At What Age is LGBTQ Representation In Media "Appropriate"

[Carjosse]

The question is simple, at what age is LGBTQ representation in media "appropriate"? Most importantly, why? And by representation I mean nothing more than that, just a character being LGBTQ themselves or showing them a member of a family with other LGBTQ characters doing the same things any other character would for the age group the media is aimed at. For example in media aimed at young children maybe one of the characters has same-sex parents, for older kids maybe the main character is LGBTQ and they have a love interest with some physical contact, and for teens you have full relationships.

There seems to be a lot of conservatives who seem to think that a LGBTQ character or relationship makes something "adult" and inappropriate for kids. Not a single one on this forum or in real life has ever been able to give an actual reason why that is other than saying it is inappropriate or not "family friendly". LGBTQ people exist and have families too, certainly they should be represented too and the target audience of the media should not matter.

 

[Phys251]

The question is simple, at what age is LGBTQ representation in media "appropriate"? Most importantly, why? And by representation I mean nothing more than that, just a character being LGBTQ themselves or showing them a member of a family with other LGBTQ characters doing the same things any other character would for the age group the media is aimed at. For example in media aimed at young children maybe one of the characters has same-sex parents, for older kids maybe the main character is LGBTQ and they have a love interest with some physical contact, and for teens you have full relationships.

There seems to be a lot of conservatives who seem to think that a LGBTQ character or relationship makes something "adult" and inappropriate for kids. Not a single one on this forum or in real life has ever been able to give an actual reason why that is other than saying it is inappropriate or not "family friendly". LGBTQ people exist and have families too, certainly they should be represented too and the target audience of the media should not matter.

At the exact same age as depicting cishet relationships.

ANY difference is homophobia or transphobia, pure and simple.

 

[Captain Adverse]

The question is simple, at what age is LGBTQ representation in media "appropriate"? Most importantly, why? And by representation I mean nothing more than that, just a character being LGBTQ themselves or showing them a member of a family with other LGBTQ characters doing the same things any other character would for the age group the media is aimed at. For example in media aimed at young children maybe one of the characters has same-sex parents, for older kids maybe the main character is LGBTQ and they have a love interest with some physical contact, and for teens you have full relationships.

Interesting question.

I'd say it would be best around the age group where such expressions of sexuality usually emerge.

I chose 14 to 15 but I would rather have had the option 12 to 15 because that is typically (with rare exceptions) when one's physiological sexual changes are rapidly occurring.

There seems to be a lot of conservatives who seem to think that a LGBTQ character or relationship makes something "adult" and inappropriate for kids. Not a single one on this forum or in real life has ever been able to give an actual reason why that is other than saying it is inappropriate or not "family friendly". LGBTQ people exist and have families too, certainly they should be represented too and the target audience of the media should not matter.

Well you are making a lot of presumptions here. I think because you have a dividing line regarding "conservative and non-conservatives" in your own mind and seek to place people on one side of the line or the other. There are many different viewpoints not just those two "extremes."

I have no problem with people who express whatever their hearts desire, as long as they don't believe they have a right to compel others to accept it, or it is an expression that takes advantage of/harms others for their own advantage.

This is entirely different from concerns over "grooming" efforts.

Youth can certainly come to their own conclusions about who they are and whom they are attracted to. IMO the idea should be to allow these urges, feelings, etc. to come to fruition without compulsion disguised as "being helpful."

The main problem with kids of that age (13 - 16) is a deep desire to belong, to be accepted, to be noticed and respected. Thus many will "pick" an "in group" they think will give them that reinforcement. That may lead to problems down the road if they have committed to something "irreversible" due to peer pressure and acceptance. Especially when they mature enough to realize regret.

 

[Carjosse]

Interesting question.

I'd say it would be best around the age group where such expressions of sexuality usually emerge.

I chose 14 to 15 but I would rather have had the option 12 to 15 because that is typically (with rare exceptions) when one's physiological sexual changes are rapidly occurring

What makes it inherently inappropriate? Attraction can start much younger than 14 or 12, kids have crushes all the time, media often depicts kids having crushes towards the opposite sex, why can't same-sex attraction be represented too? Outside of the actual attraction aspect of it what about the presentation of other kinds of families, children of LGBTQ families deserve the representation as much as single-mother families or interracial families. They will also be exposed LGBTQ people in real life so why shouldn't media also reflect that reality?

Well you are making a lot of presumptions here. I think because you have a dividing line regarding "conservative and non-conservatives" in your own mind and seek to place people on one side of the line or the other. There are many different viewpoints not just those two "extremes."

I have no problem with people who express whatever their hearts desire, as long as they don't believe they have a right to compel others to accept it, or it is an expression that takes advantage of/harms others for their own advantage.

This is entirely different from concerns over "grooming" efforts.

Youth can certainly come to their own conclusions about who they are and whom they are attracted to. IMO the idea should be to allow these urges, feelings, etc. to come to fruition without compulsion disguised as "being helpful."

The main problem with kids of that age (13 - 16) is a deep desire to belong, to be accepted, to be noticed and respected. Thus many will "pick" an "in group" they think will give them that reinforcement. That may lead to problems down the road if they have committed to something due to peer pressure and acceptance when they mature enough to have the confidence to really know what it is they think, and want.

It is an inherently conservative position. Following the logic of your last point I guess it is inappropriate to show any kind of hobby, religious, or ethnic activity, after all they may want to "pick" an "in group" due to peer pressure and don't know what they actually want. You seem to think that being LGBT is like joining a religion, it is not.

 

[Lycanthrope]

The question is simple, at what age is LGBTQ representation in media "appropriate"? Most importantly, why? And by representation I mean nothing more than that, just a character being LGBTQ themselves or showing them a member of a family with other LGBTQ characters doing the same things any other character would for the age group the media is aimed at. For example in media aimed at young children maybe one of the characters has same-sex parents, for older kids maybe the main character is LGBTQ and they have a love interest with some physical contact, and for teens you have full relationships.

There seems to be a lot of conservatives who seem to think that a LGBTQ character or relationship makes something "adult" and inappropriate for kids. Not a single one on this forum or in real life has ever been able to give an actual reason why that is other than saying it is inappropriate or not "family friendly". LGBTQ people exist and have families too, certainly they should be represented too and the target audience of the media should not matter.

Within the context you present? The same age as hetero/cis characters are deemed appropriate.

 

[jpevans]

The question is simple, at what age is LGBTQ representation in media "appropriate"? Most importantly, why? And by representation I mean nothing more than that, just a character being LGBTQ themselves or showing them a member of a family with other LGBTQ characters doing the same things any other character would for the age group the media is aimed at. For example in media aimed at young children maybe one of the characters has same-sex parents, for older kids maybe the main character is LGBTQ and they have a love interest with some physical contact, and for teens you have full relationships.

There seems to be a lot of conservatives who seem to think that a LGBTQ character or relationship makes something "adult" and inappropriate for kids. Not a single one on this forum or in real life has ever been able to give an actual reason why that is other than saying it is inappropriate or not "family friendly". LGBTQ people exist and have families too, certainly they should be represented too and the target audience of the media should not matter.

I agree with the way you frame it. Different kinds of people exist in the real world. There is currently an attempt to put LGBTQ+ back in the closet & shut the door & nail it shut.
"They" said same sex marriage would ruin it for straight folk, well 55 years Married & we're doing fine.