Should kids & family movies have gay characters?

I'm against overly-sexual characters in family films in general. Beauty and the Beast isn't necessarily marketed only to children, though. I don't know. Gay people aren't going anywhere, and I don't think seeing gay characters in films will traumatize children. I just don't think there needs to be an agenda or special message about gay characters. If their character is gay, then that is only a small part of their character. A character's entire point of being in a film shouldn't just be so they can be gay. Gays IRL are more than their sexuality, and movie characters should reflect that.

....because you would need every movie to be about 50 hours long to include even a fair portion of minorities?

Are there going to be native American characters in Beauty and the Best? Will there be Russians? Albinos? Former African child soldiers? No? Then man, why is Disney so bigoted and racist??

Excuses excuses innsmouth. Next you are going to try and tell me Donald Trump didn't lose the popular vote by nearly three million votes. Are you trying to say that if there were more hillbillies and redneck conservative christians on this message board the NO vote would have been higher? 

No. The PC era needs to hurry up and end.

you're kidding, right?   it gives people the 'right' to protest and WHINE about anything and everything AND WE ARE FORCED TO LISTEN!   too many people are butthurt over the tiniest little things  and they nitpick everything.  even toddler cartoons [Peppa Pig for example...  Australia has a bone to pick about the MrSkinnylegs   character because Australians have to deal with this deadly spider and they are afraid their wee ones would go picking up spiders and playing with them. no one can do ANYTHING anymore without pissing someone off. 

the statement:  Hitler was bad. almost cost me my life.  

not kidding.

New topic, Billy. Try to keep up.

It was clear from the get-go that your intentions were the best, so all is well. Having spent the last decade contributing regularly to various political blogs, I know how tempting it can be to get pulled into skirmishes (of which I've certainly had my share) with people like Conspirologist and others on this thread who are quickly revealed to have excluded themselves from the sphere of rational discourse, claiming unassailable authority on matters about which they clearly know nothing, and which are fueled instead by a combination of only supposition, urban legend and old wives' tales, deliberate disinformation and outright hysteria.

But I figure they may also provide a public service in their small ways: during the national debate over marriage equality, for instance, I noticed that the more hysterical opposition became, the more public support for legal equality increased (as, presumably, more and more people concluded, "What a bunch of crackpots...the hell with them and their nonsense"). Plus, the more time the crackpots spend at their keyboards firing off furious messages full of vitriol, the less time they're out in the real world doing serious damage.


       

In the 80s Michael Eisner said it was lucky that Disney was now owned by people devoted to good as opposed to evil because the power the company had was awesome (as that pre-school found out when Disney forced them to remove images of Mickey and friends--its unlikely Walt would have cared, since he didnt care that Warner Bros. took the Bugs Bunny design from one of his cartoons).
Modern Disney is a monster.
They hate European heritage with a passion.

They want to promote a globalist monoculture and erase boundaries.
In fact Eisner said it in the 90s--he wanted Disney to be "entertainer for the globe."

Disney was not able to do well without Walt at the helm, but now it has gone into a direction that is quickly validating all those ZOG conspiracy theories.

I dont care if someone is gay, but the idea that it should be normalized in children's films is not tolerance, it is an attack on family cohesion and forcing families to address sex at an early age--and I ask--why?
If Disney was sincere about promoting a peaceful society, it would have kept Tibet in the Dr Strange movie, or it would have its media addressing rape in Europe or critiquing the Iraq invasion (instead of cheerleading for it).

The owners of Disney have the opposite sensibility of Walt-they despise the European, especially the blonde blue eyed Nordic type.

I can see why David Duke is having the best year of his life because the media companies are doing everything possible to validate his conspiracy theories.


I had no problem with Snagglepuss being gay though.

Whatever you say, Texas Pete!