When I watch a TV show, I typically see warnings about flashing lights, cigarette smoking, violence, nudity, self-harm, and the like, but I never see warnings about the thing that I typically find most upsetting – male gay scenes.<\/p>\n
I don’t choose to get upset over the homo stuff. It’s just how my physiology works. Why should I lie about it? Why should I feel shame about my feelings?<\/p>\n
If it is wonderful that more gays are out of the closet about their true feelings, why is it not wonderful if other people who aren’t LGBTQ+ get to be out of the closet too with their true feelings?<\/p>\n
I won’t to watch a movie or a TV show if it shows a man kissing another man let alone anything more graphic than that. I hate getting invested in a show and then the gay bombardment begins (ala Black Doves on Netflix).<\/p>\n
Are my widespread feelings not worthy of consideration? So why exactly do my preferences not count? Why do my religious sensibilities not count? Why does my culture not count? Why does my America not count? Why does my Bible-based hero system not count? Why does my upbringing not count? Why?<\/p>\n
Modern Guru columnist Danny Katz fields a question in the 2-22-25 edition of the Sydney Morning Herald<\/a>:<\/p>\n I\u2019m tired of investing time in a movie or TV series only to discover halfway through that there are non-heterosexual kissing and sex scenes, which I do not enjoy. Should there be classification warnings so I can avoid them? Nope, just get used to it. This is the new and improved movie and TV world with a powerful LGBTQI+ formula designed to take on the toughest, most baked-on homophobes. That means there\u2019s going to be more same-sex kissing, plenty of same-sex hugging and so much same-sex lovemaking that old-fashioned, hetero sex scenes are going to start looking shocking; you\u2019ll be sitting in front of the TV, thinking, \u201cHang on, one of them has breasts … one doesn\u2019t … weeeeeird. And kinda gross.\u201d<\/p>\n And not just sex scenes. Films and TV shows have finally started stepping up and truly reflecting our modern times with a whole variety of races, religions, identities and neurodiversities being represented \u2013 and that\u2019s a good thing. For too long, the only people of colour on Australian TV were sun-bronzed lifesavers or Italian puppets with a Dolmio grin. For too long, only men drove cars in TV car ads, with women either sitting in the passenger seat or perving at the car as it drove past like they wanted to have sex with it. For too long, neurodivergent characters were played by non-neurodivergent actors with their hair parted down the middle, their top button done up, and given the nickname \u201cGoober\u201d.<\/p>\n Thankfully, our new cultural landscape is richer and better and we don\u2019t need any classification warnings saying: \u201cContains coarse language, mature content, multicultural themes, non-white people, non-Christians, equal-gender situations and sexually diverse lovemaking scenes that may involve stubble grinding against stubble, both on the face and, sometimes, nowhere near it.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n What if we can’t get used to it? What if we don’t want to get used to it? I like it how you write that the LGBTQ+ formula is deliberately “designed to take on the toughest, most baked-on homophobes.” How’s that working out for you? How’s your withering contempt for half the population working out for your side?<\/p>\n Hetero revulsion at unexpected same-sex scenes is not going to disappear. One day, the TV and movie industry will listen to us. <\/p>\n From a thread on Quora<\/a>: <\/p>\n How do you feel about children\u2019s TV shows\/movies including homosexual and transgender culture? Should there be a warning for parental advisory shown before the film or episode starts? Until about 2022, the left was steadily winning the culture war on every front. Now the tide might be turning in our direction. <\/p>\n The Los Angeles Times and the New York Times want to play down the trans part of the Zizian trans killing cult.<\/p>\n The Los Angeles Times<\/a>: “Vegan computer savants with Bay Area ties linked to deaths across U.S., authorities say”<\/p>\n Three paragraphs in, the trans thing gets a mention, and trans women in the article are given the pronoun “she.”<\/p>\n Steve Sailer writes<\/a>: <\/p>\n NYT struggles with pronouns of the Zizian murder cult<\/p>\n The Times’ paying subscribers don’t want their sense of who are the Good Guys and who are the Bad Guys subverted by journalistic clarity.<\/p>\n But what word crucial to understanding the Zizians is missing from the NYT?<\/p>\n The sacred appellation of \u201ctransgender\u201d is skipped over by the NYT. (Normally, the NYT is not reticent about the word \u201ctransgender,\u201d having published it in 9,661 articles since 2013.)<\/p>\n Nor does the Times appear to want to commit itself early in its 1600 word article to the preferred pronouns of the numerous suspects, instead carefully constructing pronoun-free sentences…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The WSJ also plays down the trans angle<\/a>: <\/p>\n \nA Silicon Valley Intellectual Society Kicked Them Out. Now They\u2019re Tied to a Killing Spree. Feb. 21, the LA Times posts<\/a>: “A woman suspected of killing her wife, a Cal Fire captain who battled the Eaton fire last month, was previously convicted of killing her first spouse, records show.”<\/p>\n Feb. 22, the LA Times posts<\/a>:<\/p>\n Grindr, the dating app that caters to gay men, cannot be held responsible for the rape of a 15-year-old boy who the company matched with sexual predators, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week; it is the latest teens-versus-tech spat in a fight over internet immunity experts say could soon come before the U.S. Supreme Court.<\/p>\n The appellate court\u2019s ruling upheld a 2023 decision by U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright II of the Central District of California, who dismissed the suit, saying Grindr was shielded by broad immunity protections passed almost a decade before the plaintiff was born.<\/p>\n In a series of events Wright called \u201calarming and tragic,\u201d a closeted Nova Scotia teen downloaded the LGBTQ+ hookup app in an attempt to meet other gay kids in his rural Canadian town.<\/p>\n Instead, over the course of four days, he was assaulted by four adult men, including a man who picked him up after the teen sent him pictures from his high school cafeteria…<\/p>\n In a civil suit first filed in California Superior Court in Los Angeles and later moved to federal court, the boy\u2019s attorneys argued in Doe vs. Grindr that, despite its adults-only terms of service, Grindr knew kids used its app and even marketed to them on TikTok and Instagram. About half of gay teens use Grindr while still underage, according to a 2018 study in the Journal of Adolescent Health.<\/p>\n The suit also called the West Hollywood tech firm \u201ca trafficking venture.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When I watch a TV show, I typically see warnings about flashing lights, cigarette smoking, violence, nudity, self-harm, and the like, but I never see warnings about the thing that I typically find most upsetting – male gay scenes. I … Continue reading
\nL.B., Curl Curl, NSW<\/p>\n
\nAlba: It\u2019s the agenda that annoys me. I was watching this new series on Netflix, Dead End, I was really enjoying the cartoon and out of the third episode, the sad lonely boy without a \u201cfamily\u201d turned out to reveal to be trans without family support. So it ended up being the whole thing about making the expectator\u2018s feel sorry for him. I have just checked the credits, because I was pretty annoyed with this whole thing and googled about it and saw all the comments in this tread. Apparently they\u2019ve started adding LGBTQ to the Genres. That\u2019s a step. I will sure check it more often. I hate being forced to anyones agenda, specially my kid. No thanks, we have gay friends and family, I don\u2019t need our family entertainment always including sexuality\/gender, can we have plain fun entertainment back? I would rather have our children being introduced to different religions\/cultures.. we still are so behind on that department.
\nBrad: Yes! I won’t let my daughter watch ANYTHING until I’ve watched it first. She doesn’t understand sexual stuff yet and I think it’s disgusting to add it to children’s shows. We”ll probably not go to another theater showing of any movie until she’s well into her teens, and that’s sad. We have always loved family movie day. They already have warnings for nudity, drug use, even smoking. It needs to be added to protect our children’s innocence.
\n>Do you usually turn your face or change the channel when homosexual scenes show up on TV or in movies? What does that say about me if I do?
\nJamie: The LGBT community is such a minority group, it’s their aggressiveness and being in the middle if everything that makes them seem bigger. I fast forward or look away, it’s not natural! It’s seems forced, and it’s only done cause shows and movies would be strung up if they didn’t put scene with queer gay stuff in it. I find it disgusting and wish I had a time machine to go wayyyy back.
\n> How do you feel about children\u2019s TV shows\/movies including homosexual and transgender culture? Should there be a warning for parental advisory shown before the film or episode starts?
\nMike: Yes! Because my children and grand children do not need to see that kind of behavior until they are mature enough to understand what it really involves! This is why we stopped going to movie theaters I’m not about to spend money on a movie to see the offensive LGBT behavior just to get up and walk out! The LGBT need to respect everyone’s rights not just theirs!<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nLinked to homicides, a faked death and the elite tech world, the \u2018Zizians\u2019 are known for militant veganism\u2014and now a nationwide rampage<\/p><\/blockquote>\n