>>123096967I'm more talking about the media fascination where they thought it was bold and shocking to have gay characters. This mostly happened in the 90s-00s, where "gay" was treat as a character trait that could be wrung out for sympathy points in lieu of actually writing the character well in the first place. Now the shock and awe of "THIS CHARACTER IS GAY!!!" has long worn off, so we are getting better written gay characters now. Currently we are seeing something similar with "THIS CHARACTER IS TRANS!!!", so hopefully once the novelty wears out for that we can see better written transexual characters.
I'm not saying that "media with gay people is bad", I'm saying "media that shallowly exploits the sexual identity of characters for publicity is poorly written but ultimately a stepping stone to the novelty wearing off and getting society over it".
Also, media is always going to be about hetero stuff, sorry. It's the norm for +90% of the world's population and bears no controversy to feature it, and the world kind of does revolve around heterosexuality anyway.
>>123097080Wrong, don't assume you know what I'm talking about.
