alexseanchai | REALLY, DISNEY? FUCK YOU!

Skip to Main Content

Entry tags:

fandom: disney

REALLY, DISNEY? FUCK YOU!

There is a spoiler on Facebook for Disney's Beauty and the Beast (2017). To wit: LeFou is explicitly gay.

...You know, Disney, when we said we want queer representation in Disney films?

WE DID NOT MEAN THE FUCKING VILLAINS.

(We have Scar and Ursula and etc for that!)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I think it's worse than that-- LeFou isn't even a villain. He's a joke, a comic relief toady.

Ugh, yeah, good point.

I saw this on Twitter, oddly enough and all I can do is just lay my head down and laugh. It's not a happy laughter. It is a bitter, resigned, angry laugh. It's not that LeFou being gay is INHERENTLY a problem, except for every single cultural contextual piece outside of it and the fact that that's YOUR ONLY POINT OF EXPLICIT QUEER.

How about Bell, bookish young man. Or why not have Beast be a fucking lady? OR HEY YOU COULD EVEN JUST MAKE LUMIERE AND COGSWORTH CANONICAL. THAT ALONE WOULD MAKE US HAPPY.

PRECISELY.

LIKE. THIS WASN'T HARD. Lumiere and Cogsworth is not a fucking LEAP for *ANYONE* that is aware things other than heterosexuality exist to make. Not personally actually sure how you read the original animated without assuming something there, but also I am SO FAR FROM THE FIRST PERSON TO NOTICE THIS. Even some of the fucking straight people have noticed the potential!

But, no. It's the fucking comic relief villain. Not even the main villain! NOPE. Joke character villain. Are you fuckin' kidding me.

LUMIERE AND BABETTE THOUGH. Because bisexuality doesn't exist, apparently, and neither do love triangles or serial monogamy, never mind poly.

Obviously Lumiere is bi! And bi and poly exist. But like. I would honestly have been... well, okay, not totally OK with them collapsing some various implicit shit, but at least at peace with it, if it gave us canonical Lumiere and Cogsworth.

But no. No, we're gonna go with the lazy, not even a tiny bit revolutionary option of textualising queer coding. SURE. WHY NOT. Why should anyone hope for something more than scraping the absplute fuckcing bottom of the barrel re: representation. *BITTER LAUGHTER HERE*

ACCURATE.

Still waving the "canon queer Elsa" flag for Frozen 2, but, well.

Well, the most repulsive part is that they keep saying this is revolutionary when it is not. Because we always had the implicitly queer Lumiere and Cogsworth, and this character is still fairly implicitly queer from what I've heard. (He doesn't do anything but swoon over the other man I think??)

That sounds accurate, yeah.

Yeeeeeeeeeeeah.

I cannot even.

headdeskheaddeskheaddesk

*insert pillow*

Thank you.

...and then I have a friend of mine when I said some of this that says that she wouldn't want to esplain homosexuality to a five year old )Which I love the girl, but wtf?)

...

And that wasn't even going into the polly stuff (Which makes her extremely awkward and uncomfortable like for serious)

...

(Jay had his own opinions, but I think I might let him speak them tomorrow when he's not so obviously annoyed by all this.

We're palyamorous in-collective (Not physically because no partner who seems interested yet) so this irks him a bit.

-Fallon~

But that's easy! "Most of the time, women love men and men love women. Some of the time, women love women and men love men. There is nothing wrong with any of those ways to love." I mean, that doesn't get into other shades of queerness or any shades of transness, but the hypothetical listener is, after all, five...

(Which wasn't your friend's point, I'm sure.)

No her point is that she doesn't think a five year old is old enough to comprehend even that, I think. That said, I'm a bit mor liberal fluid than she is. I'd explain it to a 3-4 year old if I knew they could understand it. But beuing what we are, I think that comes with the territory, yaknow?

Also, I wish there were esier ways to get society used to things like poly and things like that because this whole 'society stuck in monogamy' kinda irks me. Has for a while. As does "Polyamory is just fuck buddies" mentality that many have. Um..no, it's not. Say that to someone who is actually *poly* (Unlike us who are jus in-system poly) and hear them get pissed to shit at you.

-Fallon~

In my (admittedly limited) experience, five-year-olds comprehend heterosexuality just fine.

*nod*

I should write more stories with polyamory, probably...I mean, my audience is shit size-wise, but it's a start...

Yeah, hi, I saw that film with an actual, flesh-and-blood five-year-old. Who is gay. (He doesn't know the word but he says that he's only going to date boys when he grows up, and lots of other things that make it pretty clear.) And I had to explain to him why they made the gay character a villain and a ridiculous one at that. So I'm not terribly sympathetic to this sort of 'think of the children' attitude.

Yup.

If you're not going to leave logged-in comments for whatever reason, could you sign them with some handle of yours, please? Thanks.

Sorry about that. I don't like unsigned anon comments either, but I can't think of a way of identifying myself without outing a young child to the whole internet without his consent.

-- AnonSheep

Fair

Thanks

That's got extra implications when the token queer is on the villain side, and I want to give it a solid Hulk Smash.

indeed!

And, like, they don't get points for "look he is gay because we say he is! Look how great we are at queer representation!!!"

INDEED

Just read another good Twitter thread about this, this time from @AnaMardoll: https://twitter.com/AnaMardoll/status/836975472084926465 There's also the point that freaking Ian McKellen is one of the voice actors and wtf they couldn't have had HIM play the gay character? He at least knows how to talk about it!

Ana usually brings the awesome, yes.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only