fading into the background. Oops. We have an LGBTQ+ character who has been written by someone who doesn't know anything about what LGBTQ+ people go through. Expect stereotypes and over the top bigoted characters as the writer tackles serious issues without tact, grace, subtlety or accuracy. We have an LGBTQ+ character who was killed. They are the only LGBTQ+ character. We have an LGBTQ+ character who is obviously in the closet. We will tease the possibility of coming out to the closet. When they finally do, we make a big show and dance about it. This TV event will be blasted all over social media, whilst we brag about how progressive we are. We actually take the time to research LGBTQ+ issues and talk to people from the LGBTQ+ communities. We even have LGBTQ+ writers on our writing staff. The result: we actually get it right!
So true, also the whole forbidden love, oversexualization of lesbians thing ( where a married woman gets "seduced" by another woman or/and the movie is literally just sex scenes. )
Yeah, I suppose lesbians are romanticized (fetishized tbh. They are more accepted because it is "hot" ) while gay men are more demonized and predatorialized? Idk but society definetely views same sex love differently based on the genders involved. Idk though, just an observation i've noticed as a bi woman. Probably all v subconcious thoughts people have, but hollywood doesn't really break those tropes or those views too often, aka it enables those stereotypes.
I think this is so apparent and the root of the ongoing 'bury your queers' is because they are more likely to be supporting cast. And diversity and representation of side characters is beautiful if only present there, it leads to the problem. I always love your discussions
Myn Kobayashi This is the same problem with women in refrigerators. The problem is that too many fictional works star straight male characters as the lead. So every other character is relegated to a supporting role. Often times the women and minority roles are just there to fill token representation slots or to show that the main character is a normal person with loved ones. So these roles are often not fully developed beyond lover and friend of the main character thus expendable for the story when it needs to raise the stakes and put the main character through an ordeal. In works where women and LGBT characters are leads the male love interest is often fridged and straights are buried.
@@MildMisanthropeMaybeMassive It can be so hard to navigate, why I adore ensemble casts so much better as it allows for more diversity and a broader look at characters
@@CouncilofGeeks I noticed the glasses too and at first, I liked them and then I asked myself who needs more then one pair and then I remembered when I lost my only pair that one time and was blind for some time and thought "me, probably".
@@CouncilofGeeks You can get laser surgery. But that means no more cute frames unless you slap in fake lenses. On the flip side, individual leaves on trees are a sight to behold.
@@Aconitum_napellus Same!!! I'd probably have a father daughter dynamic between her and God, considering that she was created by Him, though not as His child in reality.
Hate the trope. Nice outfit. Really happy as a mini pride March goes through my town this year at a time where I can meet more LGBTQ people. Happy pride everyone 🌈
This was a really interesting lesson for me as I did not know about the agreement or the trope so much. I think you are right it is lazy writing, it is like when they teased LeFu was gay in the live action Beauty and the Beast and nothing really happened with it. They use it to garner LGBQT+ support and then get upset when there is a bunch of disappointed angry fans who feel rightly ripped off. I feel like Australian television has done some amazing LGBQT+ characters over the years without killing them off so maybe that is why it was not as on my radar. Thank you for the history lesson and for doing these videos because it helps to learn the genesis of something along with how it is actually used.
The thing with dr who is that there are so many living gay characters, it is expected for at least some of them to die. They don't treat LGBT+ any different to normal characters. Also might be interesting, In the book I am writing everyone in the universe except a gay couple is killed.
About the last one: that would make them seem "special" because "well, they are the special ones because they are gay!" (Also, why would everyone die except a gay couple?)
@@keelanbarron928 They were special because they were two of the main characters. Also one of them is the one that has a mental breakdown and kills everyone else in the universe. One of their friends who has the ability to see probabilities everyone's chances to die in the next 24 hours and everyone who is not friends with (the one who destroys the universe, called the archangel) has a 100% chance to die, even his best friends I think were high 90's.
"There are so many living gay characters". Jack Harkness was omnisexual, not gay. Madame Vastra and Jenny are in a relationship. John Hart's still out there. Ianto is dead. Bill is kind of. That's it. 3-4 ish living characters. I mean Rose, Martha, and Donna didn't die. You can have characters exit the show, with sadness, and without death. It's not expected.
Thank you. Great video. Also, don’t even get me started on Tara’s death and the whole Dark Willow storyline. It wasn’t just that they killed her off, as she and Willow were pulling their boots back on... it was the fact that Joss was on record as saying he was aware of the trope and wasn’t gonna go there. He’d been called out about Larry. Those of us who were fans of W/T (which was incredibly groundbreaking and honestly pretty amazing) had spend literally years defending it and and Tara from the trolls wanting her to die for making Willow gay. And there were a lot. And they were vocal. It felt like a total betrayal for Joss to go there with her. I still love a lot about Buffy, but it took me a really long time to watch the last ep of s6 and even longer to see s7.
I always thought Lorne was asexual, at least in regards to the human(oid) cast around him, but I found him refreshing for that. I wouldn’t say that Tara wasn’t BECOMING part of the gang, as Season 6 started to give her scenes to bounce off other characters like Buffy and Dawn, but she was still a secondary character in function; the fact she mostly dodged the angst of that same season, while making her stand out as stable next to the rest, had the side effect of not giving her a character thread of her own in the spotlight. The worst part in my mind (which Nathaniel/Vera didn’t address) is that she died in the first, the ONLY episode she was credited as a main character, because it was also one of Joss Whedon’s quaintest desires granted in a cheap way. He had wanted to kill off a character in the first episode they were in the opening titles, in fact as early as Season 1 with Xander and Willow’s friend Jesse (played by Eric Balfour) in the double-length premiere - he couldn’t because the WB network only gave him enough budget for a 12-episode half-season in the back half of the 1996-1997 tv Season (after turning them down for “7th Heaven” initially) and a single opening title sequence; thing is, the intent would have worked there, because a seeming main character being turned and dusted after just one opening credit sequence was unheard of at the time, and in hindsight Jesse felt all the more like a side character BECAUSE the opening doesn’t show him despite being friends with Xander and Willow... in contrast, Tara should have either stayed recurring or been a regular from Season 6’s get-go, because to me it felt like a cheap shock-value trick on Joss’s part.
Buffy's always been a difficult case for me. I mean, the Dark Willow arc was a very interesting exploration of grief and the scene between Willow and Xander is one of my favorites in the series. I don’t think the writers were thinking about how killing Tara would effect representation (I believe Whedon said that he would have done the same arc if Oz hadn’t left), but intention doesn’t change impact. It’s still a story about tragic gay romance in a time when that was the only gay story in television.
@@thegeekclub8810 How many tragic story arcs about Buffy's love life were there? 3 or more? Willow & Tara were amazing and I've never cried so much over a work of fiction as these 2 characters. Defo ground breaking in its time. 1st normalised gay relationship & 1st normalised gay kiss on TV that I remember.
Tara unfortunately was a victim of being Willows girlfriend Joss said if Seth Green hadnt left the show Oz would have died instead Xander may have become the lgbt character instead I think Joss wanted Willow to go Dark Willow realistically and killing Tara was the most effective way to accelerate it Willow still being there meant there was still lgbt representation and her not dating a guy again too goes against the trope in a way Taras death still hurt though
Also the entire point of Bill's departure is that she *didn't* die--she lived forever with her space girlfriend. (moffat has actually done a similar ending to this, with both Clara/Me and Vastra/Jenny. Whether or not the refutation of the death makes up for the trope in the first place is ymmv, but I think it's far more nuanced than a strict execution of the trope)
The example I was most hurt by was Charlie's death in Supernatural. Not only because the show kinda has an issue with female characters in general dying, but because of how sloppily it was done. It was done off-screen by a character that Dean kills very quickly the next episode. It wasn't even the main villain of the season. (The mark of Cain is technically the main villain, but I would have also accepted Rowena.) It just left such a bad taste in my mouth that I just felt numb afterward. Someone at their SDCC panel that year even pointed out how stupid the death was and it looked like all the actors agreed. I really liked the video and I have to say that you are one of my favorites, especially for nerdy content.
The cast and crew even NOTED there were VERY clear ways that Charlie could (and would) have lived if she wasn’t acting out of character - the plot forced the setting to bend over for her to die, it happened very unnaturally (and is just one reason I don’t bother with later SPN seasons). Compared to that, Tara in BtVS dying to a bullet-of-plot-convenience (which drew ire back when it aired especially) is small potatoes.
I found out about Charlie's death ahead of time, and it's one of those times I'm actually happy for a spoiler. I don't want to see that. I was already tired of how they treated female (and poc, etc long list) chars in general, but that's when I just... Emotionally checked out wrt Supernatural. It was one of those things that reminds me "right, there are people writing this and choosing what they want to happen, and they wanted this character to die". Thanks to the other actors, I might still watch a few eps with a friend who is still a fan, but... Never going to be "all in" like I once was. That was just too much of a dick move.
It was really dumb too. Charlie was translating this book in the nice safe bunker where no one could get her. Then abruptly she's just like "this bunker is lame, if I'm going to translate this book I need to be in a coffee shop". She is then targeted in the coffee shop and murdered. Like there was literally no reason she needed to be there. If she'd been going to get something that was desperately needed for the plot to advance I could maybe forgive it but she could have done what she did just as easily from the bunker.
For me the reason why I loved Charlie and I guess for about 99,99% of the people is just that she's awesome. Being into girls is just smth else like she has red hair. But the show really just did her dirty. And now we also have the situation with Castiel... I would have prefered that he remain in the friendzone. At least the character might have been treated better in the ending. And why were they so cool with girl on girl couples but boy on boy was always just a joke?
"You make this one black, that one's Asian, that one's gay, that one's overweight, oh, that one's goth, hey, we'll have that one be in a wheelchair." LMAO THEY JUST BASICALLY DESCRIBED GLEE 😂
I was really annoyed at Bill's story arc ended, and not just because I was hoping she'd stick around for at least one story with the 13th Doctor as a bridge between eras (as often happened in "old" Doctor Who). From the little speech the Doctor gave at the end of "The Pilot," I was *sure* they were going to find Heather and restore her full humanity (and, if Bill *wasn't* going to be around for Series 11) they would become roommates at Uni. … On a tangential but related note: I've now come to see my physical disability as a facet of my queer identity (mostly because of how my peers' and society's expectations around disability really messed with me figuring out what my sexual orientation really is). And there's a related trope when it comes to disabled characters. In order of prevalence: 1) the character has to be cured of their disability before they have a happy ending, 2) they end up dying (which, for many disabled characters, *is* their happy ending -- better dead than disabled), 3) it turns out they were faking it all along. And yeah. It hurts.
I don’t have the same level of awareness of disabled representation issues (for obvious reasons) but as I learn more about it, there are a ton of parallels with the history of queer representation.
@@CouncilofGeeks I'm currently reading "Disability Rhetoric" by Jay Timothy Dolmage (2014) which focuses on how disability was treated in Greek and Roman philosophy, and how that has carried through to modern literature. And he points out that there is a *lot* of overlap between Classical Greek attitudes toward disabled people, genderqueer and gender fluid people, and women, since all of these people violated boundaries in what was considered the ideal of the male identity. So yeah... a lot of parallels.
I had never seen this parallel this clearly before. you just put words to things that have affected me a lot wrt self... Understanding. I'm gonna check that book out.
@@geckovonparsley8200 it's a good book, but a word of warning: it's written at an academic level for an audience already familiar with formal philosophical terms -- be prepared to reread sentences a few times. ;-) But he also writes with playful turns of phrase, and draws on current pop culture (such as the Wonder Woman comics and Breaking Bad).
I just realised I am very bigoted (well, I mean bigoted in surprising new ways! I hadn't been assuming I was the wokest!) and I feel I should share. So I have been ignoring TH-cam's suggestions to watch your videos for the longest time. I think I opened a link once and then I saw who I assumed was a male, white, wearing a fedora (or fedora-like hat) talking about a social issue and self-identify as a geek. I was so sure I knew what you had to say. And I want to apologise. Thank you for this video and thanks for the opportunity to self-reflect.
My characters Don t die because the death has to have gravity and move the plot forward not to say that they truly die. But some characters have uses because they die. Either willingly or by consequence. My kind of morality leads to apolitical and deviants unpunished due to the narrative and not the trope used. If you are gay I will write them as if they are normal in a world between the natural and the super natural, gays and lesbians can have happy endings, didactic codes of moralistic guardian's will be appropriately called out. Politics is encompassing in my work but the narrative and not the themes that underpin my work take precedence. When one is evil depends on the transformation into the monster and not soullessly coerced into becoming the beast because of the narrative. Though great ambition has it's uses it also shows humanity. Example of this is ganondorf, he wished to Rule everything but he also ruled in a way that helped his people even if it was a guise to the end. Ganondorf from windwaker is more wise and less ambitious than simply ruling everything, he wished to restore Hyrule instead of being flushed away.
You've given me some good ideas on how to present my own LGBTQ characters so thank you soooo much! I have been torturing myself for months because no matter what I was doing they didn't seem quite right, though now I think I know what I'm going to do. I too loathed the trope as a child, it got so tiresome for me seeing someone mentioned as being gay thay may as well slapped a redshirt on them (which they done in ST: First Contact with ensign Lynch) and it really pissed me off because I knew they were only mentioning it so they could make a big deal of how heart broken the main cast were over losing their gay friend and aren't they such good ppl for greiving?!! I think that slowly but surely, just like representation of women and minorities, it's getting better but we do still need to call it out otherwise bigwigs in entertainment might throw up a "mission acomplished" banner and not bother trying to be more inclusive.
I am so very impressed by your work on this subject. Your intelligence and ability to NOT overreact but sticking to the facts and reality EVEN when you are outraged is a rare quality. Your point about characters having 'mass' that is having an existence that WEIGHS in the story as a hole is so right on and one of the reasons I much preferred RTD (who btw is a GENIUS, the best non film director out there) is how EMOTIONALLY invested we become with ALL the characters where as Moffat's more 'idea' driven scripts in his era were poor in humor, poor in character development and frankly often shallow. The ultimate proof of RTD' superior directorial skills is that HIS take on Moffats ideas was so much more powerful than Moffat's versions. (IMHO). I have just come from your very good 'Stop Baiting LGBTQ+ Audiences - A Pop Culture Rant' where you explain so well the importance of honesty and sincerity over cheap 'hint's' covered with 'deniability' and tokenism. Captain Jack is my favorite gay take ever. You could even call it 'straight' washing in that the first time we see him he is holding a very attracted and lovely Rose (yeah I'm straight but so what) but it is soon clear he 'plays' with women enjoying their interest in him but it is men he really and at the end this is made 100% clear in the final bar scene. RTD was able far better than any others to show a VERY diverse set of race, class and age HUMAN BEINGS with out EVER feeling like either pandering or moral lecturing but simply how things are, as it should be. You are perhaps the most intelligent Dr Who commentator out there and I always find your work interesting and thought provoking. Here is another subscription!
Not only do I still mourn Bill, I'm still in *heavy* mourning for the 12th Doctor. Only NOW people are starting to realize what a GENIUS performance Capaldi did.....
Great video, loved the segmenting slides. All the work you put in really shows. Along with pulp publishing and the Hays Code, the Comics Code was also subject to the same "sexual deviancy" ruleset, so it was pretty well ubiquitous and so ingrained it took a long time to be noticed outside the LGBTQ+ community. Sometimes it seems like background gays are analagous to redshirts or that guy who's waxing rhapsodic about what he's going to do after he retires in a week. You just know they're not gonna make it. As for primary characters, it feels like a combination of Bury Your Gays and 'Fridging (which is its whole own issue), because it's so often done to push the survivors' arc forward. In both cases, the impact wouldn't sting so much if it weren't for the fact these characters tend to be, as Daffyd Thomas of Little Britain was wont to claim, "the only gay in the village". Like so many minority depictions, being subject to the Smurfette Principle makes these deaths more outsized than they would be otherwise, particularly when looked at as part of a long-established pattern. Fortunately, we are starting to see some backlash, as evidenced by the outrage with Buffy, and The 100, and most recently, The Magicians. Hopefully the hue and cry will become enough for creatives to come up with more innovative ways to move plots forward and eliminate characters whose actors have chosen to move on.
I love how you went right from gay coding (the unintentionally hilarious "Do you like snails or oysters?" speech in SPARTACUS) to Patricia Highsmith's PRICE OF SALT. I was hoping you would mention this important book by one of my favorite crime authors and you did at some length. One thing the Bury Your Gays trope does is make it all the sweeter when gay and/or trans characters survive and triumph- like (spoiler) Nomi and Amanita at the end of SENSE8. Love your outfit.
I’m loving the structure. Even a loose structure is really helpful in defining the video and it ups the perceived production value a ton. Big ups. Also having it in little chunks makes it more digestible. If you need to pause the video soon and know that, you can pause at the beginning of a segment. I think people are more likely to do it, but also come back, when these segments are titled. Because instead of pausing a flow, it’s a natural pausing place. You also see what you’d miss if you don’t keep watching the video, so it prompts you to go back, which is something you decidedly don’t get if you don’t have structure. As an editor, I’m a huge fan of the adoption of segmentation. It’s a different feeling and, I think, a good change. On another note, I’m also loving the unabashed owning of your gender fluidity. The hubbub of “oh this isn’t the usual Jay we’re used to seeing,” is not really as much of a factor, and even to a cisgen woman, it feels cool that you have established the trust with your audience to be honest about this and just, own it and move on. You deserve the happiness of being able to be yourself, no matter what wonderful facet of you we’ll be seeing on any given video, it’s you regardless. I’m also loving the highlights. They’re really cool!!!
The most painful 'dead gay' for me was the main character Nathan from the book series Half Bad. Mostly because he was so much more than just bi. He was nearly painfully coded black/biracial, had learning disabilites, was neurodivergent, had been physically and emotionally tortured since his childhood, was used as a science experience and trained to be a human weapon controlled by the white and "good" witches. Over the course of two books we follow Nathan as he escapes from the white witches, meets and fall in love with Gabriel and slowly starts to accept himself and his powers. And then in the third book in the Big BattleTM, Gabriel gets killed by a stray bullet or some other bs. Heartbroken, Nathan commits suicide over Gabriel's grave by turning himself into a tree (shapeshifting was one of his powers) and the book ends with Nathan's former abuser and torturer reading a poem over his and Gabriel's grave. The cis white abuser got a full "redemption" arc aka she felt bad she tortured an innocent kid for years. Meanwhile Nathan, who inspired SO MANY in the fandom who identified with him, set the wonderful example of "if you're non-white, queer, neurodivergent, and/or a survivor of abuse; just kill yourself". And the author had led the fans on, happily gushing about headcanons, fanfics, fanart, hearing how Nathan and Gabriel helped fans and how they were representing so many marginalised persons, the whole schebang, even writing slice-of-life, happily-ever-after ficlets herself, knowing full well she'd kill them both. And she refused to aknowledge that she had done anything wrong or problematic. I watched that small fandom burn to ashes over the course of a week or so. It was very similar to the outrage of GoT, but on a smaller level.
Oh my gods, Yes! I agree entirely! I mean I'm sti questioning in terms of my sexuality but his death was maddening not just because of 'burry your gays' but also because of 'abuse victims can't have happy ending' trope. For an example of a story that has LGBTQ+ characters who don NOT die (actually the cast is quite diverse in pretty much any way possible) I would suggest Magnus Chase series by Rick Riordan. The premise is: Magnus Chase is son of Frey, a Norse god, and he dies heroically in one of the first chapters of the fist book only to be taken to Viking afterlife in Valhalla and from then on he and the previously mentioned diverse cast go ob tryong to stop Loki from starting Ragnarok (AKA end of the world. The plot is a tad predictible, but even if you know what is going to happen you don't know HOW it's going to happen, the characters are enjoyable, the writing style is funny. And you might learn some trivia about Norse mithology.
elena nojkovic LOVE Rick, been reading his books for years now and never get tired of them :D sadly I didn’t like the Magnus Chase series a lot, maybe because I’m Swedish so I was pretty well versed in Norse myth already, idk. Love love LOVE Sam and Alex though, they were my favourites. The Apollo series though is 👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻
ktelle I hesitate calling it queerbaiting since Nathan and Gabriel were a couple but she baited the hell out of a happy ending for them. When it all went down that release week I decided to never read that book, one of the best desicions I’ve made lol though apparently you can read the third book up to a certain page , close it and go ”and then they lived happily ever after”
I wasn't even angry at the end of the book. No, I felt NOTHING. It was obviously a cheap shot at drama and so called "bittersweet" ending. I didn't want to give the author the outrage she wanted.
See I find Bury Your Gays to be exactly opposite from what you do. Larry was a minor character, who we hadn't really brought into our hearts and identified with. And he died heroically, in a scene that made sense. Tara was important and many people identified with her. And she was killed off not with any agency, but killed off to drive another character. To make Willow angry. That's the same problematic shit as women in refrigerators in my opinion.
Interesting points, but I think dying heroically is part of the problem. You can have an expendable character and think of nothing better to do with them than an ennobling death. It can feel like you're doing a service to the character , but it doesn't indicate that there's a whole lot to the character in the storyteller's mind. Not that there shouldn't be expendable characters. It's just that expendable characters are more likely to come from marginalized groups. And, of course, it's more brave to kill someone who isn't expendable. That could be invoked in Tara's case, but that's not at all intended to refute your point about her death. I suppose it gets into a different area of even a major character being seen as fundamentally expendable for the sake of the plot (the characters used as "fridging" instruments can be major or minor, as long as they're important enough to another character to incite a reaction).
I don’t think I’d exactly agree. Fridging is a serious problem because it is reductive. It boils a character down to how their only meaningful contribution is dating a main character. Essentially it turns them into a prized possession that when Lost motivates the owner to seek out the thief. That said people do die in stories and it does prompt other characters to react. So I wouldn’t call Tara’s death fridging exactly if only because being Willow’s girlfriend and heralding the coming of Dark Willow were not her only contributions to the story. For much of Season 6 she acted as a mom figure to both Buffy and Dawn and while she was important to Willow’s drug problem arc that wasn’t her only purpose. Contrast that with her sanity sucking by Glory in S5 which was much more like fridging, only done to force a confrontation with Glory. That was accepted essentially because it got undone.
Diana Bell actually Tara died not cause she was gay but because amber benson chose not to return for the following season which ultimately became its last the correct tv trope to use for Tara is kill the departing actor/actress's character cause they don't want to do the show anymore trope actually warren was trying to shoot buffy cause his other attempts throughout the season failed and he was desperate at that point
The more troubling part of Tara’s death is that it led to another, even uglier trope use in the “Psycho Lesbian”, with Willow going not just homicidal but psychotically so (the imagery of her literally ABSORBING the black inked text from the Magic Box’s spellbooks is seared into my brain, and it’s one of the most uncomfortable things Tv has given me personally). Joss said that if Seth Green hadn’t left the show this would still have played out in some form, with Oz instead of Tara dying to facilitate Willow’s brief insanity period (Tara would have been introduced anyway, but not as Willow’s love interest, if this had played out).
I don't know if you've seen the show Shadowhunters but I'd really love to hear your thoughts about it. It's about Angels, demons, half Angeles, half demons, you know fantasy. It's a really fun show with really diversed characters. It has only 3 seasons, season one is bad but it gets really good and I personally think that season 3 is just amazing.
I f-ing LOVE your hair. I've not seen many of your videos and this is the first time I've seen it down! It's beautiful :) :) Also, this was a fascinating video and I really enjoyed it. Thank you for your videos and I hope you continue to make great content! (I realise maybe these points should be the other way around. I hope it doesn't bother you!)
Your point about diversity being spread across supporting cast and so accidentally buying into harmful tropes is a really good point! It's not one I have heard often from other people, but it explains a lot.
Yeah, I think it often gets missed. Because it's just a function of most story telling that way more thought and care goes into main characters. So if you're spreading the diversity through the supporting cast you end up with a lot of careless stuff slipping through. It's something that I realized when revising some of my own writing.
I’d love it if there could be a video about the difficulties of writing for all kinds of minorities. You hear that you can’t use certain terms, like any food term or wood analogy for skin tone (unless you are a POC, when it’s generally less of an issue), and how changing language makes it difficult to actually have words that are safe to use to write, to say, “This person is black or gay or trans.” The approved language is really limiting, so that it’s easier and safer to just not include them. Several writers I’ve worked with have had this problem, and some buckled and removed the characters at the behest of an agent or the publishing house themselves. I... want to have writing be honest, but it’s difficult to display your vision if you’re afraid that the use of an adjective could be used against you if you offend someone with it. I don’t think enough people discuss this, but it is a huge and prevalent issue for writers today.
Joe Francis I agree. But people disagree on what is racist and homophobic. Also, if you are a POC, using a term like apricot to describe skin color is fine, but if you aren’t, it’s split on if it’s acceptable. There’s a vanishingly slim number of descriptors to even clue in your audience that your character is actually a person of color at all, because most descriptors are seen as... less than ideal or problematic. I can use wood and food colors for white skin because of the lack of a widespread history of racism and segregation based on those skin tones. But if I’m describing anything darker than a tan white character, it gets tricky really fast. I’m not a racist. And I want my books to not leave out people who need to be represented just because the language is tricky. But it’s making life really hard for me and other writers like me. Some cave and just don’t mention it at all, and have a head cannon that the character is black or Asian or bi or asexual but it doesn’t end up in the book because they couldn’t walk that line of appropriate wording that the industry feels is suitable. They would rather not it take another full year to get the book on the shelf just to work their way through a descriptor swamp with PR people breathing down their necks and a lot of tense closed door meetings with PR and their agent. Is it worth maybe being dropped because you’re being a pain in the ass in insisting you have representation? A lot of authors cave. I don’t want that to happen anymore. If only POC Can write books including any characters who are also POC, if only LGBTQ+ writers can write books with LGBTQ+ characters, then there will always be less representation than their would be if we could all agree on maybe a reasonable lexicon of descriptors. The characters in my books projects and in the projects I pitch in on that do have these problematic descriptors are many other things than “just black,” or “just gay,” they aren’t third string people added to feel progressive. They actually have stories to offer. But they can’t if we aren’t allowed any words. It’s assumed by a lot of publishing houses that any term you use about skin tone (if you’re referring to as POC, that is) is meant to be disparaging and is something to avoid. But this is a written medium. It would be bad and lazy writing to just say, “Oh yes, because you are white, and I am black.” That isn’t done! So if we don’t have a different way to clue people in, it’s as if our books have ONLY white people in them. It’s easy to say. “Don’t be racist.” But discussing racial topics doesn’t mean they are RACIST topics. Totally different thing. The racial is being smacked around as if it is racist, which is removing race from books completely, and LGBTQ+ characters are getting the same treatment. Since you came to watch this specific video, I’d think you would not support characters being written out because their sexual orientation or skin tone was deemed to be too sticky to get into by a publisher. But no, “If you can’t express your vision without using racist or homophobic terminology then your vision is not worth expressing.” I’d like to think maybe now you realize there’s more to this discussion than *that* takeaway. It’s a huge ongoing problem in terms of trying to get representation on par with real life, and a one sentence declaration isn’t going to solve it for us who are actively dealing with it. But thank you so much for your input.
@@SunflowerSpotlight Then just hire a group of POC and LGBT+ consultants you ignorant asshole. It's not that hard to just ask the actual people what the preferred lexicon.
I have a gay character in my series. It took me awhile to figure out why there was a small group of people who would get hostile about that, since they were often LGBTQ+ or allies. Turns out they (erroneously) assumed that the gay bestie dies. He doesn't. He provides a longstanding foil to the protagonist's inner conflict. But this was my first conscious encounter with the trope as a real, current thing in fiction. Excellent explanation of the trope, it's history, and how to avoid it. Good videos.
You seem much more comfortable, animated and smiley in today's video. Maybe starting off without the "reveal" (for want of a better word) is good for you. x
The most recent (and most heartbreaking for me) was in the TV show The Magicians. I won’t give details because I don’t want to spoil anyone still watching but the whole situation was bizarre and really badly received. I urge anyone who doesn’t care to be spoiled (or wants to be warned) to look up the season 4 finale situation and leave their opinions below. I’m hoping to write an essay about it soon because it fcked me up so much.
TREE BABY Whoa, sorry, whenever I see a kodama anywhere that just kinda comes out. Anyway great video, I've been binging your stuff recently, especially the LGBTQ stuff. I like hearing about it, but as a fellow member of the community it's nice to hear from someone within it all the frustration that I've been feeling. Also your glasses are awesome.
When Star Trek finally introduces a Gay couple, the last I would've expected was this tripe/trope, yet there it was by the end of the first season of Discovery (yeah, they tried to undo it with a new life form but still . . . )
I was so disgusted when the doctor died... Why? Why this specific character? They managed to kinda fix it but it took awhile. And we are perfectly cool with them kissing and being lovely together, which they also avoided in the first season. In fact I found them unbelievable as a couple in the first seasons and now I see it.
I remember having that problem as a teenager with books. When I started to figure out I was lesbian (I was twelve at the time), I searched at the library for books about other people like me. They had dozens of shelves filled with romance novels. Only three I could find had lesbian characters. One was an erotic novel (I had no interest in that one. I was *twelve* for heavens sake.), the other two were tragedies in which at least one if not both of the protagonists died.... I was absolutely heartbroken. So while I generally agree with your points... even killed "with care" freaking hurts, when it's the only representation that you come in contact with. It left me feeling hopeless. Like a happy ending is just not possible for people like me. That thought still haunts me.
Still in the middle of my first watch of the video, I hope I live to see the day when people can just wear what they want to watch and not feel the need to explain why they're wearing the "kinds" of clothes they're wearing. Being able to talk about themselves is one thing- and damn straight I'm supportive of that- but feeling the *need* to explain why they're wearing what they're wearing... I think Eddie Izzard put it best when a reporter asked about him wearing "women's dresses", and he said "They aren't women's dresses, they're MY dresses". My love of wearing jeans and pants would have been seen as "dressing like a man" through the years, and while it did cause some issues in the 80s, it wasn't actually a big deal in my life asides from some comments from some family, and because people sometimes think I'm a part of the LBGTQ+ community when I'm not... which seriously blows my mind. We need to stop assigning genders to the kind of dress people wear. Like a skirt is seen as "female", but a kilt isn't? Yes, the traditions are different, but the function of both and the design of how they functionally cover body parts are the same. I see more men feeling comfortable wearing shades of pink in "men's" clothing as a slow improvement- a moment that sticks out in my mind as a kid was a bunch of guys were together and one was wearing a button up suit shirt that all the men were laughing was "pink", when he said "It's not pink, it's salmon" they all cracked up, and he probably never lived it down with them. It's absurd. There's an enraging long way to go, even with the improvements I've seen since the 80s and on I've been here and aware, for people to be able to love, marry, form families, adopt, and dress/express their gender how they want and in the way they feel represent who they are. Where if you were born as a gender you don't identify with, however you decide to express that isn't seen as anything weird... It annoys me when people assume I'm either a lesbian or bi, not because I take it as an insult- I actually make it a point of never correcting them because I feel that would imply there's something insulting about it- but because people still overly assign genders to clothes. Just because I'm more comfortable in jeans, a tshirt, and a hoodie when I'm not having to fit to a professional dress code doesn't mean anything more than that. Men who dress in clothes seen as "women's" doesn't automatically mean they're gay, or trans... don't jump to conclusions and just appreciate that they're wearing what they're wearing. Their sexuality and identification isn't your business unless they decide to tell you. Keep your assumptions and commentary to yourself. Crap, you're rocking that look far better than I would. Ok, that rant aside, I've noticed the same, and where people are calling studios out when the "token" minority doesn't make it to the end of the movie, or when there can only be one character of a minority, so if another comes on that first one has to go- people haven't been demanding the same of LGBTQ+ characters... and most of the time, where people are also finally speaking up when minority characters are only there to perpetuate stereotypes, generally speaking LGBTQ+ characters in most forms of entertainment have to fit into stereotypes. Not all the time, but annoyingly more often than not. There's a loooooooooooooong way to go, things are improving (and then backsliding) overall, but there's a LONG damn way to go.
This is a really important video I didn't even really realise this was a trope but you're totally right. Remember the gay couple from the 100? Literally the only reason I watched that show and then one of them died obviously
I'm surprised that The Walking Dead wasn't mentioned at all. I've never watched it but my boyfriend does and he's mentioned that the show pretty much never has more than 2 gay characters at a time. Once a third one is introduced, one of the old ones are killed off within an episode or two, sometimes in the SAME episode.
This is one of the reasons why I (who loved TWD for five seasons) stopped watching after getting through season 6 mostly on loyalty. It got really obvious.
I just stumbled upon this video in my recs list. I'm glad I clicked on it. You're entertaining to watch and the analysis is really thought out. Maybe because this subject hits close to your heart, don't know, I'll have to check out your other vids. However, I do like your presentation and topics, so- subs from me.
Hey just wanted to let you know I really like this video; I appreciate you digging into the history and showing how the prudish conservativeness of the Hays Code era still haunts us. Also, I love your top!
Thoughtful video as usual. I find this problem quite difficult to deal with overall simply because of the numbers at play. If we take the highest percentage and say that 10% of a population is not heterosexual, then when writing a story it becomes a challenge because if there are 10 less important characters in a situation, chances are only one of them is not heterosexual. You could tackle the problem with over-representation, but that can cause it's own issues. I think doctor who took this approach and it still gets criticized, despite having a large number of gay minor characters who simply survived. When it comes to characters who are less important to the plot, things are as you pointed out, more difficult. Minor characters are often killed off unceremoniously, many of them without ever portraying to the audience what their sexual preferences or gender identity are (statistically, some were gay). I personally see it as a problem if a characters only trait is "The gay one" and by extension I see it being pretty daft when the story goes "Hey! I'm the gay character... and now I'm dead." ,but at the same time is it not equally a problem if we were to protect any minority from death in a series where death was relatively commonplace and unceremonious? I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.
This was very interesting. I wanted to say they do this to all minorities, especially use to do this to black minorities, but slowly not as much. I think the same with lgbtq characters dying or being wafted out of the story when their arcs are complete... but it's not really a good thing at all, and sometimes it seems like there is an ignorance to it where a community doesn't realize they are doing it because of the influence of American media/ (or just Past American media), and perpetuates the same stereotypes, even though they might not have as bad a history. However, hearing the full history on this issue was very interesting. But honestly, I'm still not going to defend the "Bury your Gays" Trope too much in media because gay characters dying or being in tragedies happens way too much. We get it! It's a cliche at this point to where it is distracting even when it is innocent. I think the only way to get around it is if you have multiple main lgbtq characters of different representation with different outcomes such that it doesn't feel like their sexuality was a factor in choosing their death. (Because sometimes as well, that casual side of things feels like a Bachelor reality show, and LGBTQ people are just another minority person on the show there to avoid accusations of racism, but eventually they get picked to leave the story because they don't see their potential to pair the character off with any of their other main characters. I just say, let's do something "newish" and let lgbtq characters get a happy ending, (when everything else is ending)
It's not just a Hollywood issue though. The same trope is often used in anime, and although I can't be sure how it got there because I haven't researched it, I highly doubt it was Western influence. Although in anime it's usually more on the tragic side. Ironically, in the latest episode of Sarazanmai that I was watching just this morning a gay couple died after explicitly establishing that their relationship was a romantic one. It's been hinted throughout the series, pretty heavily at times, but before this episode there's always been an out to interpret it as something else. So, yeah. Nice timing. Also, love the title screens :)
really loved this video- it was wonderful hearing the actual miserable history behind this trope. i wish you had mentioned the magicians, as that is still such a sore spot for me. actually, i would love a whole video about quentins death if you even watch the show haha.
I think today there’s a double edged sword to this topic with the over presence of social media. Amber Benson talked about the letters she received about the importance of Tara and Willow from fans, but she talks about how because there wasn’t the ability to tweet immediately the impact was more removed from them. While I am so happy that as a community we are calling out the trope and demanding better representation and more representation in general, I think too often fandom itself goes sour. In the case of the 100 they barely go to conventions anymore and every single panel question has to be carefully monitored. Not too mention that still 3 years later the actress that portrayed Lexa can’t escape awkward and uncomfortable questions during public professional issues. The other half of this is that on the creative side directors and show runners can more easily impact fan’s conversations, baiting is more easily done when a show runner is constantly tweeting about a “ship”. Then there’s a huge fallout when they’re called out for what they do and there’s no in between of understanding the impact of their work and them being attacked and bullied for their actions online. The trope has been so ongoing I think it’s difficult for writers and creators to understand better representation, especially if they’re cisgender and hetero. When they see fallout for the actions of others online, instead of making an effort they just stop and don’t bother with adding lgbt+ at all. This video is so important and I so admire how you’ve approached all of this. I know you’re also not a “fan” of when fandom goes sour.
Good vid 👍🏻 ... it seems to me that anyone that's not considered as being 'acceptable ' 'normal' etc kinda all get treated the same, I'm glad you mentioned wheelchair users, ... sometimes people being portrayed as more violent etc. because of their appearance ... it's more than about time that the media and entertainment industries stop using out-dated stereotypes and stop marginalizing anyone who doesn't fit into narrow minded definitions, politicians too have responsibility to stop using oppressive legislation etc. allow people to be who they are and not be treated inferior for it.
I get it better now, that I was able to finish this clip. Same kind of trope. Wonder if the random bigot character getting killed off would make us feel better.
I guess they may as well wear red shirts. I recently started watching Chicago Fire and there was a character, Leslie Shay, played by Lauren German and I don't know if she can be called "supporting" since it was kind of an ensemble cast, but she wasn't one of the more frequently featured cast members. There was a plotline with her trying to get pregnant that seemed to get dropped with nothing more said about it after a while. Then she was killed off in the 2nd season. And while it didn't go unnoticed, and other characters mourned her loss, with the storyline of her trying to get pregnant getting dropped, it didn't leave a good feeling.
Bill was definitely my favorite companion other than Donna and jack. I felt like her character was killed off too quickly and I’d love to see her in later episodes
This is the same thought I had with the patterns video that I didn't get to share so I'll share it here. The pattern started out as a clever way to get around sensors and has been taken to a negative extreme. Gay or Lesbian Romeo and Juliet? Wonderful. Dressing as women to hide from the mafia? Genuis. Thoughtlessly killing off a gay character? That's more of a problem with tokening in general, as tokening runs into the problem one character trait and that's their whole personality which is just lazy writing. Same with having men dress up as women and expecting the audience to laugh just because. Good reason for the start but man is the pattern bad. Good video as always.
Thanks for educating me on a trope I was not previously aware of. Did you know that the character playing Larry in Buffy (also called Larry) is quite the homophobe, publicly stating that he believes that god intended men to be with women and not other men? Not too bothered about an unceremonious offing of that guy (although I acknowledge that this still plays into the trope). I think Buffy series 6 isn’t acknowledged enough as it’s about the pervasive misogyny and entitlement of the “nerd” - who at that time was often seen as the hero and the underdog.
I stumbled across this video just a week after the show Harrow killed off their only openly gay series regular. It's such a cheap, dirty, and lazy thing to do most of the time. A week later and I'm still raging over it. It was really interesting to learn how it all started, but, you're right, it's time we start treating this like the other tropes out there and subvert it. It's ridiculous that in this day when there's such a cry for good representation that this still happens so much.
I'd be delighted to share some shots with you, but I live in Toronto. I found this video very informative and insightful, so thank you for that. Happy Pride, Nathaniel! Happy Pride, Vera!
Carol… in that book… grew on me. It saddens me taboos still exist in stories told that make it unnecessarily difficult for many people to see themselves as valid in the world they live. I read carol and the ending didn’t strike me as sad, but realistic, hopeful even. The main characters, in the world they live can’t remain together because of their peers and though that might make them miserable, they don’t let this become the be all and end all of their story. In my own story, my gay character gets the relationship arc which ends in misery for her, for a short time. This is because though their relationship ends, it doesn’t spell the end for their stories. The gay character sticks around for her ex because they’re friends, and for her kids because that’s the kind of person she is. And her ex ends up showing her that love exists in many different forms and despite all they’ve been through, love remains a constant. This is a big deal for her because she is used to pain, she is on bad terms with her homophobic mother and on tenuous terms with her impressionable younger brother and her ex’s family pretty much considers her a daughter after their relationship ends. For the gay character, she is tasked with wrapping her head around the fact that despite everything she considers unlovable about herself, she is loved by more people than she perhaps has ever known. I wrote the stories because this is what I crave to see in fiction. I create a new love interest for her in time, one who she isn’t quite ready to love at the time they meet and one for whom she has to resolve a lot of conflict. There were times in her arc where she was miserable because of who she loved, times when she resigns herself to unhappiness because she wants to be kind to those people she loves. There are times when she gets hurt because those people she loves end up in Herero relationships because those are pains that I’ve experienced. My journey out of the closet is marred in pain and marked by the monumental task of accepting and forgiving myself for my own insecurities and for hurting myself again and again for the sake of other people’s happiness and for those whose behaviour shows that they do not in fact care about me. If I saw myself in fiction in ways and forms that were not resigned to misery and death I might have grown up with a different attitude toward myself. Point being, make the stories of lgbtq+ characters as complex and nuanced as any other.
I remember you mentioning the next scheduled video on LGBTQ representation would be about bi-sexual characters. I'm curious about your thoughts (and am hoping you bring up Rosa from B99), so I'm kinda bummed it got pushed again. Any estimate on when you plan on touching that subject?
Thank you :) It's very interesting learning a bit of the history. I only recently learned of the trope, and I'm trying to be more aware of it, and other overused tropes, in the media I consume.
@@justkerowen3191 dude it's a masterpiece. Because he doesn't just talk about his sexuality, he addresses so many issues around our community and in general. Very good watch
This was very interesting and is definitely food for thought. To be honest i had never heard of the trope until a character died in critical role. I think gicen what you had to say that the death there wasn't malicious. And in stead the bi character wasnt dieing because he was bi, but because he was working with others to save their friends and stop slavers. His was a heroic death and in the end he spit in the eye of his killer. Those who survived the encouter swore to avenge him and his death had true meaning.
Very interesting, especially regarding the early establishment of the trope which I had no idea was even a thing. Although, when a character death does happen to fit into the parameters of a particular trope, does that necessarily make it an example of that trope in practice?
This was a really great video and I have a Lot of feelings about this trope. But I want to take issue, just really quickly, with the conflation of "trope" and "cliché" because they really aren't synonyms. A trope is any narrative device or convention, not only the overused ones. I'm not trying to be an ass about this, but I'm a bit of a stickler for grammar and word choice so... Yeah.
I feel one of the reasons the tripe still comes up is that it’s existence hasn’t removed much attention via satire or parody like say ‘black people always die in horror movies’ which has been mocked for years. It’s why I don’t think it’s always worth getting mad a writer when it comes up as it wouldn’t be necessarily unreasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt. If it oddities frequently from the same writer though, different story.
Nah, it’s always worth outrage. If someone accidentally kills someone without intending to they still get arrested for involuntary manslaughter, the same principle should apply here
@@theshadowdirector Except things don't exist in isolation, especially stories. They have a greater context outside of their self-contained worlds that contribute not only to the perception of LGBT+ people but also the perpetuation of generally harmful stereotypes. This isn't something that can be judged on a case by case basis. We all have to react the same way to all stories that do this, we can't really make exceptions if they "do it well" because that promotes the idea that it's the way it's done that's the problem as opposed to the fact it was done to begin with. When in reality, its the other way around.
Buffy spoilers. 14:00 - Going from memory here, I'm pretty sure Amber Benson was not generally credited in the opening. I remember at the time thinking it was odd given her prominent role. Anyway, I'm pretty sure the only episode she was credited in the opening was when Tara was shot. And I noticed that, FINALLY she was in the opening credits. Then at the end I realized they added her because she was about to die - maybe a nice gesture of not having without an opening credit for her whole stint on the show? That's what I remember from when the show was broadcast. I don't know if they retroactively added her to the opening credits of the other episodes since then. If anyone has a different memory of the original broadcasts, I don't know what to say. I guess I'd have to try to dig out some of my old VHS tapes to provide evidence.
When I watched them just a couple of years ago back when they were still on Netflix, it was exactly as you describe. I vividly remember thinking "yay! Tara is officially in the credits now" at the beginning and "you bastards. You were just raising my hopes so that the fall would hurt even more" at the end. (Your interpretation of the intent is much more charitable). So at least as of the version they put on Netflix a few years back, that is the only episode where she is in the beginning credits.
Remember how huge it was that Adam was trans on Degrassi? And then they killed him in a "don't text and drive" subplot? I get that the actress was a woman and couldn't depict his medical transition, BUT HE WAS A SENIOR. Adam didn't have to be written out! He was going to leave the show when he graduated!! You know they don't give a flip about characters after they graduate, because Maya's own sister didn't even show up when Maya's life was falling apart!!
would you ever consider sorta a "history of Magneto and Professor X" video? theres so much romantic subtext in the films(the young versions mostly) and delving into comic history would be interesting and maybe ask "should they just make it canon?" been thinking about them a lot especially after dark phoenix basically ending on them going off to live together. however i feel like you don't have interest in exploring specific pairings.
Council of Geeks I have one too and am always surprised how little it’s recognised! New to your channel and love your videos so far. I’m a gay woman but am learning a lot about the gender spectrum from you - something I admit I know little about - and I’m so glad you are able to be you :)
I think the Bill Potts inclusion is a stretch, Moffat had to end his era and raise the stakes in a big way ,writing out the twelve doctor , missy and the companions
Except they could’ve kept the companions. Or at least written them out in a way that didn’t violently kill off the only prominent LGBT* companion besides Jack.
Writer here just realised I have a story where I kill a "gay" character early in the book but the fact she is lesbian dose not come to light till the end when she is saved and finds love (very early draft know I need to give hints sooner)
Also a writer. I noticed that the only character in my group of heroes who is NOT explicitly LGBTQ+ is also the only one who dies. This was not intended, but it's kind of cool as a subversion of this trope, now that I think about it.
puzzlequeen 1988 As long as she’s not the only gay character and you bring her back without ever killing a gay character ever again then you should be good.
I believe that there is a sub trope of this with the stray bullet where a gay character gets killed off when they weren’t the target of said violence like Tara in Buffy or Lexa. This is usually done to motivate the love interest and tends to have a lot of shock value but it honestly just sucks to see since characters that fall under this trope usually are giving the happy moment prior to death or are frequently put into other situations more dangerous than in the conditions they died
When you are ace and their are more representation of vampire and human than ace relationship, you like... In media, dying work more than me being alive so...
Have a look on TH-cam for Gerald Tippett, Shortland Street. Gerald was the first out ace character on tv. Shortland Street is a New Zealand soap opera and Gerald's story includes his self-discovery of his asexuality and coming to terms with that, although his asexuality is not his defining characterisation - he happens to be ace, but that was just one of many plotlines for him. th-cam.com/video/mgju7QrWszA/w-d-xo.html
Most recently this grinded my gears when voltron was airing and Adam was killed and Banana Fish when Ash died. I kind of get Ash dying, there's a whole in depth discussion we can have about that but like it was an extremely upsetting way to end the manga/anime😭
What do you think of the acronym grsm? In case you don't know, it stands for Gender, Romantic and Sexual Minorities, and people started using it because the lgbt... variants were getting too long or too exclusive.
It’s interesting you brought this up, as I’ve wanted to ask your opinion on this since I discovered your channel. I’ve never heard the phrase “bury your gays” before, but I was always hyper aware of this disturbing trend in New Who. I teach film editing and storytelling at the college level and I am a big fan of “making everything count”, story wise. I am not gay, so I don’t have a dog in this race, but it always struck me as disturbing and sloppy storytelling that this seemed to be consistent in the show. Disturbing in the fact that “wow, you guys are killing a lot of gay characters. Sloppy because, why do we care about their sexuality if they are just monster food? Why do they need to bring up this fact at all IF it does not affect the story? (I’m not against it, but why bother is my point.) If there is no effect on the plot it is just unnecessary info. (Thanks for the deeper insight into the person that will die 3 shots from now.) The two greatest examples that stuck with me is the girl that gets sucked out of the shuttle ion “Crossing Midnight”. With her case, it was casual conversation, and a really good way to add that depth to the character. It wasn’t forced or weird, it was just small talk. Well done RTD. Then 37 seconds later she is sucked out an airlock. It just seems like a waste to bring it up, but there wasn’t much to do with this character anyway. The one that bothers me most as a storyteller is in “Waters of Mars”. As I mentioned before don’t add in unnecessary details to your story. One of the other “rules” of storytelling is that the best drama come from character relationships. That being the case, if you’re going to bring it up (anything really), make it relevant to the story you are telling. In “Waters of Mars” there are to guys working on the station who early in the episode identify themselves as each other’s husbands. Cool, maybe we can use that info later. Later in the episode one of these guys goes to the Greenhouse section of the ship (I think he was the botanist). All of the other characters are in the C & C part of the station watching the botanist on a monitor as he does what was needed done. Suddenly, he is attacked by the water and is being turned into a water zombie IIRC. Back in C & C, his husband is watching his husband get killed on video, but they didn’t make a big deal about it. This was a great opportunity to make the earlier conversation pay off. We know the relationships that these character share, and they just didn’t bother making it relevant or interesting to the story. By the end of the ep, I think both characters are dead, but they missed out on such a good opportunity for a great character moment! Arrgh! Sloppy. I just always thought this trend was weird/ bothersome.
Two comments. Sometimes I think you're so happy to see LGBTQ content that you instantly find it good when sadly, writers are too often missing the mark. Secondly, I was so thrilled to see that you "came out" in the opening of this video that I chose to re-subscribe. I just want you to be whoever you are, whatever that is at the time, and sometimes your videos feel like you're half in the closet with that hat. It doesn't matter what others think. Honesty to oneself is key and empowering.
This is a great video; many great points. I do want to mention, though, near the end of the video, you said that "another word for a trope is a cliche." This is an untrue statement; a trope is simply an element of a story; Five Man Band and Soulmates are tropes, just as Bury Your Gays/Queers and Damsel in Distress are tropes. A cliche is simply an overused trope. The words are not synonymous.
I think the Dr. Who critique is unwarranted. Because of the frequency that they kill of characters main out supporting. gay, straight, or Bi. Hell the last companion (before bill) was killed and revived ad nauseum.
![ปฏิเสธไม่ไหว (Crush on you) - LIPTA feat. No One Else [TEASER MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VC689EgdSIw/mqdefault.jpg)
So the various tropes include (but are not limited to):
We will imply a character is LGBTQ+ but never show it.
We will outright say a character is LGBTQ+ but never show it.
We never intended a character to be LGBTQ+ until a retcon later on.
We have an LGBTQ+ character. The writers pretend that anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment doesn't exist. Despite this, the writers manage to send harmful messages that reveal their true feelings towards LGBTQ+ people.
We have an LGBTQ+ character whose sole purpose is to take up a support role such as a "best friend". If we're feeling generous, they may even have a useful skill such as tech expert or a sidekick who thinks outside the box.
We will have an LGBTQ+ character and we will constantly remind you of this.
We have an LGBTQ+ character who is a super annoying caricature used for comic relief.
We have an LGBTQ+ character who is only revealed in the expanded universe (books, video games etc). This will be explored in support materials but never shown in the TV show.
We have a bigot who turns out to be an LGBTQ+ character all along. The potentially fascinating implications of this obvious denial are never explored because this was purely done for shock value.
We have an LGBTQ+ character who has been made as boring as humanly possible because we're trying not to offend anyone. However, by doing this, everyone forgets about the LGBTQ+ character and they end up fading into the background. Oops.
We have an LGBTQ+ character who has been written by someone who doesn't know anything about what LGBTQ+ people go through. Expect stereotypes and over the top bigoted characters as the writer tackles serious issues without tact, grace, subtlety or accuracy.
We have an LGBTQ+ character who was killed. They are the only LGBTQ+ character.
We have an LGBTQ+ character who is obviously in the closet. We will tease the possibility of coming out to the closet. When they finally do, we make a big show and dance about it. This TV event will be blasted all over social media, whilst we brag about how progressive we are.
We actually take the time to research LGBTQ+ issues and talk to people from the LGBTQ+ communities. We even have LGBTQ+ writers on our writing staff. The result: we actually get it right!
Holy shit, who wrote this bs?
So true, also the whole forbidden love, oversexualization of lesbians thing ( where a married woman gets "seduced" by another woman or/and the movie is literally just sex scenes. )
@@wronglayerbutok I hadn't considered that one. Yeah, that is quite prevalent.
Yeah, I suppose lesbians are romanticized (fetishized tbh. They are more accepted because it is "hot" ) while gay men are more demonized and predatorialized? Idk but society definetely views same sex love differently based on the genders involved. Idk though, just an observation i've noticed as a bi woman. Probably all v subconcious thoughts people have, but hollywood doesn't really break those tropes or those views too often, aka it enables those stereotypes.
Or we confirm a couple lgbtq and we never show them kissing.
I think this is so apparent and the root of the ongoing 'bury your queers' is because they are more likely to be supporting cast. And diversity and representation of side characters is beautiful if only present there, it leads to the problem. I always love your discussions
Myn Kobayashi This is the same problem with women in refrigerators. The problem is that too many fictional works star straight male characters as the lead. So every other character is relegated to a supporting role. Often times the women and minority roles are just there to fill token representation slots or to show that the main character is a normal person with loved ones. So these roles are often not fully developed beyond lover and friend of the main character thus expendable for the story when it needs to raise the stakes and put the main character through an ordeal.
In works where women and LGBT characters are leads the male love interest is often fridged and straights are buried.
@@MildMisanthropeMaybeMassive It can be so hard to navigate, why I adore ensemble casts so much better as it allows for more diversity and a broader look at characters
LOVE your glasses 💜 they’re so pretty!
I would love to get Zenni Optical to sponsor this stuff, I wear enough of their frames.
@@CouncilofGeeks I noticed the glasses too and at first, I liked them and then I asked myself who needs more then one pair and then I remembered when I lost my only pair that one time and was blind for some time and thought "me, probably".
Well I’m lucky because my eyes haven’t gotten worse in ages, so I’ve just gotten new frames me tastes have shifted or if I was getting bored.
@@CouncilofGeeks You can get laser surgery. But that means no more cute frames unless you slap in fake lenses. On the flip side, individual leaves on trees are a sight to behold.
yes, I agree, they look really great :o
Satan was a Lesbian sounds like an amazing read.
Right?
I lobby for a story where she seduces a mortal woman, falls in love and gets to live on earth but still rules over Hell.
@@alexbenjaminlubbers I'd read that, it would also make a cool movie.
@@Aconitum_napellus
Same!!!
I'd probably have a father daughter dynamic between her and God, considering that she was created by Him, though not as His child in reality.
I need that cover as an A3 poster, it's magnificent
a TH-camr called Strange Æons actually did a video reviewing it. 10/10 recommend her video and channel.
Hate the trope. Nice outfit. Really happy as a mini pride March goes through my town this year at a time where I can meet more LGBTQ people. Happy pride everyone 🌈
I never use the trope, too overdone
@@haruhisuzumiya6650 You're a better person than most film or show writers then.
This was a really interesting lesson for me as I did not know about the agreement or the trope so much.
I think you are right it is lazy writing, it is like when they teased LeFu was gay in the live action Beauty and the Beast and nothing really happened with it. They use it to garner LGBQT+ support and then get upset when there is a bunch of disappointed angry fans who feel rightly ripped off.
I feel like Australian television has done some amazing LGBQT+ characters over the years without killing them off so maybe that is why it was not as on my radar.
Thank you for the history lesson and for doing these videos because it helps to learn the genesis of something along with how it is actually used.
I'm Australian and i can't really think of many good examples. Can you suggest some for me to watch?
Dance academy comes to mind but he died in season 2...
The thing with dr who is that there are so many living gay characters, it is expected for at least some of them to die. They don't treat LGBT+ any different to normal characters.
Also might be interesting, In the book I am writing everyone in the universe except a gay couple is killed.
About the last one: that would make them seem "special" because "well, they are the special ones because they are gay!" (Also, why would everyone die except a gay couple?)
@@keelanbarron928 They were special because they were two of the main characters. Also one of them is the one that has a mental breakdown and kills everyone else in the universe. One of their friends who has the ability to see probabilities everyone's chances to die in the next 24 hours and everyone who is not friends with (the one who destroys the universe, called the archangel) has a 100% chance to die, even his best friends I think were high 90's.
@@GamePackAlpha okay.
"There are so many living gay characters".
Jack Harkness was omnisexual, not gay.
Madame Vastra and Jenny are in a relationship.
John Hart's still out there.
Ianto is dead.
Bill is kind of.
That's it. 3-4 ish living characters. I mean Rose, Martha, and Donna didn't die.
You can have characters exit the show, with sadness, and without death. It's not expected.
Thank you. Great video. Also, don’t even get me started on Tara’s death and the whole Dark Willow storyline. It wasn’t just that they killed her off, as she and Willow were pulling their boots back on... it was the fact that Joss was on record as saying he was aware of the trope and wasn’t gonna go there. He’d been called out about Larry. Those of us who were fans of W/T (which was incredibly groundbreaking and honestly pretty amazing) had spend literally years defending it and and Tara from the trolls wanting her to die for making Willow gay. And there were a lot. And they were vocal. It felt like a total betrayal for Joss to go there with her.
I still love a lot about Buffy, but it took me a really long time to watch the last ep of s6 and even longer to see s7.
really? i did not know that! thank you
I always thought Lorne was asexual, at least in regards to the human(oid) cast around him, but I found him refreshing for that.
I wouldn’t say that Tara wasn’t BECOMING part of the gang, as Season 6 started to give her scenes to bounce off other characters like Buffy and Dawn, but she was still a secondary character in function; the fact she mostly dodged the angst of that same season, while making her stand out as stable next to the rest, had the side effect of not giving her a character thread of her own in the spotlight. The worst part in my mind (which Nathaniel/Vera didn’t address) is that she died in the first, the ONLY episode she was credited as a main character, because it was also one of Joss Whedon’s quaintest desires granted in a cheap way. He had wanted to kill off a character in the first episode they were in the opening titles, in fact as early as Season 1 with Xander and Willow’s friend Jesse (played by Eric Balfour) in the double-length premiere - he couldn’t because the WB network only gave him enough budget for a 12-episode half-season in the back half of the 1996-1997 tv Season (after turning them down for “7th Heaven” initially) and a single opening title sequence; thing is, the intent would have worked there, because a seeming main character being turned and dusted after just one opening credit sequence was unheard of at the time, and in hindsight Jesse felt all the more like a side character BECAUSE the opening doesn’t show him despite being friends with Xander and Willow... in contrast, Tara should have either stayed recurring or been a regular from Season 6’s get-go, because to me it felt like a cheap shock-value trick on Joss’s part.
Buffy's always been a difficult case for me. I mean, the Dark Willow arc was a very interesting exploration of grief and the scene between Willow and Xander is one of my favorites in the series. I don’t think the writers were thinking about how killing Tara would effect representation (I believe Whedon said that he would have done the same arc if Oz hadn’t left), but intention doesn’t change impact. It’s still a story about tragic gay romance in a time when that was the only gay story in television.
@@thegeekclub8810 How many tragic story arcs about Buffy's love life were there? 3 or more? Willow & Tara were amazing and I've never cried so much over a work of fiction as these 2 characters. Defo ground breaking in its time. 1st normalised gay relationship & 1st normalised gay kiss on TV that I remember.
Tara unfortunately was a victim of being Willows girlfriend Joss said if Seth Green hadnt left the show Oz would have died instead
Xander may have become the lgbt character instead
I think Joss wanted Willow to go Dark Willow realistically and killing Tara was the most effective way to accelerate it
Willow still being there meant there was still lgbt representation and her not dating a guy again too goes against the trope in a way
Taras death still hurt though
You mentioning voltron gave me war flashbacks... what a dark time that was
+bootstrap paradox+ that’s a mood
Oof. Mood.
To be fair to Doctor Who - they also made Jack Harkness immortal. And Vastra and her wife are series stalwarts.
Yeah but to Become immortal he was "Killed" and because he was "Dead" he was left behind so kinda
There’s also a shit ton of casual side character deaths in doctor who
They killed Ianto off though. Right after he came out to his sister.
Also the entire point of Bill's departure is that she *didn't* die--she lived forever with her space girlfriend. (moffat has actually done a similar ending to this, with both Clara/Me and Vastra/Jenny. Whether or not the refutation of the death makes up for the trope in the first place is ymmv, but I think it's far more nuanced than a strict execution of the trope)
sanityisrelative Ianto is torchwood not dw tho
The example I was most hurt by was Charlie's death in Supernatural. Not only because the show kinda has an issue with female characters in general dying, but because of how sloppily it was done. It was done off-screen by a character that Dean kills very quickly the next episode. It wasn't even the main villain of the season. (The mark of Cain is technically the main villain, but I would have also accepted Rowena.) It just left such a bad taste in my mouth that I just felt numb afterward. Someone at their SDCC panel that year even pointed out how stupid the death was and it looked like all the actors agreed.
I really liked the video and I have to say that you are one of my favorites, especially for nerdy content.
The cast and crew even NOTED there were VERY clear ways that Charlie could (and would) have lived if she wasn’t acting out of character - the plot forced the setting to bend over for her to die, it happened very unnaturally (and is just one reason I don’t bother with later SPN seasons).
Compared to that, Tara in BtVS dying to a bullet-of-plot-convenience (which drew ire back when it aired especially) is small potatoes.
I found out about Charlie's death ahead of time, and it's one of those times I'm actually happy for a spoiler. I don't want to see that.
I was already tired of how they treated female (and poc, etc long list) chars in general, but that's when I just... Emotionally checked out wrt Supernatural. It was one of those things that reminds me "right, there are people writing this and choosing what they want to happen, and they wanted this character to die".
Thanks to the other actors, I might still watch a few eps with a friend who is still a fan, but... Never going to be "all in" like I once was. That was just too much of a dick move.
It was really dumb too. Charlie was translating this book in the nice safe bunker where no one could get her. Then abruptly she's just like "this bunker is lame, if I'm going to translate this book I need to be in a coffee shop". She is then targeted in the coffee shop and murdered. Like there was literally no reason she needed to be there. If she'd been going to get something that was desperately needed for the plot to advance I could maybe forgive it but she could have done what she did just as easily from the bunker.
@@BadWolf739 wow. They really wanted her dead.
For me the reason why I loved Charlie and I guess for about 99,99% of the people is just that she's awesome. Being into girls is just smth else like she has red hair. But the show really just did her dirty.
And now we also have the situation with Castiel... I would have prefered that he remain in the friendzone. At least the character might have been treated better in the ending.
And why were they so cool with girl on girl couples but boy on boy was always just a joke?
"You make this one black, that one's Asian, that one's gay, that one's overweight, oh, that one's goth, hey, we'll have that one be in a wheelchair."
LMAO THEY JUST BASICALLY DESCRIBED GLEE 😂
I misheard 'goth' as 'a god' in the video, and thought: 'Dang! One of the minor characters is way more powerful than the others!'
I was really annoyed at Bill's story arc ended, and not just because I was hoping she'd stick around for at least one story with the 13th Doctor as a bridge between eras (as often happened in "old" Doctor Who). From the little speech the Doctor gave at the end of "The Pilot," I was *sure* they were going to find Heather and restore her full humanity (and, if Bill *wasn't* going to be around for Series 11) they would become roommates at Uni. … On a tangential but related note:
I've now come to see my physical disability as a facet of my queer identity (mostly because of how my peers' and society's expectations around disability really messed with me figuring out what my sexual orientation really is). And there's a related trope when it comes to disabled characters. In order of prevalence: 1) the character has to be cured of their disability before they have a happy ending, 2) they end up dying (which, for many disabled characters, *is* their happy ending -- better dead than disabled), 3) it turns out they were faking it all along.
And yeah. It hurts.
I don’t have the same level of awareness of disabled representation issues (for obvious reasons) but as I learn more about it, there are a ton of parallels with the history of queer representation.
@@CouncilofGeeks I'm currently reading "Disability Rhetoric" by Jay Timothy Dolmage (2014) which focuses on how disability was treated in Greek and Roman philosophy, and how that has carried through to modern literature. And he points out that there is a *lot* of overlap between Classical Greek attitudes toward disabled people, genderqueer and gender fluid people, and women, since all of these people violated boundaries in what was considered the ideal of the male identity.
So yeah... a lot of parallels.
I had never seen this parallel this clearly before. you just put words to things that have affected me a lot wrt self... Understanding. I'm gonna check that book out.
@@geckovonparsley8200 it's a good book, but a word of warning: it's written at an academic level for an audience already familiar with formal philosophical terms -- be prepared to reread sentences a few times. ;-)
But he also writes with playful turns of phrase, and draws on current pop culture (such as the Wonder Woman comics and Breaking Bad).
Ugh "bury your disabled" trope
I've known about this trope for a while but never knew the history of how it started, so this is really interesting and informative, thank you 💜🏳️🌈
I just realised I am very bigoted (well, I mean bigoted in surprising new ways! I hadn't been assuming I was the wokest!) and I feel I should share. So I have been ignoring TH-cam's suggestions to watch your videos for the longest time. I think I opened a link once and then I saw who I assumed was a male, white, wearing a fedora (or fedora-like hat) talking about a social issue and self-identify as a geek. I was so sure I knew what you had to say. And I want to apologise. Thank you for this video and thanks for the opportunity to self-reflect.
I’m happy to have defied your expectations.
And this is why I wrote a book with myself, a trans Female with Cerebral Palsy, as the main character and I DON'T DIE!!!!
My characters Don t die because the death has to have gravity and move the plot forward not to say that they truly die.
But some characters have uses because they die. Either willingly or by consequence.
My kind of morality leads to apolitical and deviants unpunished due to the narrative and not the trope used. If you are gay I will write them as if they are normal in a world between the natural and the super natural, gays and lesbians can have happy endings, didactic codes of moralistic guardian's will be appropriately called out.
Politics is encompassing in my work but the narrative and not the themes that underpin my work take precedence.
When one is evil depends on the transformation into the monster and not soullessly coerced into becoming the beast because of the narrative. Though great ambition has it's uses it also shows humanity.
Example of this is ganondorf, he wished to Rule everything but he also ruled in a way that helped his people even if it was a guise to the end.
Ganondorf from windwaker is more wise and less ambitious than simply ruling everything, he wished to restore Hyrule instead of being flushed away.
You've given me some good ideas on how to present my own LGBTQ characters so thank you soooo much! I have been torturing myself for months because no matter what I was doing they didn't seem quite right, though now I think I know what I'm going to do. I too loathed the trope as a child, it got so tiresome for me seeing someone mentioned as being gay thay may as well slapped a redshirt on them (which they done in ST: First Contact with ensign Lynch) and it really pissed me off because I knew they were only mentioning it so they could make a big deal of how heart broken the main cast were over losing their gay friend and aren't they such good ppl for greiving?!! I think that slowly but surely, just like representation of women and minorities, it's getting better but we do still need to call it out otherwise bigwigs in entertainment might throw up a "mission acomplished" banner and not bother trying to be more inclusive.
I am so very impressed by your work on this subject. Your intelligence and ability to NOT overreact but sticking to the facts and reality EVEN when you are outraged is a rare quality. Your point about characters having 'mass' that is having an existence that WEIGHS in the story as a hole is so right on and one of the reasons I much preferred RTD (who btw is a GENIUS, the best non film director out there) is how EMOTIONALLY invested we become with ALL the characters where as Moffat's more 'idea' driven scripts in his era were poor in humor, poor in character development and frankly often shallow. The ultimate proof of RTD' superior directorial skills is that HIS take on Moffats ideas was so much more powerful than Moffat's versions. (IMHO).
I have just come from your very good 'Stop Baiting LGBTQ+ Audiences - A Pop Culture Rant' where you explain so well the importance of honesty and sincerity over cheap 'hint's' covered with 'deniability' and tokenism. Captain Jack is my favorite gay take ever. You could even call it 'straight' washing in that the first time we see him he is holding a very attracted and lovely Rose (yeah I'm straight but so what) but it is soon clear he 'plays' with women enjoying their interest in him but it is men he really and at the end this is made 100% clear in the final bar scene. RTD was able far better than any others to show a VERY diverse set of race, class and age HUMAN BEINGS with out EVER feeling like either pandering or moral lecturing but simply how things are, as it should be. You are perhaps the most intelligent Dr Who commentator out there and I always find your work interesting and thought provoking. Here is another subscription!
Thanks for existing💓💛💙💚💜
Not only do I still mourn Bill, I'm still in *heavy* mourning for the 12th Doctor. Only NOW people are starting to realize what a GENIUS performance Capaldi did.....
Great video, loved the segmenting slides. All the work you put in really shows.
Along with pulp publishing and the Hays Code, the Comics Code was also subject to the same "sexual deviancy" ruleset, so it was pretty well ubiquitous and so ingrained it took a long time to be noticed outside the LGBTQ+ community.
Sometimes it seems like background gays are analagous to redshirts or that guy who's waxing rhapsodic about what he's going to do after he retires in a week. You just know they're not gonna make it. As for primary characters, it feels like a combination of Bury Your Gays and 'Fridging (which is its whole own issue), because it's so often done to push the survivors' arc forward.
In both cases, the impact wouldn't sting so much if it weren't for the fact these characters tend to be, as Daffyd Thomas of Little Britain was wont to claim, "the only gay in the village". Like so many minority depictions, being subject to the Smurfette Principle makes these deaths more outsized than they would be otherwise, particularly when looked at as part of a long-established pattern.
Fortunately, we are starting to see some backlash, as evidenced by the outrage with Buffy, and The 100, and most recently, The Magicians. Hopefully the hue and cry will become enough for creatives to come up with more innovative ways to move plots forward and eliminate characters whose actors have chosen to move on.
I love how you went right from gay coding (the unintentionally hilarious "Do you like snails or oysters?" speech in SPARTACUS) to Patricia Highsmith's PRICE OF SALT. I was hoping you would mention this important book by one of my favorite crime authors and you did at some length. One thing the Bury Your Gays trope does is make it all the sweeter when gay and/or trans characters survive and triumph- like (spoiler) Nomi and Amanita at the end of SENSE8. Love your outfit.
I’m loving the structure. Even a loose structure is really helpful in defining the video and it ups the perceived production value a ton. Big ups. Also having it in little chunks makes it more digestible. If you need to pause the video soon and know that, you can pause at the beginning of a segment. I think people are more likely to do it, but also come back, when these segments are titled. Because instead of pausing a flow, it’s a natural pausing place. You also see what you’d miss if you don’t keep watching the video, so it prompts you to go back, which is something you decidedly don’t get if you don’t have structure. As an editor, I’m a huge fan of the adoption of segmentation. It’s a different feeling and, I think, a good change.
On another note, I’m also loving the unabashed owning of your gender fluidity. The hubbub of “oh this isn’t the usual Jay we’re used to seeing,” is not really as much of a factor, and even to a cisgen woman, it feels cool that you have established the trust with your audience to be honest about this and just, own it and move on. You deserve the happiness of being able to be yourself, no matter what wonderful facet of you we’ll be seeing on any given video, it’s you regardless.
I’m also loving the highlights. They’re really cool!!!
Never seen this channel but what a great video!!! Super informative and so well written.
The most painful 'dead gay' for me was the main character Nathan from the book series Half Bad. Mostly because he was so much more than just bi. He was nearly painfully coded black/biracial, had learning disabilites, was neurodivergent, had been physically and emotionally tortured since his childhood, was used as a science experience and trained to be a human weapon controlled by the white and "good" witches.
Over the course of two books we follow Nathan as he escapes from the white witches, meets and fall in love with Gabriel and slowly starts to accept himself and his powers. And then in the third book in the Big BattleTM, Gabriel gets killed by a stray bullet or some other bs. Heartbroken, Nathan commits suicide over Gabriel's grave by turning himself into a tree (shapeshifting was one of his powers) and the book ends with Nathan's former abuser and torturer reading a poem over his and Gabriel's grave.
The cis white abuser got a full "redemption" arc aka she felt bad she tortured an innocent kid for years. Meanwhile Nathan, who inspired SO MANY in the fandom who identified with him, set the wonderful example of "if you're non-white, queer, neurodivergent, and/or a survivor of abuse; just kill yourself". And the author had led the fans on, happily gushing about headcanons, fanfics, fanart, hearing how Nathan and Gabriel helped fans and how they were representing so many marginalised persons, the whole schebang, even writing slice-of-life, happily-ever-after ficlets herself, knowing full well she'd kill them both. And she refused to aknowledge that she had done anything wrong or problematic. I watched that small fandom burn to ashes over the course of a week or so. It was very similar to the outrage of GoT, but on a smaller level.
Oh my gods, Yes! I agree entirely!
I mean I'm sti questioning in terms of my sexuality but his death was maddening not just because of 'burry your gays' but also because of 'abuse victims can't have happy ending' trope.
For an example of a story that has LGBTQ+ characters who don NOT die (actually the cast is quite diverse in pretty much any way possible) I would suggest Magnus Chase series by Rick Riordan. The premise is: Magnus Chase is son of Frey, a Norse god, and he dies heroically in one of the first chapters of the fist book only to be taken to Viking afterlife in Valhalla and from then on he and the previously mentioned diverse cast go ob tryong to stop Loki from starting Ragnarok (AKA end of the world. The plot is a tad predictible, but even if you know what is going to happen you don't know HOW it's going to happen, the characters are enjoyable, the writing style is funny. And you might learn some trivia about Norse mithology.
elena nojkovic LOVE Rick, been reading his books for years now and never get tired of them :D sadly I didn’t like the Magnus Chase series a lot, maybe because I’m Swedish so I was pretty well versed in Norse myth already, idk. Love love LOVE Sam and Alex though, they were my favourites. The Apollo series though is 👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻
ktelle I hesitate calling it queerbaiting since Nathan and Gabriel were a couple but she baited the hell out of a happy ending for them. When it all went down that release week I decided to never read that book, one of the best desicions I’ve made lol
though apparently you can read the third book up to a certain page , close it and go ”and then they lived happily ever after”
I wasn't even angry at the end of the book. No, I felt NOTHING. It was obviously a cheap shot at drama and so called "bittersweet" ending. I didn't want to give the author the outrage she wanted.
See I find Bury Your Gays to be exactly opposite from what you do. Larry was a minor character, who we hadn't really brought into our hearts and identified with. And he died heroically, in a scene that made sense. Tara was important and many people identified with her. And she was killed off not with any agency, but killed off to drive another character. To make Willow angry. That's the same problematic shit as women in refrigerators in my opinion.
Interesting points, but I think dying heroically is part of the problem. You can have an expendable character and think of nothing better to do with them than an ennobling death. It can feel like you're doing a service to the character
, but it doesn't indicate that there's a whole lot to the character in the storyteller's mind.
Not that there shouldn't be expendable characters. It's just that expendable characters are more likely to come from marginalized groups. And, of course, it's more brave to kill someone who isn't expendable.
That could be invoked in Tara's case, but that's not at all intended to refute your point about her death. I suppose it gets into a different area of even a major character being seen as fundamentally expendable for the sake of the plot (the characters used as "fridging" instruments can be major or minor, as long as they're important enough to another character to incite a reaction).
I don’t think I’d exactly agree. Fridging is a serious problem because it is reductive. It boils a character down to how their only meaningful contribution is dating a main character. Essentially it turns them into a prized possession that when Lost motivates the owner to seek out the thief. That said people do die in stories and it does prompt other characters to react. So I wouldn’t call Tara’s death fridging exactly if only because being Willow’s girlfriend and heralding the coming of Dark Willow were not her only contributions to the story. For much of Season 6 she acted as a mom figure to both Buffy and Dawn and while she was important to Willow’s drug problem arc that wasn’t her only purpose. Contrast that with her sanity sucking by Glory in S5 which was much more like fridging, only done to force a confrontation with Glory. That was accepted essentially because it got undone.
@@quinnsinclair7028 Okay, if it's not possible to "fridge" a major well-developed character, maybe I'm not well-informed about the subject.
Diana Bell actually Tara died not cause she was gay but because amber benson chose not to return for the following season which ultimately became its last the correct tv trope to use for Tara is kill the departing actor/actress's character cause they don't want to do the show anymore trope actually warren was trying to shoot buffy cause his other attempts throughout the season failed and he was desperate at that point
The more troubling part of Tara’s death is that it led to another, even uglier trope use in the “Psycho Lesbian”, with Willow going not just homicidal but psychotically so (the imagery of her literally ABSORBING the black inked text from the Magic Box’s spellbooks is seared into my brain, and it’s one of the most uncomfortable things Tv has given me personally). Joss said that if Seth Green hadn’t left the show this would still have played out in some form, with Oz instead of Tara dying to facilitate Willow’s brief insanity period (Tara would have been introduced anyway, but not as Willow’s love interest, if this had played out).
I don't know if you've seen the show Shadowhunters but I'd really love to hear your thoughts about it. It's about Angels, demons, half Angeles, half demons, you know fantasy. It's a really fun show with really diversed characters. It has only 3 seasons, season one is bad but it gets really good and I personally think that season 3 is just amazing.
Folks have a tendency to bring it up when I cover LGBTQ+ topics, but I have yet to find the time to see it.
@@CouncilofGeeks oh yeah of course. I just thought it's the kind of show you'd enjoy.
I f-ing LOVE your hair. I've not seen many of your videos and this is the first time I've seen it down! It's beautiful :) :)
Also, this was a fascinating video and I really enjoyed it. Thank you for your videos and I hope you continue to make great content! (I realise maybe these points should be the other way around. I hope it doesn't bother you!)
Your point about diversity being spread across supporting cast and so accidentally buying into harmful tropes is a really good point! It's not one I have heard often from other people, but it explains a lot.
Yeah, I think it often gets missed. Because it's just a function of most story telling that way more thought and care goes into main characters. So if you're spreading the diversity through the supporting cast you end up with a lot of careless stuff slipping through. It's something that I realized when revising some of my own writing.
I’d love it if there could be a video about the difficulties of writing for all kinds of minorities. You hear that you can’t use certain terms, like any food term or wood analogy for skin tone (unless you are a POC, when it’s generally less of an issue), and how changing language makes it difficult to actually have words that are safe to use to write, to say, “This person is black or gay or trans.” The approved language is really limiting, so that it’s easier and safer to just not include them.
Several writers I’ve worked with have had this problem, and some buckled and removed the characters at the behest of an agent or the publishing house themselves.
I... want to have writing be honest, but it’s difficult to display your vision if you’re afraid that the use of an adjective could be used against you if you offend someone with it.
I don’t think enough people discuss this, but it is a huge and prevalent issue for writers today.
If you can’t express your vision without using racist or homophobic terminology then your vision is not worth expressing
Joe Francis I agree. But people disagree on what is racist and homophobic. Also, if you are a POC, using a term like apricot to describe skin color is fine, but if you aren’t, it’s split on if it’s acceptable. There’s a vanishingly slim number of descriptors to even clue in your audience that your character is actually a person of color at all, because most descriptors are seen as... less than ideal or problematic. I can use wood and food colors for white skin because of the lack of a widespread history of racism and segregation based on those skin tones. But if I’m describing anything darker than a tan white character, it gets tricky really fast.
I’m not a racist. And I want my books to not leave out people who need to be represented just because the language is tricky. But it’s making life really hard for me and other writers like me. Some cave and just don’t mention it at all, and have a head cannon that the character is black or Asian or bi or asexual but it doesn’t end up in the book because they couldn’t walk that line of appropriate wording that the industry feels is suitable. They would rather not it take another full year to get the book on the shelf just to work their way through a descriptor swamp with PR people breathing down their necks and a lot of tense closed door meetings with PR and their agent. Is it worth maybe being dropped because you’re being a pain in the ass in insisting you have representation? A lot of authors cave.
I don’t want that to happen anymore. If only POC Can write books including any characters who are also POC, if only LGBTQ+ writers can write books with LGBTQ+ characters, then there will always be less representation than their would be if we could all agree on maybe a reasonable lexicon of descriptors.
The characters in my books projects and in the projects I pitch in on that do have these problematic descriptors are many other things than “just black,” or “just gay,” they aren’t third string people added to feel progressive. They actually have stories to offer. But they can’t if we aren’t allowed any words.
It’s assumed by a lot of publishing houses that any term you use about skin tone (if you’re referring to as POC, that is) is meant to be disparaging and is something to avoid. But this is a written medium. It would be bad and lazy writing to just say, “Oh yes, because you are white, and I am black.” That isn’t done! So if we don’t have a different way to clue people in, it’s as if our books have ONLY white people in them.
It’s easy to say. “Don’t be racist.” But discussing racial topics doesn’t mean they are RACIST topics. Totally different thing. The racial is being smacked around as if it is racist, which is removing race from books completely, and LGBTQ+ characters are getting the same treatment.
Since you came to watch this specific video, I’d think you would not support characters being written out because their sexual orientation or skin tone was deemed to be too sticky to get into by a publisher.
But no, “If you can’t express your vision without using racist or homophobic terminology then your vision is not worth expressing.”
I’d like to think maybe now you realize there’s more to this discussion than *that* takeaway. It’s a huge ongoing problem in terms of trying to get representation on par with real life, and a one sentence declaration isn’t going to solve it for us who are actively dealing with it. But thank you so much for your input.
@@SunflowerSpotlight Then just hire a group of POC and LGBT+ consultants you ignorant asshole. It's not that hard to just ask the actual people what the preferred lexicon.
I have a gay character in my series. It took me awhile to figure out why there was a small group of people who would get hostile about that, since they were often LGBTQ+ or allies. Turns out they (erroneously) assumed that the gay bestie dies. He doesn't. He provides a longstanding foil to the protagonist's inner conflict. But this was my first conscious encounter with the trope as a real, current thing in fiction.
Excellent explanation of the trope, it's history, and how to avoid it. Good videos.
I like how this video is structured, with the title screens. It's very nicely done and feels very neat and tidy.
You seem much more comfortable, animated and smiley in today's video. Maybe starting off without the "reveal" (for want of a better word) is good for you. x
I really appreciate your Frank and thoughtful discussions surrounding these issues. Great video!
THANK YOU for talking about this! i was hoping you'd get around to it!
also, your hair and outfit is stunning!
The most recent (and most heartbreaking for me) was in the TV show The Magicians. I won’t give details because I don’t want to spoil anyone still watching but the whole situation was bizarre and really badly received. I urge anyone who doesn’t care to be spoiled (or wants to be warned) to look up the season 4 finale situation and leave their opinions below. I’m hoping to write an essay about it soon because it fcked me up so much.
TREE BABY
Whoa, sorry, whenever I see a kodama anywhere that just kinda comes out.
Anyway great video, I've been binging your stuff recently, especially the LGBTQ stuff. I like hearing about it, but as a fellow member of the community it's nice to hear from someone within it all the frustration that I've been feeling. Also your glasses are awesome.
When Star Trek finally introduces a Gay couple, the last I would've expected was this tripe/trope, yet there it was by the end of the first season of Discovery (yeah, they tried to undo it with a new life form but still . . . )
I was like ‘are we going from bury your gays to emotionally torturing them?’
I think it ended all right, but it felt pretty frustrating for awhile.
I was so disgusted when the doctor died... Why? Why this specific character? They managed to kinda fix it but it took awhile. And we are perfectly cool with them kissing and being lovely together, which they also avoided in the first season. In fact I found them unbelievable as a couple in the first seasons and now I see it.
An excellent analysis of how tokenism can creep in uninvited, thus leading to this trope (and it's many analogues)
Tokenism could be seen as a first step away from exclusion, but a stage to get past.
"I don't know what to say to those people":
"Welcome new viewers, I'm surprised this is your first video, but let's go"?
I’m just in love with the pink in your hair and I don’t know why
I remember having that problem as a teenager with books. When I started to figure out I was lesbian (I was twelve at the time), I searched at the library for books about other people like me. They had dozens of shelves filled with romance novels. Only three I could find had lesbian characters. One was an erotic novel (I had no interest in that one. I was *twelve* for heavens sake.), the other two were tragedies in which at least one if not both of the protagonists died.... I was absolutely heartbroken.
So while I generally agree with your points... even killed "with care" freaking hurts, when it's the only representation that you come in contact with. It left me feeling hopeless. Like a happy ending is just not possible for people like me. That thought still haunts me.
Still in the middle of my first watch of the video, I hope I live to see the day when people can just wear what they want to watch and not feel the need to explain why they're wearing the "kinds" of clothes they're wearing. Being able to talk about themselves is one thing- and damn straight I'm supportive of that- but feeling the *need* to explain why they're wearing what they're wearing...
I think Eddie Izzard put it best when a reporter asked about him wearing "women's dresses", and he said "They aren't women's dresses, they're MY dresses".
My love of wearing jeans and pants would have been seen as "dressing like a man" through the years, and while it did cause some issues in the 80s, it wasn't actually a big deal in my life asides from some comments from some family, and because people sometimes think I'm a part of the LBGTQ+ community when I'm not... which seriously blows my mind. We need to stop assigning genders to the kind of dress people wear. Like a skirt is seen as "female", but a kilt isn't? Yes, the traditions are different, but the function of both and the design of how they functionally cover body parts are the same.
I see more men feeling comfortable wearing shades of pink in "men's" clothing as a slow improvement- a moment that sticks out in my mind as a kid was a bunch of guys were together and one was wearing a button up suit shirt that all the men were laughing was "pink", when he said "It's not pink, it's salmon" they all cracked up, and he probably never lived it down with them. It's absurd.
There's an enraging long way to go, even with the improvements I've seen since the 80s and on I've been here and aware, for people to be able to love, marry, form families, adopt, and dress/express their gender how they want and in the way they feel represent who they are. Where if you were born as a gender you don't identify with, however you decide to express that isn't seen as anything weird...
It annoys me when people assume I'm either a lesbian or bi, not because I take it as an insult- I actually make it a point of never correcting them because I feel that would imply there's something insulting about it- but because people still overly assign genders to clothes. Just because I'm more comfortable in jeans, a tshirt, and a hoodie when I'm not having to fit to a professional dress code doesn't mean anything more than that. Men who dress in clothes seen as "women's" doesn't automatically mean they're gay, or trans... don't jump to conclusions and just appreciate that they're wearing what they're wearing. Their sexuality and identification isn't your business unless they decide to tell you. Keep your assumptions and commentary to yourself.
Crap, you're rocking that look far better than I would.
Ok, that rant aside, I've noticed the same, and where people are calling studios out when the "token" minority doesn't make it to the end of the movie, or when there can only be one character of a minority, so if another comes on that first one has to go- people haven't been demanding the same of LGBTQ+ characters... and most of the time, where people are also finally speaking up when minority characters are only there to perpetuate stereotypes, generally speaking LGBTQ+ characters in most forms of entertainment have to fit into stereotypes. Not all the time, but annoyingly more often than not.
There's a loooooooooooooong way to go, things are improving (and then backsliding) overall, but there's a LONG damn way to go.
This is a really important video I didn't even really realise this was a trope but you're totally right. Remember the gay couple from the 100? Literally the only reason I watched that show and then one of them died obviously
0:40 I actually thought you were going to stop at dog and was quite confused. It was a long night.
I'm surprised that The Walking Dead wasn't mentioned at all. I've never watched it but my boyfriend does and he's mentioned that the show pretty much never has more than 2 gay characters at a time. Once a third one is introduced, one of the old ones are killed off within an episode or two, sometimes in the SAME episode.
Yeah... I don't watch The Walking Dead.
@@CouncilofGeeks FINALLY SOMEONE ELSE.
This is one of the reasons why I (who loved TWD for five seasons) stopped watching after getting through season 6 mostly on loyalty. It got really obvious.
I just stumbled upon this video in my recs list. I'm glad I clicked on it. You're entertaining to watch and the analysis is really thought out. Maybe because this subject hits close to your heart, don't know, I'll have to check out your other vids. However, I do like your presentation and topics, so- subs from me.
Hey just wanted to let you know I really like this video; I appreciate you digging into the history and showing how the prudish conservativeness of the Hays Code era still haunts us.
Also, I love your top!
Thoughtful video as usual. I find this problem quite difficult to deal with overall simply because of the numbers at play. If we take the highest percentage and say that 10% of a population is not heterosexual, then when writing a story it becomes a challenge because if there are 10 less important characters in a situation, chances are only one of them is not heterosexual. You could tackle the problem with over-representation, but that can cause it's own issues. I think doctor who took this approach and it still gets criticized, despite having a large number of gay minor characters who simply survived.
When it comes to characters who are less important to the plot, things are as you pointed out, more difficult. Minor characters are often killed off unceremoniously, many of them without ever portraying to the audience what their sexual preferences or gender identity are (statistically, some were gay). I personally see it as a problem if a characters only trait is "The gay one" and by extension I see it being pretty daft when the story goes "Hey! I'm the gay character... and now I'm dead." ,but at the same time is it not equally a problem if we were to protect any minority from death in a series where death was relatively commonplace and unceremonious? I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.
This was very interesting. I wanted to say they do this to all minorities, especially use to do this to black minorities, but slowly not as much. I think the same with lgbtq characters dying or being wafted out of the story when their arcs are complete... but it's not really a good thing at all, and sometimes it seems like there is an ignorance to it where a community doesn't realize they are doing it because of the influence of American media/ (or just Past American media), and perpetuates the same stereotypes, even though they might not have as bad a history. However, hearing the full history on this issue was very interesting.
But honestly, I'm still not going to defend the "Bury your Gays" Trope too much in media because gay characters dying or being in tragedies happens way too much. We get it! It's a cliche at this point to where it is distracting even when it is innocent. I think the only way to get around it is if you have multiple main lgbtq characters of different representation with different outcomes such that it doesn't feel like their sexuality was a factor in choosing their death. (Because sometimes as well, that casual side of things feels like a Bachelor reality show, and LGBTQ people are just another minority person on the show there to avoid accusations of racism, but eventually they get picked to leave the story because they don't see their potential to pair the character off with any of their other main characters. I just say, let's do something "newish" and let lgbtq characters get a happy ending, (when everything else is ending)
It's not just a Hollywood issue though. The same trope is often used in anime, and although I can't be sure how it got there because I haven't researched it, I highly doubt it was Western influence. Although in anime it's usually more on the tragic side.
Ironically, in the latest episode of Sarazanmai that I was watching just this morning a gay couple died after explicitly establishing that their relationship was a romantic one. It's been hinted throughout the series, pretty heavily at times, but before this episode there's always been an out to interpret it as something else. So, yeah. Nice timing.
Also, love the title screens :)
Not being as steeped in anime, that’s an area I usually leave alone. I just don’t have the background knowledge.
The cops? Nooo. Isnt entas and kazukis relationship going in that direction. Even if the main character is obvious.
To be fair, arent the cops technically villains.
really loved this video- it was wonderful hearing the actual miserable history behind this trope. i wish you had mentioned the magicians, as that is still such a sore spot for me. actually, i would love a whole video about quentins death if you even watch the show haha.
I think today there’s a double edged sword to this topic with the over presence of social media. Amber Benson talked about the letters she received about the importance of Tara and Willow from fans, but she talks about how because there wasn’t the ability to tweet immediately the impact was more removed from them. While I am so happy that as a community we are calling out the trope and demanding better representation and more representation in general, I think too often fandom itself goes sour. In the case of the 100 they barely go to conventions anymore and every single panel question has to be carefully monitored. Not too mention that still 3 years later the actress that portrayed Lexa can’t escape awkward and uncomfortable questions during public professional issues. The other half of this is that on the creative side directors and show runners can more easily impact fan’s conversations, baiting is more easily done when a show runner is constantly tweeting about a “ship”. Then there’s a huge fallout when they’re called out for what they do and there’s no in between of understanding the impact of their work and them being attacked and bullied for their actions online. The trope has been so ongoing I think it’s difficult for writers and creators to understand better representation, especially if they’re cisgender and hetero. When they see fallout for the actions of others online, instead of making an effort they just stop and don’t bother with adding lgbt+ at all. This video is so important and I so admire how you’ve approached all of this. I know you’re also not a “fan” of when fandom goes sour.
I was like, "You're going to bring Bill from Who" as soon as I saw this video. Glad you didn't let me down.
Good vid 👍🏻 ... it seems to me that anyone that's not considered as being 'acceptable ' 'normal' etc kinda all get treated the same, I'm glad you mentioned wheelchair users, ... sometimes people being portrayed as more violent etc. because of their appearance ... it's more than about time that the media and entertainment industries stop using out-dated stereotypes and stop marginalizing anyone who doesn't fit into narrow minded definitions, politicians too have responsibility to stop using oppressive legislation etc. allow people to be who they are and not be treated inferior for it.
4:04 in and I do not want to lose my thought " never fall in love with a Cartwright from Bonanza"
Good reference! Nice to know I'm not the only not-exactly-young person in these parts. ;)
I get it better now, that I was able to finish this clip. Same kind of trope. Wonder if the random bigot character getting killed off would make us feel better.
I guess they may as well wear red shirts.
I recently started watching Chicago Fire and there was a character, Leslie Shay, played by Lauren German and I don't know if she can be called "supporting" since it was kind of an ensemble cast, but she wasn't one of the more frequently featured cast members. There was a plotline with her trying to get pregnant that seemed to get dropped with nothing more said about it after a while. Then she was killed off in the 2nd season. And while it didn't go unnoticed, and other characters mourned her loss, with the storyline of her trying to get pregnant getting dropped, it didn't leave a good feeling.
I'm loving this channel, I love learning different opinions, what are your pronouns?
She/they
Bill was definitely my favorite companion other than Donna and jack. I felt like her character was killed off too quickly and I’d love to see her in later episodes
This is the same thought I had with the patterns video that I didn't get to share so I'll share it here. The pattern started out as a clever way to get around sensors and has been taken to a negative extreme. Gay or Lesbian Romeo and Juliet? Wonderful. Dressing as women to hide from the mafia? Genuis. Thoughtlessly killing off a gay character? That's more of a problem with tokening in general, as tokening runs into the problem one character trait and that's their whole personality which is just lazy writing. Same with having men dress up as women and expecting the audience to laugh just because.
Good reason for the start but man is the pattern bad. Good video as always.
Thanks for educating me on a trope I was not previously aware of.
Did you know that the character playing Larry in Buffy (also called Larry) is quite the homophobe, publicly stating that he believes that god intended men to be with women and not other men? Not too bothered about an unceremonious offing of that guy (although I acknowledge that this still plays into the trope).
I think Buffy series 6 isn’t acknowledged enough as it’s about the pervasive misogyny and entitlement of the “nerd” - who at that time was often seen as the hero and the underdog.
You earned a new subscriber with this video gal. I especially love your outfit and glasses.
I stumbled across this video just a week after the show Harrow killed off their only openly gay series regular. It's such a cheap, dirty, and lazy thing to do most of the time. A week later and I'm still raging over it. It was really interesting to learn how it all started, but, you're right, it's time we start treating this like the other tropes out there and subvert it. It's ridiculous that in this day when there's such a cry for good representation that this still happens so much.
I'd be delighted to share some shots with you, but I live in Toronto. I found this video very informative and insightful, so thank you for that. Happy Pride, Nathaniel! Happy Pride, Vera!
Carol… in that book… grew on me. It saddens me taboos still exist in stories told that make it unnecessarily difficult for many people to see themselves as valid in the world they live. I read carol and the ending didn’t strike me as sad, but realistic, hopeful even. The main characters, in the world they live can’t remain together because of their peers and though that might make them miserable, they don’t let this become the be all and end all of their story. In my own story, my gay character gets the relationship arc which ends in misery for her, for a short time. This is because though their relationship ends, it doesn’t spell the end for their stories. The gay character sticks around for her ex because they’re friends, and for her kids because that’s the kind of person she is. And her ex ends up showing her that love exists in many different forms and despite all they’ve been through, love remains a constant. This is a big deal for her because she is used to pain, she is on bad terms with her homophobic mother and on tenuous terms with her impressionable younger brother and her ex’s family pretty much considers her a daughter after their relationship ends. For the gay character, she is tasked with wrapping her head around the fact that despite everything she considers unlovable about herself, she is loved by more people than she perhaps has ever known. I wrote the stories because this is what I crave to see in fiction. I create a new love interest for her in time, one who she isn’t quite ready to love at the time they meet and one for whom she has to resolve a lot of conflict. There were times in her arc where she was miserable because of who she loved, times when she resigns herself to unhappiness because she wants to be kind to those people she loves. There are times when she gets hurt because those people she loves end up in Herero relationships because those are pains that I’ve experienced. My journey out of the closet is marred in pain and marked by the monumental task of accepting and forgiving myself for my own insecurities and for hurting myself again and again for the sake of other people’s happiness and for those whose behaviour shows that they do not in fact care about me. If I saw myself in fiction in ways and forms that were not resigned to misery and death I might have grown up with a different attitude toward myself.
Point being, make the stories of lgbtq+ characters as complex and nuanced as any other.
Omg that intro I'm dying lmao
Also your shirt is sooo pretty 😍
Great video I'm definitely subscribing.
Very well explained by the way. Although i cant believe you admit to watching "Bride of Chucky" 😂
I am LIVING for the way you have your hair colored!
I remember you mentioning the next scheduled video on LGBTQ representation would be about bi-sexual characters. I'm curious about your thoughts (and am hoping you bring up Rosa from B99), so I'm kinda bummed it got pushed again. Any estimate on when you plan on touching that subject?
It's probably not going to be for a few months. It's a video I'm doing with a guest, so aligning schedules has been tougher than I'd anticipated.
I don't get LGBTQ+ stuff but I hope you can do you, and I'm all down for better representation in film I'm with ya.
Thank you :) It's very interesting learning a bit of the history. I only recently learned of the trope, and I'm trying to be more aware of it, and other overused tropes, in the media I consume.
Hey man, I was wondering your thoughts on Dan's coming out video? 💜
I don't know who "Dan" is.
@@CouncilofGeeks haha I'm sorry 🙈 Daniel Howell, he posted a 45 mintue video titled "Basically, im gay" that went trending so quickly.
@@kaypaige7126 Danisnotonfire came out? Good on him! I'm gonna have to go take a look at that video.
@@justkerowen3191 dude it's a masterpiece. Because he doesn't just talk about his sexuality, he addresses so many issues around our community and in general. Very good watch
@@kaypaige7126 Brilliant - thanks for the heads-up!
This was very interesting and is definitely food for thought. To be honest i had never heard of the trope until a character died in critical role. I think gicen what you had to say that the death there wasn't malicious. And in stead the bi character wasnt dieing because he was bi, but because he was working with others to save their friends and stop slavers. His was a heroic death and in the end he spit in the eye of his killer. Those who survived the encouter swore to avenge him and his death had true meaning.
Willow's story arc is BRILLIANT in Buffy The Vampire Slayer. I do miss Tara
I am.so confused as to why I'm not already subscribed to you, great content 💙💜❤
Very interesting, especially regarding the early establishment of the trope which I had no idea was even a thing. Although, when a character death does happen to fit into the parameters of a particular trope, does that necessarily make it an example of that trope in practice?
Yes. Yes it does. If something falls within the parameters of a specific trope that automatically makes it that trope. That’s how tropes work.
This was a really great video and I have a Lot of feelings about this trope. But I want to take issue, just really quickly, with the conflation of "trope" and "cliché" because they really aren't synonyms. A trope is any narrative device or convention, not only the overused ones. I'm not trying to be an ass about this, but I'm a bit of a stickler for grammar and word choice so... Yeah.
I feel one of the reasons the tripe still comes up is that it’s existence hasn’t removed much attention via satire or parody like say ‘black people always die in horror movies’ which has been mocked for years. It’s why I don’t think it’s always worth getting mad a writer when it comes up as it wouldn’t be necessarily unreasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt. If it oddities frequently from the same writer though, different story.
Nah, it’s always worth outrage. If someone accidentally kills someone without intending to they still get arrested for involuntary manslaughter, the same principle should apply here
@@ravenfrancis1476why not react the same way to each and every accident ever committed?
Mr L Not every accident is inherently harmful.
@@ravenfrancis1476 the aforementioned issue though isn't strictly harmful in isolation though, unlike, say, manslaughter.
@@theshadowdirector Except things don't exist in isolation, especially stories. They have a greater context outside of their self-contained worlds that contribute not only to the perception of LGBT+ people but also the perpetuation of generally harmful stereotypes. This isn't something that can be judged on a case by case basis. We all have to react the same way to all stories that do this, we can't really make exceptions if they "do it well" because that promotes the idea that it's the way it's done that's the problem as opposed to the fact it was done to begin with. When in reality, its the other way around.
Buffy spoilers.
14:00 - Going from memory here, I'm pretty sure Amber Benson was not generally credited in the opening. I remember at the time thinking it was odd given her prominent role. Anyway, I'm pretty sure the only episode she was credited in the opening was when Tara was shot. And I noticed that, FINALLY she was in the opening credits. Then at the end I realized they added her because she was about to die - maybe a nice gesture of not having without an opening credit for her whole stint on the show?
That's what I remember from when the show was broadcast. I don't know if they retroactively added her to the opening credits of the other episodes since then. If anyone has a different memory of the original broadcasts, I don't know what to say. I guess I'd have to try to dig out some of my old VHS tapes to provide evidence.
When I watched them just a couple of years ago back when they were still on Netflix, it was exactly as you describe. I vividly remember thinking "yay! Tara is officially in the credits now" at the beginning and "you bastards. You were just raising my hopes so that the fall would hurt even more" at the end. (Your interpretation of the intent is much more charitable). So at least as of the version they put on Netflix a few years back, that is the only episode where she is in the beginning credits.
Remember how huge it was that Adam was trans on Degrassi? And then they killed him in a "don't text and drive" subplot?
I get that the actress was a woman and couldn't depict his medical transition, BUT HE WAS A SENIOR. Adam didn't have to be written out! He was going to leave the show when he graduated!! You know they don't give a flip about characters after they graduate, because Maya's own sister didn't even show up when Maya's life was falling apart!!
would you ever consider sorta a "history of Magneto and Professor X" video? theres so much romantic subtext in the films(the young versions mostly) and delving into comic history would be interesting and maybe ask "should they just make it canon?" been thinking about them a lot especially after dark phoenix basically ending on them going off to live together. however i feel like you don't have interest in exploring specific pairings.
Entirely shallow comment: I am consumed with envy due to your Doctor Who earring.
Glad somebody spotted it.
Council of Geeks I have one too and am always surprised how little it’s recognised! New to your channel and love your videos so far. I’m a gay woman but am learning a lot about the gender spectrum from you - something I admit I know little about - and I’m so glad you are able to be you :)
Can't believe we're still doing this, can't believe that Killing Eve joins this list.
I think the Bill Potts inclusion is a stretch, Moffat had to end his era and raise the stakes in a big way ,writing out the twelve doctor , missy and the companions
Except they could’ve kept the companions. Or at least written them out in a way that didn’t violently kill off the only prominent LGBT* companion besides Jack.
Rest In Peace, Tara.
Happy Pride Month!!!!❤️🧡💛💚💙💜
Writer here just realised I have a story where I kill a "gay" character early in the book but the fact she is lesbian dose not come to light till the end when she is saved and finds love (very early draft know I need to give hints sooner)
Also a writer. I noticed that the only character in my group of heroes who is NOT explicitly LGBTQ+ is also the only one who dies. This was not intended, but it's kind of cool as a subversion of this trope, now that I think about it.
puzzlequeen 1988 As long as she’s not the only gay character and you bring her back without ever killing a gay character ever again then you should be good.
I believe that there is a sub trope of this with the stray bullet where a gay character gets killed off when they weren’t the target of said violence like Tara in Buffy or Lexa. This is usually done to motivate the love interest and tends to have a lot of shock value but it honestly just sucks to see since characters that fall under this trope usually are giving the happy moment prior to death or are frequently put into other situations more dangerous than in the conditions they died
When you are ace and their are more representation of vampire and human than ace relationship, you like... In media, dying work more than me being alive so...
Shounen have many ace by virtue of the genre. And them being modeled often after sun wukong the most famous ace hero, who inspired goku.
I've only seen it once, that's in Bojack Horseman.
Have a look on TH-cam for Gerald Tippett, Shortland Street.
Gerald was the first out ace character on tv. Shortland Street is a New Zealand soap opera and Gerald's story includes his self-discovery of his asexuality and coming to terms with that, although his asexuality is not his defining characterisation - he happens to be ace, but that was just one of many plotlines for him.
th-cam.com/video/mgju7QrWszA/w-d-xo.html
I REALLY loved Carol, it was a great movie. I have a superhero comic idea that is based on this and what happens after it. Great video.
Most recently this grinded my gears when voltron was airing and Adam was killed and Banana Fish when Ash died. I kind of get Ash dying, there's a whole in depth discussion we can have about that but like it was an extremely upsetting way to end the manga/anime😭
Very thought provoking! Made me realise loads of stuff I never noticed before. Thanks
What do you think of the acronym grsm?
In case you don't know, it stands for Gender, Romantic and Sexual Minorities, and people started using it because the lgbt... variants were getting too long or too exclusive.
Good for a general group name. We can keep the words lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender for more specific groups and indentities.
It’s interesting you brought this up, as I’ve wanted to ask your opinion on this since I discovered your channel. I’ve never heard the phrase “bury your gays” before, but I was always hyper aware of this disturbing trend in New Who.
I teach film editing and storytelling at the college level and I am a big fan of “making everything count”, story wise. I am not gay, so I don’t have a dog in this race, but it always struck me as disturbing and sloppy storytelling that this seemed to be consistent in the show.
Disturbing in the fact that “wow, you guys are killing a lot of gay characters. Sloppy because, why do we care about their sexuality if they are just monster food? Why do they need to bring up this fact at all IF it does not affect the story? (I’m not against it, but why bother is my point.)
If there is no effect on the plot it is just unnecessary info. (Thanks for the deeper insight into the person that will die 3 shots from now.)
The two greatest examples that stuck with me is the girl that gets sucked out of the shuttle ion “Crossing Midnight”. With her case, it was casual conversation, and a really good way to add that depth to the character. It wasn’t forced or weird, it was just small talk. Well done RTD. Then 37 seconds later she is sucked out an airlock. It just seems like a waste to bring it up, but there wasn’t much to do with this character anyway.
The one that bothers me most as a storyteller is in “Waters of Mars”. As I mentioned before don’t add in unnecessary details to your story. One of the other “rules” of storytelling is that the best drama come from character relationships. That being the case, if you’re going to bring it up (anything really), make it relevant to the story you are telling.
In “Waters of Mars” there are to guys working on the station who early in the episode identify themselves as each other’s husbands. Cool, maybe we can use that info later. Later in the episode one of these guys goes to the Greenhouse section of the ship (I think he was the botanist). All of the other characters are in the C & C part of the station watching the botanist on a monitor as he does what was needed done. Suddenly, he is attacked by the water and is being turned into a water zombie IIRC. Back in C & C, his husband is watching his husband get killed on video, but they didn’t make a big deal about it. This was a great opportunity to make the earlier conversation pay off. We know the relationships that these character share, and they just didn’t bother making it relevant or interesting to the story.
By the end of the ep, I think both characters are dead, but they missed out on such a good opportunity for a great character moment! Arrgh! Sloppy.
I just always thought this trend was weird/ bothersome.
I think it got parodied a bit in "a good man goes to war"
"We're the thin/fat, gay, married Anglican Marines. Why would we need names as well?"
Two comments. Sometimes I think you're so happy to see LGBTQ content that you instantly find it good when sadly, writers are too often missing the mark. Secondly, I was so thrilled to see that you "came out" in the opening of this video that I chose to re-subscribe. I just want you to be whoever you are, whatever that is at the time, and sometimes your videos feel like you're half in the closet with that hat. It doesn't matter what others think. Honesty to oneself is key and empowering.
Good tropes: dumbass with a heart of gold
Bad tropes: kill off all your minority characters for no reason
This is a great video; many great points. I do want to mention, though, near the end of the video, you said that "another word for a trope is a cliche." This is an untrue statement; a trope is simply an element of a story; Five Man Band and Soulmates are tropes, just as Bury Your Gays/Queers and Damsel in Distress are tropes. A cliche is simply an overused trope. The words are not synonymous.
I think the Dr. Who critique is unwarranted. Because of the frequency that they kill of characters main out supporting. gay, straight, or Bi. Hell the last companion (before bill) was killed and revived ad nauseum.