This is certainly common and hypocritical, but it misses the most hypocritical situation of all. We routinely get romances between male and female characters, the anchor point of Superman comics has long been his romance with Louis Lane. In the Spider Man comics not only does he have an enduring relationship With MJ Watson and sometimes Felicia or Gwen Stacey, but those relationships and sometimes “love triangles” have often been integral and pivotal to the story. Sue and Reed Richards are husband and wife, Bruce/The Hulk and Betty Ross…. The list goes on and on. So we’ve had heterosexual romances pushed on us in media and society along with an almost constant narrative that is the “right” or aspirational way to be. Homosexuality (etc.) is often used exploitively such as for sensationalism. Of a bias fits our natural disposition it tends to not stand out to us. There is already and historically a distinct “agenda” of “main stream heterosexuality” in the media.
Many reading this are too young to remember that when “divorced families” and “single parent families” and “unmarried parents” started to be shown in the media, many felt that too was some sort of “agenda” or “attack” on the “traditional family.” The fact was simply that not only had those groups always existed, but they were rising in numbers and becoming more socially acceptable. It was becoming far less “shameful” to be a divorcé for example. So not only were many “average people” not represented in media, but it didn’t reflect the reality of what society looked like; and more and more people couldn’t relate to or even didn’t aspire to have a “leave it to beaver” style family. Shows like the “Simpsons” were EXTREMELY controversial for how tame we tend to see them today for showing a “dis functional family,” but one of the things that made the show successful and part of an era of beloved “dis functional families” and the modern day TV family- was that people could better relate.
Comments