For or against represent fing LGBT in Pokémon

[Auraninja]

What makes you say that they were testing the reactions?
Perhaps Masuda or whoever had a gay friend they wanted to represent (like how the NPC in R/S was Masuda's daughter). Maybe they just wanted a gay character in the games.

Also, how is it cheap and uncreative? Could we say Kukui and Burnet was cheap and uncreative?

 

[Sceptile Leaf Blade]

What in the world makes you claim that a homosexual character in the Pokémon universe would be "very relevant"? Homosexuals barely needs any representation, they have plenty already. Haven't you seen Moon and Broke Back Mountain or read some of the yaoi hentai manga out there? Or visited Sweden? Or watched Conchita Wurst win Eurovision? It would change nothing in our world. It would please a few, it would annoy a few, but whatever the case may be, homosexuals do NOT need Pokémon. They can marry in the church now, how much more do you want? Let Pokémon remain as apolitical as possible.

Digimon introduced a lesbian character in one of the newer videogames, if I remember correctly. The world has never been the same, lol, it was indeed very relevant...

The very fact that you count Eurovision (which is primarily ridiculed rather than taken seriously), or hentai manga as representation pretty much tells me that you still don't have a clue what this is about. Yes I have visited Sweden on multiple occasions, not sure how that's relevant. They can marry in the church in some countries, and that's a legislative victory for same-sex couples. After all these posts you still ask "how much more do you want?". How about LGBT people being treated as people in society, not just legislative, but also practically. In terms of security and safety, in terms of treatment and discrimination.

There are more kinds of people than two.

1) Homophobes.
2) Those who think it is propaganda.
3) Those who do not want mature subjects pushed upon a children's franchise.
4) Those who do not feel that the people of the Pokémon world neccesarily have to be as diverse as the people of our world. I mean, when playing Pokémon, aren't you playing to get away from reality a bit? I mean, just because homosexuals exist in this world, they do not neccessarily have to exist in the Pokémon world. Swedish people are not represented in Pokémon neither. Should we add Swedes too, just for the sake of doing it? No. Let the Pokémon world remain the Pokémon world. And I say that even though I love Swedish people. Or what should it be next time? Adding Jews to the game?? I don't see why adding homosexuals should be more relevant than adding Jews, furries, Swedes and other identities that really got nothing to do with Pokémon...

And, again, you seem to have no grasp of what this is about. To 3), LGBT is not only a mature issue. People fall in love, and that happens in pokémon too. Kukui and Burnet fall in love together, there are opposite-sex couples. This is about also representing same-sex couples in the same way. Just show a bit of love and affection just like Kukui and Burnet, or between the Brionne girl and her boyfriend. There is nothing more mature about it if the two members of the couple just happen to have the same gender.

People falling under 4) are essentially the same as 1). And it still shows that you have no idea what this is about. Swedish people don't need special representation because they don't get discriminated against or beat up on the street for just being who they are. It's a completely different situation. The fact that you reduce the motives for a call for LGBT representation to "just for the sake of doing it" is quite frankly insulting and demeaning. Let me tell you this, the Pokémon world would still remain the Pokémon world even with LGBT representation.

 

[Morton Belgram]

1) LBGT is a mature issue. In fact, far too mature a subject for Pokémon. Should we also include subjects such as racism, just to show how wrong racism is?
2) Jews, who I also mentioned, do get harassed and attacked on the street, heck, they went through the Holocaust and couldn't hide like the gays could. Jews would obviously need more representation if anyone needed representation, so why not start by adding Jews to Pokémon? Or gypsies or other groups who are at least as hated as homosexuals?
3) No, those in number 1 are homophobes, dictated by hate, while those in number 4 are not dictated by hate, but by principles and opinion. Why do you insist on generalising like this?
4) The Pokémon world would likewise remain Pokémon world without LBGT representation. Just like it will without Jew representation, Gipsy representation, polygamic marriage representation, etc. Let's not make complicated what is so simple.
5) In practice, it would indeed just be "done for the sake of being done". It would change absolutely nothing and you know it. People wouldn't stop beating up Jews just because Jews are represented in Pokémon.

Why don't you call for Jews to be represented? Are homosexuals more important than Jews?

 

[Auraninja]

You know, I forgot to mention, Earthbound had a gay character since the creator of the series, Shigesato Itoi said that normal society had gay people and he had gay friends as well.

Granted this is only partially implied by the games, but I think we can do more than what was done in the 90s.

I guess Earthbound went into a cheap and uncreative direction after Beginnings, huh?

 

[Morton Belgram]

You know, I forgot to mention, Earthbound had a gay character since the creator of the series, Shigesato Itoi said that normal society had gay people and he had gay friends as well.

Granted this is only partially implied by the games, but I think we can do more than what was done in the 90s.

I guess Earthbound went into a cheap and uncreative direction after Beginnings, huh?

Yeah, there was a gay character in Earthbound, but 1) Earthbound is also a slightly more mature franchise, with insane cults and child beatings and other dark stuff, and 2) we only get a few indications that Tony is gay, it's never clearly stated in the game. Kinda like how Rowling was smart enough to not mention IN the story that Dumbledore was homosexual, but told us in an interview. If the creators of Pokémon went out and said "James is actually homosexual", cool, no problem, then the homosexuals will have a hero in the Pokémon world to root for, without the subject being pushed upon viewers/gamers.

And you didn't answer why it is more important to represent homosexuals than Jews?

 

[Auraninja]

I guess Steven Universe was not smart enough to keep the homosexual-implied content out of the show.

How would Jews be fairly and accurately represented in Pokemon games?
I mean, you could make a region out of a predominantly Jewish region (but there are few of those to my knowledge).
In contrast, homosexuality isn't tied to just one place.

Edit: I should mention that, yes, Jews live in America, but how would you distinguish them as being Jewish?

 

[Morton Belgram]

I guess Steven Universe was not smart enough to keep the homosexual-implied content out of the show.

How would Jews be fairly and accurately represented in Pokemon games?
I mean, you could make a region out of a predominantly Jewish region (but there are few of those to my knowledge).
In contrast, homosexuality isn't tied to just one place.

Edit: I should mention that, yes, Jews live in America, but how would you distinguish them as being Jewish?

There could be a few characters dressed in traditional Jewish clothes, for example?

Couldn't you just pretend that some of the NPC characters are gay? You don't even know if they're straight.

I also think it is absolutely horrible that there are no disabled people in Pokémon (as far as I know).

I have seen no dwarfs, either??

Why is it that you think homosexual people are more important to represent than other minorities?

 

[Sceptile Leaf Blade]

There could be a few characters dressed in traditional Jewish clothes, for example?

Couldn't you just pretend that some of the NPC characters are gay? You don't even know if they're straight.

I also think it is absolutely horrible that there are no disabled people in Pokémon (as far as I know).

I have seen no dwarfs, either??

Why is it that you think homosexual people are more important to represent than other minorities?

I never said that. Nor is that what this thread is about. You're just deflecting away from the topic. This thread is about LGBT representation, not about representation of people with dwarfism, jews, Swedish people, etc. I guess Sophocles is pretty short though.

And I already said that pretending doesn't count, that's not representation. If you can't see why that doesn't count then you completely miss the point about why there are calls for LGBT representation in the first place.

 

[Morton Belgram]

I never said that. Nor is that what this thread is about. You're just deflecting away from the topic. This thread is about LGBT representation, not about representation of people with dwarfism, jews, Swedish people, etc. I guess Sophocles is pretty short though.

And I already said that pretending doesn't count, that's not representation. If you can't see why that doesn't count then you completely miss the point about why there are calls for LGBT representation in the first place.

There is already LBGT representation in a looot of movies, games and comics, etc... It just doesn't have to be EVERYWHERE.
I mean, we have already reached the point where homosexuals almost are treated as heroes in Sweden.
We do not need LBGT representation in Pokémon, just like we don't need Jewish representation, dwarf representation or any specific "representations" at all. It's about the Pokémons, damn it, not the humans.

 

[PocketMonsterRealm]

Pokemon doesn't focus much on relationships and I don't want them to start doing that. I dont mind small references of LBGT just like they do have small references to other kinds of things. I mean all kinds of people exist in the world. However, they don't need to go out of their way to include or point out that such and such character is LBGT (or create a new character for that sole purpose). I also dont mind small references to religion or disabled people or ill people loners couples singles interracial couples (they do exist after all). I know they have covered these kinds of things already in game, though maybe I am wrong on the lbgt though i am sure they have. personally I like pokemon to stay very general with characters (but not ignore diversity). I mean who is to say this trainer or that one is this or isnt? Speculation doesn't bother me. Speculation means there was enough hinted that they could be this or that and probably was. I also dont want pokemon to fall into a political thing either which can easily happen if not careful. It has been nice to see color options for trainers. It would have been nice if they didnt gender lock clothes when clothes came out. I'm not lbgt, but I do prefer unisex clothes, however to some people they would call it masculine for a female. And when u go to the store in real life, there isnt anything hindering you from going to the opposite gender's clothing section and picking up a shirt.
at the end of the day I do think we will see more references to diversity as more new regions come out. I mean look at Alola.
I think this kind of thing needs to be left up to the Pokemon Company and they need to be careful on how they do it (presentation).

 

[Manchee]

Pokemon doesn't focus much on relationships and I don't want them to start doing that. I dont mind small references of LBGT just like they do have small references to other kinds of things. I mean all kinds of people exist in the world. However, they don't need to go out of their way to include or point out that such and such character is LBGT (or create a new character for that sole purpose). I also dont mind small references to religion or disabled people or ill people loners couples singles interracial couples (they do exist after all). I know they have covered these kinds of things already in game, though maybe I am wrong on the lbgt though i am sure they have. personally I like pokemon to stay very general with characters (but not ignore diversity). I mean who is to say this trainer or that one is this or isnt? Speculation doesn't bother me. Speculation means there was enough hinted that they could be this or that and probably was. I also dont want pokemon to fall into a political thing either which can easily happen if not careful. It has been nice to see color options for trainers. It would have been nice if they didnt gender lock clothes when clothes came out. I'm not lbgt, but I do prefer unisex clothes, however to some people they would call it masculine for a female. And when u go to the store in real life, there isnt anything hindering you from going to the opposite gender's clothing section and picking up a shirt.
at the end of the day I do think we will see more references to diversity as more new regions come out. I mean look at Alola.
I think this kind of thing needs to be left up to the Pokemon Company and they need to be careful on how they do it (presentation).

This is still how I feel on the matter after everything that has been said. Unless they add explicit romantic options to woo someone or show a kind of interest, I'm not going to be terribly concerned if the LGBT+ community is represented or not. At this point, even seeing a straight couple in the game only really comes up when you walk into someone's house and there happens to be a male and female. If LGBT+ representation were to start being included, that's where I'd prefer it to show up, and I'm part of that community. I'm all for fighting to get represented in certain areas, but Pokémon is not one where I'm very concerned.

 

[Akashin]

There is already LBGT representation in a looot of movies, games and comics, etc... It just doesn't have to be EVERYWHERE.
I mean, we have already reached the point where homosexuals almost are treated as heroes in Sweden.
We do not need LBGT representation in Pokémon, just like we don't need Jewish representation, dwarf representation or any specific "representations" at all. It's about the Pokémons, damn it, not the humans.

Exactly, it's about the Pokemon. And since it's about the Pokemon and not, say, relationships like Kukui and Burnet, why is it such a big deal to you if the games were to apply the same sort of irrelevant courtesy to LGBT?

Heterosexual relationships are 'EVERYWHERE', even in Pokemon, so why is it such a big deal that LGBT are trying to reach a point where they're treated with the same normalcy?

 

[Kein]

I can only think of Misty, Kukui and Burnet as game characters who confirm their sexuality (forgive me if I don't count random NPCs). You're free to assume whatever you want about the other characters.

Of course, it wouldn't hurt to have a confirmed LGBT character if it were just a detail rather than the focus of said character.

 

[Morton Belgram]

Exactly, it's about the Pokemon. And since it's about the Pokemon and not, say, relationships like Kukui and Burnet, why is it such a big deal to you if the games were to apply the same sort of irrelevant courtesy to LGBT?

Heterosexual relationships are 'EVERYWHERE', even in Pokemon, so why is it such a big deal that LGBT are trying to reach a point where they're treated with the same normalcy?

Heterosexual relationships are "everywhere" in Pokémon? For all you know, 90% of the Pokémon world could be homosexual, we have only seen VERY FEW relationships in the game. I think the old daycare couples and a few of those trainer tagteams you fought? But the vast majority of the trainers in the game, or the anime for that matter, do never state their sexuality. How do you know they're heterosexual and not homosexual? And why do you not call for Jews to be represented, while the Jews might need it more than the gays?

Hell, how do you know that the Celadon City gym is not a huge gym of lesbians?

 

[Sceptile Leaf Blade]

Heterosexual relationships are "everywhere" in Pokémon? For all you know, 90% of the Pokémon world could be homosexual, we have only seen VERY FEW relationships in the game. I think the old daycare couples and a few of those trainer tagteams you fought? But the vast majority of the trainers in the game, or the anime for that matter, do never state their sexuality. How do you know they're heterosexual and not homosexual? And why do you not call for Jews to be represented, while the Jews might need it more than the gays?

Hell, how do you know that the Celadon City gym is not a huge gym of lesbians?

You're obviously just trolling at this point. I'm just going to stop arguing with you. I've already answered all these questions before and you're clearly not going to read it anyway.

 

[Morton Belgram]

You're obviously just trolling at this point. I'm just going to stop arguing with you. I've already answered all these questions before and you're clearly not going to read it anyway.

You never gave proper answers. Your point has basically been "I would like to see homosexual representation in Pokémon, it is very relevant, and those who don't agree are homophobes. The other majorities are not as relevant to represent".

 

[Sceptile Leaf Blade]

You never gave proper answers. Your point has basically been "I would like to see homosexual representation in Pokémon, it is very relevant, and those who don't agree are homophobes. The other majorities are not as relevant to represent".

Obvious trolling is obvious by twisting my words, I never said anything about other minorities not being as relevant to represent. I said it's not relevant in this thread because this thread is about LGBT representation. Other minorities also perhaps requiring representation doesn't mean LGBT representation is suddenly no longer necessary.

And yes, the idea of specifically banning homosexual representation because it's 'inappropriate' while allowing heterosexual representation is inherently homophobic because that argument pretty much directly labels homosexuality as more inappropriate than heterosexuality.

 

[Morton Belgram]

Obvious trolling is obvious by twisting my words, I never said anything about other minorities not being as relevant to represent. I said it's not relevant in this thread because this thread is about LGBT representation. Other minorities also perhaps requiring representation doesn't mean LGBT representation is suddenly no longer necessary.

All this "trolling" talk, lol. Don't be such a nerd. I don't twist your words.

"Very relevant!" - your own words
You said it would be very relevant to include homosexuals.
The truth of the matter is, Pokémon is doing just fine without LBGT representation, so obviously, it isn't relevant for Pokémon.
Obviously, it wouldn't make people respect homosexuals more either, so it isn't relevant for homosexuals neither.

The point is, your "very relevant" is completely irrelevant.

You antagonize those who do not want to see LBGT represented in Pokémon. Well, I hate racism, and yet I wouldn't want Pokémon to be about such subjects neither.

Pokémon should remain a simple pure world, most kids doesn't even understand romance.

 

[PocketMonsterRealm]

Can I just ask this? Why is it assumed that when a male and female couple are seen that they are automatically straight?
why is sexuality important in pokemon to begin with? there are hints of people's sexuality of all spectrums --> already <-- in game and anime and I dont think we need to have more cut scenes of kissing and other things not really related to the story or pokemon, heterosexual or not.. cut scenes of head nodding in Alola is tedious enough and I do hope they stop that kind of stuff.
we also dont need characters coming up and basically saying hi im straight/bi/gay/pan/disabled/ black/white ect ect either. I mean under normal circumstances, most people don't do this in real life.
I am not sure what kind of "more representation" you are wanting. unless you are thinking along the lines of walking into a house and see a couple of males/females saying we just got married or how they love to cuddle or they just bought their first house as a couple.
I think there has been a male and female couple who was like this in one of the games, I could be mistaken.
But again, their sexuality was not implied. they could have been swingers straight bi pan or whatever. we dont know, and it doesnt matter.
And then again we have seen twos of the same sex living in a house and nothing is said at all. For all we know they could have been gay bi friends friends with benefits siblings dating ect. we do not know.
Its all generalized. People are generalized while showing some diversity in Pokemon because its not about the people and relationships. Its about Pokemon and friendships really.



We have had several instances where people of the same sex called another cute handsome beautiful pretty or that they wanted to impress them or there were hints of the person being embarrassed around another of the same sex because they thought they were cute ect

 

[Akashin]

I can only think of Misty, Kukui and Burnet as game characters who confirm their sexuality (forgive me if I don't count random NPCs). You're free to assume whatever you want about the other characters.

Of course, it wouldn't hurt to have a confirmed LGBT character if it were just a detail rather than the focus of said character.

True. But that's still enough to undermine the point that relationships shouldn't be depicted at all in Pokemon. That ship's sailed, if only to a minor extent (which is all people are asking for with LGBT representation anyway).

Heterosexual relationships are "everywhere" in Pokémon? For all you know, 90% of the Pokémon world could be homosexual, we have only seen VERY FEW relationships in the game. I think the old daycare couples and a few of those trainer tagteams you fought? But the vast majority of the trainers in the game, or the anime for that matter, do never state their sexuality. How do you know they're heterosexual and not homosexual? And why do you not call for Jews to be represented, while the Jews might need it more than the gays?

Hell, how do you know that the Celadon City gym is not a huge gym of lesbians?

I said heterosexual relationships were everywhere in general, and that they're even in Pokemon, in response to your assertion that homosexual relationships don't need to be everywhere. If the issue here doesn't have anything to do with any actual bias against LGBT, why is it a big deal for homosexual relationships to be represented to the point where whether or not they're in a particular media ceases to be something worth noting as special or significant, as with heterosexual relationships?

Trying to deflect the conversation from what this thread is about is pointless, but that's already been pointed out (and likely fallen on deaf ears, but nevertheless).

And it's already been pointed out why characters whose sexuality are undefined are irrelevant. If which way they lean isn't defined by the game itself, it's not representation for anything. Character A could be homosexual, sure, but that's us filling in spots the game left blank.