Gena Davis institute on Gender in media tries to link violent games to mass shootings and police violence

[Silvanus]

I dunno maybe actually criticise it without having to pull the society harm argument to try and justify your personal issues or objection with said content? But then as you likely well know "I don't like this" doesn't hold up well as an argument and can be quite well countered with "Then maybe you're not the target audience?"

You want me to... arbitrarily exclude certain criticisms, then.

No, I don't really feel like self-censoring, thank you.

I dunno presenting the stuff as actively harmful or dare I say "Spiritual Opium" can tend to get companies to get a bit concerned about the thing and wanting to act due to the perception of harm being done if enough people are heard repeating the lie that they believe it to be true.

Feedback for artists doesn't really help them if you (to borrow a term from Liana K) invoke the werewolf cookbook. The werewolf cookbook goes as such
"This is a cookbook, I like Werewolves, this cookbook doesn't contain any werewolves thus it's bad". Basically asking for the product to be something it is not or as I'd frame it wanting all games to be Burger King so you can always "Have it your way" rather than examining what was being done with the game seemingly and trying to understand what the artist was going for and as either Oscar Wilde or Charles Dickens said in their essays on the nature of criticism, review it based on how well you believe it achieved it's goals but on how it didn't deliver something it was never presented as delivering.

"Werewolves" in that analogy represent a specific niche interest. Women who aren't hyper-sexualised is not a specific niche interest, and would generally be more suited to most artistic endeavours (except for pornography).

 

[BrawlMan]

This thread has taken many weird turns.
What is real, and what is fake?
Obsessing over things that will never meant to be or fickle things.
What it means to be a "true, real, or pro gamer."
I know a way to end that cycle.
Want to know how?
Get rid of all that.
Kill the "pro" gamer.
Kill the "real" gamer.
Kill the "true" gamer.
Kill the "hardcore" gamer.
Kill the past.
Play and do the things that make you happy, without going out of your way to hurt others.
Ignore senseless foolishness.
Either teach them better, or ignore them if they can't be reason. Better yet, call them out.
Your past, present, and future will be all the better for it.
I'll be seeing you next time.
We will meet again in the past.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Yeah.

I mean, ask real women who are "curvy" how they feel about wearing dresses, especially dresses with low necklines, and whether they feel "sexualized".

But this is a great example of why "sexualized" doesn't mean bad, it means sexualized. I think the general consensus is that Lady Dimitrescu is pretty awesome, because she represents a kind of sexualization we don't often get.. and one which people were apparently thirsty for. It seems like Capcom themselves were not expecting the reaction that character would get at all, and to me that says everything. Like, you designed a really tall woman with a super dominant personality and you didn't think people would get horny for it?

And it's also accessible to a lot of people who are put off by the usual forms of sexualization we get in the games industry. Queer people loved it, not always on a sexual level but also because she's a queer coded villain who is awesome. It gave men a little opportunity to acknowledge submissive fantasies publicly without ridicule, which is still pretty rare. Even the fact that she is tall and sexy is kind of nice, because generally women who are tall are treated very badly about it.

Because, and I can't stress this enough. Sexualization isn't bad. The constant, non stop, endless sexualization of one very specific set of very boring fantasies that are largely inaccessible to a lot of people (and kind of futile even for the people who do buy into them) is bad.

Yet 99% of the time when sexualisation is brought up it's to try and claim it's problematic while generally when people are praising a character they're said to be sexy not sexualised. Sexualised sounds like something done to a character that may not be in keeping with said character sexy sounds like how the character is and is in line with their personality / character.

Also is Lady D queer coded? Really?

Yeah... recently.

What happened to Megan Fox is disgusting though.

Megan Fox starred in one of my favourite films of all time, Jennifer's Body. It's a cute, funny film, and one of the few films I've ever seen which actually manages to recreate a distinctively bisexual coming of age experience. The writer and director were both women, and they were clearly writing this story for young women (and also, queers of all genders) who can see themselves in these kinds of experiences.

And it bombed. It absolutely bombed, and it destroyed one of Megan Fox' few chances to break out of the weird rut she was in after the transformer's franchise and be recognized as a serious talent. Sadly though, despite the fact that she is a serious talent, she is also why the film bombed, because the production company inexplicably marketed the film at teenage boys on the basis that Megan Fox was in it.

But that was Megan Fox's life at that time. She appeared in Transformers (TFW you realise her character is called Mikaela Banes and throw up in your mouth a little) Michael Bay shot her fixing a car, and her life was ruined because after that noone could take her seriously. She came out as bisexual at a time when that was still actually a big deal, only to be immediately patronized and have her lived experience invalidated. She criticized the way she was being treated, and was accused of being unprofessional and "crazy". She tried to do something different, and the production company decided they were making softcore porn because she was in it.

It's great to see her doing more stuff now, but she lost at least a decade of her career because noone could look past the fact that she was sexy, and I suspect the only reason she's able to do stuff now is because she's old enough that basic straight men have moved on to the next 18-21 year old they want to bang. Gross.

I find it somewhat funny you're on about Jennifer's body as a queer coming of age story when my uni flat mate back in the day sold it to me as "It's a horror film where you got to watch two hot chicks make out". So it could have been queer coded on some level I'll give you that but it could also have fallen into the 90's "Here's two hot chicks, lets make them make out cause that gives the idea a 3 some would be possible" thing that was a thing for a while. Also I dunno if she was really breaking her typecasting considering the character is a flirtatious groupee character initially then the host of a succubus / demon

I'm guessing she's doing the jobs now because she's enough of a name to carry weight still but she's longer in the "New hottest actress" category so it's more her name and brand. Like how Bruce Willis keeps doing these fairly low budget action films these days cause they'll have him on set for like 10 days of the shoot and pay him $1 Million to for it just so his name is attached to it as a selling point.

What are your feelings on Christina Hoff Sommers again?

To the best of my knowledge she's not been citing some papers withdrawn due to allegations about false data at least not after the papers were already withdrawn.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I'd just prefer if you didn't put words in my mouth. Engage with what I'm actually arguing rather than making it up for me.

Right........so don't actually point out you're just using different words that mean the same thing essentially?

I find hyper-sexualisation offputting in general. That feeling isn't limited to mainline games or non-DLC, and I don't see why it would be.

So does that apply to real life too?
If so or if not how come you find it offputting?

Sure, yes. But the "idea in my head" isn't any more specific than "generally quite practical outfits, or generally equal outfits for men and women".

Yet you can actually get sexy Male outfits in some of the Dead Or Alive games. So there are equal outfits.

It's not "harm to children". You're rewriting my argument for your own convenience. Again.

If people are portrayed in a certain way over and over and over again, people-- kids, teenagers, and even adults-- will start to associate those depictions with those people. This isn't controversial stuff; it's basic, established psychology.

Yet it's also basic established psychology under the principals of learning theory by Vygotsky that our peers and immediate environment are the most influential upon our ideas and learning. Thus applying that to Piaget's theories about schema the fact kids will see women teachers more often or women on the news or their own parents in a number of different roles would mean they're most likely to associate people with those around them.

Also are we really objecting to sexy women who are strong and powerful in their own right?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

You want me to... arbitrarily exclude certain criticisms, then.

No, I don't really feel like self-censoring, thank you.

Well most artists will likely file your criticism under "Do the opposite of their objections because they're the opposite of the intended target audience"

"Werewolves" in that analogy represent a specific niche interest. Women who aren't hyper-sexualised is not a specific niche interest, and would generally be more suited to most artistic endeavours (except for pornography).

Looking at so much of the history of art wanting to capture beauty or the idea of what said times viewed as ideas of perfection. I'm pretty sure sexy and art have gone together for many years. I mean art being "Too sexy" was what caused the action of the Council of Trent.
Also it could be argued the chaste woman idea is a specific interest to some who may be somewhat intimidated by women showing themselves to be sexy as some kind of thing linked to them being powerful while the chaste maiden represents innocence and purity not temptation.

 

[Silvanus]

Right........so don't actually point out you're just using different words that mean the same thing essentially?

Or just engage with what I'm arguing. It would be a novel approach for you, I realise.

So does that apply to real life too?
If so or if not how come you find it offputting?

I mean, yeah, if hyper-sexualisation was as common in real life, then I'd find it quite offputting.

Yet you can actually get sexy Male outfits in some of the Dead Or Alive games. So there are equal outfits.

And they're far, far, far, far rarer, and much more tame. The idea that the sexes are treated equally is laughable.

Yet it's also basic established psychology under the principals of learning theory by Vygotsky that our peers and immediate environment are the most influential upon our ideas and learning. Thus applying that to Piaget's theories about schema the fact kids will see women teachers more often or women on the news or their own parents in a number of different roles would mean they're most likely to associate people with those around them.

I find it pretty funny that the two names you quoted are the ones we get taught in high school psychology.

Yep, our immediate environment is most influential. People have thousands of influences on them throughout their formative years. Cultural depictions are another major one.

Also are we really objecting to sexy women who are strong and powerful in their own right?

No, and we never were, this is another lazy strawman.

 

[Silvanus]

Well most artists will likely file your criticism under "Do the opposite of their objections because they're the opposite of the intended target audience"

You think the "target audience" of DOA is exclusively people who want hyper-sexualisation?

Because I'm a gamer, & a fan of fighting games.

Looking at so much of the history of art wanting to capture beauty or the idea of what said times viewed as ideas of perfection. I'm pretty sure sexy and art have gone together for many years. I mean art being "Too sexy" was what caused the action of the Council of Trent.
Also it could be argued the chaste woman idea is a specific interest to some who may be somewhat intimidated by women showing themselves to be sexy as some kind of thing linked to them being powerful while the chaste maiden represents innocence and purity not temptation.

You're creating a false binary. I don't want "chaste women". And I'm fine with sexy women.

What I don't like is the inundation, and the over-the-top shit.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

And could you or they. gotta chase that clout and dunk on "The Gamers™" though. even thought at this point the Gamers are the reason for Gatcha Mobile games but also refuse to play mobile games and acknowledge them as legitimate games.........

What, are you so mad that some rando dunked on another rando on Twitter for saying that nuBayonetta is "censored" that you have to think that there's some movement cheering on the censorship of Bayonetta?

It's almost like there's vast swaths of gamers with many varying attitudes towards what they find sexy or not. Like, clearly, if you are using that tweet as proving "people are attacking Bayonetta for being sexy", then you have to think that the Bayonetta in the Bayonetta 3 trailer is censored, yes?

Is the nuBayonetta in the trailer Censored, Dwarvenhobble? The Bayonetta that the rest of Twitter is making the floor slippery over?

It can actually add to a decent enough game though and help it sell.

Yeh and?

Loving this nothing argument:
"People put in the sex because it sells!"
"Except for all these examples where it very clearly doesn't"
"Well yeah, sex doesn't sell by itself"
"So if the sexy game dropped its sexy it would sell on its own merit"
"No, Go Woke Go Broke"

Yet 99% of the time when sexualisation is brought up it's to try and claim it's problematic while generally when people are praising a character they're said to be sexy not sexualised. Sexualised sounds like something done to a character that may not be in keeping with said character sexy sounds like how the character is and is in line with their personality / character.

Also is Lady D queer coded? Really?

Get out of your bubble and hang around more queer people.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

What, are you so mad that some rando dunked on another rando on Twitter for saying that nuBayonetta is "censored" that you have to think that there's some movement cheering on the censorship of Bayonetta?

It's almost like there's vast swaths of gamers with many varying attitudes towards what they find sexy or not. Like, clearly, if you are using that tweet as proving "people are attacking Bayonetta for being sexy", then you have to think that the Bayonetta in the Bayonetta 3 trailer is censored, yes?

Is the nuBayonetta in the trailer Censored, Dwarvenhobble? The Bayonetta that the rest of Twitter is making the floor slippery over?

Who knows, we shall see.

Loving this nothing argument:
"People put in the sex because it sells!"
"Except for all these examples where it very clearly doesn't"
"Well yeah, sex doesn't sell by itself"
"So if the sexy game dropped its sexy it would sell on its own merit"
"No, Go Woke Go Broke"

Except I'd wager that even some of the crap games still sold more than comparatively also equally crap games just dude to sex appeal. BMX XXX is likely remembered by and has more name recognition than Raze's Hell for examples.

Get out of your bubble and hang around more queer people.

Sounds like you're stereotyping people a bit to me

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Or just engage with what I'm arguing. It would be a novel approach for you, I realise.

I do but you get rather tetchy when I point our words mean things, then refuse to clarify how those things aren't your position despite being often the baggage that is connected to said positions you choose to take.

I mean, yeah, if hyper-sexualisation was as common in real life, then I'd find it quite offputting.

Man we have lived very different lives in kinda very different worlds it seems lol.

And they're far, far, far, far rarer, and much more tame. The idea that the sexes are treated equally is laughable.

It's literally Speedos and a bow tie......... How much more revealing is needed? Also they're produced based on what sells and what there can be done to be deemed sexy beyond what they already do normally lol. I dunno maybe it says about how little people realise male characters are sexualised as they walk round shirtless showing off 8 packs as people argue they're not sexualised.

I find it pretty funny that the two names you quoted are the ones we get taught in high school psychology.

Yep, our immediate environment is most influential. People have thousands of influences on them throughout their formative years. Cultural depictions are another major one.

Yes which tells you how fundamental they are to psychology.

Also media depictions aren't anywhere near as powerful as people seem to think or the world wouldn't change and progress anywhere near as much as it has.

No, and we never were, this is another lazy strawman.

I note you didn't bother addressing any of the rest of the argument so was I right on the money?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

You think the "target audience" of DOA is exclusively people who want hyper-sexualisation?

Because I'm a gamer, & a fan of fighting games.

Yes but you're upset by breasts apparently.

You're creating a false binary. I don't want "chaste women". And I'm fine with sexy women.

What I don't like is the inundation, and the over-the-top shit.

But that entirely depends on where you're looking then being upset that you saw said stuff and didn't look elsewhere.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Who knows, we shall see.

A) If it's your argument that it's happening, you should be able to show it
B) Is nuBayonetta sexy or censored? The internet's come to a very different conclusion than your small corner has.

Except I'd wager that even some of the crap games still sold more than comparatively also equally crap games just dude to sex appeal. BMX XXX is likely remembered by and has more name recognition than Raze's Hell for examples.

Considering Raze's Hell has a better meta critic score than all releases of BMX XXX except for the GBA version that had a different name, "having more name recognition" is, like, actively bad. Like, Daikatana has name recognition. Alien: Colonial Marines has name recognition. You haven't explained why that's a good thing though, other than some sales just for being in the public eye. Comparing a disastrous AAA published release to a glorified indie publisher with middling software is fun though.

Sounds like you're stereotyping people a bit to me

Dude, you said somebody was promoting the censorship of sexy games because they were laughing at morons who think nuBayonetta was censored. You ignore vast swaths of people who think remade designs are very sexy because they aren't one particular kind of sexy. Like, you've somehow missed the massive thirst people have for giant buff ladies in leather and you seem to think Lady Dimitrescu's main attraction was her bust line. It's very narrow-minded.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

It's literally Speedos and a bow tie......... How much more revealing is needed? Also they're produced based on what sells and what there can be done to be deemed sexy beyond what they already do normally lol. I dunno maybe it says about how little people realise male characters are sexualised as they walk round shirtless showing off 8 packs as people argue they're not sexualised.

Wolverine was hotter when he was regular gym fit and not hyper movie fit

Everyone Is Beautiful and No One Is Horny - Blood Knife

The human body has become a strange contradiction at the heart of the modern blockbuster. Sexy, yes. But sexual? No.

bloodknife.com

Like, those dudes aren't sexualized. And if you'd payed attention to who the ladies actually get thirsty for, you'd realize that.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Yet 99% of the time when sexualisation is brought up it's to try and claim it's problematic while generally when people are praising a character they're said to be sexy not sexualised. Sexualised sounds like something done to a character that may not be in keeping with said character sexy sounds like how the character is and is in line with their personality / character.

Fictional characters are fictional. They don't have real personalities or real agency. Everything they are is imposed on them by the people who created them. If those characters are sexy, it's because their creators sexualized them. Sexualization isn't inherently positive or negative, all it means is the ascription of sexual characteristics to things that are not inherently sexual, like fictional characters. The actual problem with sexualization is that it doesn't stop with fictional characters, people also do it to real life people (especially but not exclusively women) who do have their own sexuality and their own agency, because a lot of people can't distinguish between the way they treat fictional characters and the way they treat real people.

Also is Lady D queer coded? Really?

YES

Again, I have to point this out. Queer coding is not just about signifying that a character is gay, although Lady D is 100% a massive lesbian and this is canon. Queer coding is about making a character appealing to a gay audience. Oh my god, I wonder if this massive, tall, really femme, totally domme perfect queen who hangs out in a castle with a bunch of literal hags menacing heterosexual families and who is also a literal monster might have some gay appeal somewhere. I wonder.

I find it somewhat funny you're on about Jennifer's body as a queer coming of age story when my uni flat mate back in the day sold it to me as "It's a horror film where you got to watch two hot chicks make out".

...

"Guys, I saw this great film. There are these two guys, and get this right.. one of them just starts fucking the other right in the ass. And there's this chick there eating a salad and she says 'not in front of my salad' and I'm telling you dude, it was fucking funny as fuck. Like, watching those dudes just pound each others asses was a bit weird, but I don't think there's anything gay about it bro. It's just two dudes fucking. That's not gay bro. Not gay at all. Like, they were probably doing it because they were absolute madlads and thought it would be funny for the chick and anyone watching. Totally not gay at all bro. I mean, I think the actors might have been gay but that doesn't mean the characters were gay, right bro? They're totally not gay bro. It's not gay. Please bro, you gotta believe how not gay it was.."

So it could have been queer coded on some level I'll give you that but it could also have fallen into the 90's "Here's two hot chicks, lets make them make out cause that gives the idea a 3 some would be possible" thing that was a thing for a while.

No, it was the former.

I don't really know what to tell you, other than to watch the film again. Even then, I don't know if you're going to get it, but it's not like your opinion really matters.

One of the characters is literally named "Needy Lesnicki." There are long shots of the two main characters staring at each other or holding hands. They are completely obsessed with each other to the point it dominates their lives. When they do kiss, it's filmed in extreme close up of their lips to indicate intensity and intimacy rather than zooming out for spectacle. Needy, who is normally the sexually repressed one, literally climbs on top of Jennifer in order to kiss her. Jennifer's dialogue in that scene indicates that they've fooled around before. Jennifer specifically seduces and kills boys who Needy is attracted to, ostensibly as a kind of rivalry but also very obviously to control Needy's sexuality. In the end (spoilers by the way) Jennifer literally lets Needy kill her by stabbing her in the heart. These characters are in love, they have a toxic, volatile, intense relationship with each other which they themselves don't understand, but which is incredibly obvious to anyone in the audience who spent a minute thinking about it (or doesn't try to pretend that two women passionately kissing is 100% hetero).

And if you're bisexual, you may well have been one of these characters, or both of these characters. You're a normal straight (you think) teenager living your normal straight life and you're as happy with it as any teenager is, but you have that one friend you're way too close to, and you don't understand what's happening to you or why you feel the way you do, so it turns weird and intense and toxic and inevitably breaks down. I think that's part of how a lot of us figure out that we're bisexual, and I can't think of any other film off the top of my head that tries to capture that weird, fucked up part of a bi person's life.

To the best of my knowledge she's not been citing some papers withdrawn due to allegations about false data at least not after the papers were already withdrawn.

Maybe not (I can't be bothered to check), but she works for a right wing thing tank whose explicit purpose is to publish misleading bullshit.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

How is it that people who will tell you to read between the lines and consider the implications behind laughing at or complaining weird video game sexy costumes miss literally any obvious subtext or just plain text in actual media?

Like, we're spinning "look at this weirdo who thinks Bayonetta is being censored" as promoting censorship and "What's my favorite Star Wars game? Not kotor" as hating Star Wars, but an LGBT character has to literally turn to the camera and state their direct relationship with queerness.

 

[Mister Mumbler]

Ah yes because clearly there no reason to call out an organisation pushing falsehoods pretending to be academically legit while the thing in question cites a number of papers that have actually been withdrawn by publications for falsified results. Funny how many of them were all by the same author / research group too.

You're right, that was in rather poor taste...


I could do so much better, like this:


A bit more topical I feel, don't you?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

A) If it's your argument that it's happening, you should be able to show it
B) Is nuBayonetta sexy or censored? The internet's come to a very different conclusion than your small corner has.

No I said we shall wait and see. It is [current year] so who knows.

Considering Raze's Hell has a better meta critic score than all releases of BMX XXX except for the GBA version that had a different name, "having more name recognition" is, like, actively bad. Like, Daikatana has name recognition. Alien: Colonial Marines has name recognition. You haven't explained why that's a good thing though, other than some sales just for being in the public eye. Comparing a disastrous AAA published release to a glorified indie publisher with middling software is fun though.

Still likely sold pretty well.
BMX XXX still likely managed to sell well.

Sure Raze's Hell scored better but no-one is talking about that game and has really talked about it until I brought it up here but BMX XXX still sees people bring it up. Come on did you even know about Raze's Hell before I mentioned it?

BMX XXX wasn't AAA, it might have been planned to be a AAA BMX game before going off the rails but what came out was far from AAA

Dude, you said somebody was promoting the censorship of sexy games because they were laughing at morons who think nuBayonetta was censored. You ignore vast swaths of people who think remade designs are very sexy because they aren't one particular kind of sexy. Like, you've somehow missed the massive thirst people have for giant buff ladies in leather and you seem to think Lady Dimitrescu's main attraction was her bust line. It's very narrow-minded.

no because that's not a kind of sexy that's regularly deemed problematic and in need of being changed.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Wolverine was hotter when he was regular gym fit and not hyper movie fit

Everyone Is Beautiful and No One Is Horny - Blood Knife

The human body has become a strange contradiction at the heart of the modern blockbuster. Sexy, yes. But sexual? No.

bloodknife.com

Like, those dudes aren't sexualized. And if you'd payed attention to who the ladies actually get thirsty for, you'd realize that.

Actually yes they are. It comes from the history of cinema and the Swords and Sandals era of films which saw most of their audience as women. What you think the ancient Hollywood executives who grew up on that stuff aren't remembering back to it and trying to repeat it?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Fictional characters are fictional. They don't have real personalities or real agency. Everything they are is imposed on them by the people who created them. If those characters are sexy, it's because their creators sexualized them. Sexualization isn't inherently positive or negative, all it means is the ascription of sexual characteristics to things that are not inherently sexual, like fictional characters. The actual problem with sexualization is that it doesn't stop with fictional characters, people also do it to real life people (especially but not exclusively women) who do have their own sexuality and their own agency, because a lot of people can't distinguish between the way they treat fictional characters and the way they treat real people.

Which I hoped some-one would bring up because it basically provides the logical framework to destroy this whole study and the push against sexy characters but if I'd brought it up directly I'm sure people would have objected.

If no character is seen as having agency based on their personality then thanks to death of the author the judgement falls to the audience and as everyone's opinion is subjective then there is no universal true answer thus peoples objections are based on their subjective views. Thus the whole argument is pointless to have as people who hate sexy character will carry on hating them and people who are fine with them will keep being fine with them and unless people want to make this into a war for domination then people are going to have to learn to live with sexy characters and especially with them not getting changed.

As for people doing it IRL......... I've seen fanfiction archives they're like 2/3rd slash fiction lol. It's very much not always women. Hell I doubt it was men who tried to split Kitt Harrington and his wife up. Or see the issues Markiplier had a while back

YES

Again, I have to point this out. Queer coding is not just about signifying that a character is gay, although Lady D is 100% a massive lesbian and this is canon. Queer coding is about making a character appealing to a gay audience. Oh my god, I wonder if this massive, tall, really femme, totally domme perfect queen who hangs out in a castle with a bunch of literal hags menacing heterosexual families and who is also a literal monster might have some gay appeal somewhere. I wonder.

yeh......... I'm still going with this sounds like fanfiction stuff. Lady D isn't the Rocky Horror Picture Show

...

"Guys, I saw this great film. There are these two guys, and get this right.. one of them just starts fucking the other right in the ass. And there's this chick there eating a salad and she says 'not in front of my salad' and I'm telling you dude, it was fucking funny as fuck. Like, watching those dudes just pound each others asses was a bit weird, but I don't think there's anything gay about it bro. It's just two dudes fucking. That's not gay bro. Not gay at all. Like, they were probably doing it because they were absolute madlads and thought it would be funny for the chick and anyone watching. Totally not gay at all bro. I mean, I think the actors might have been gay but that doesn't mean the characters were gay, right bro? They're totally not gay bro. It's not gay. Please bro, you gotta believe how not gay it was.."

Give it a few years and that'll probably be said by a girl in a film unironically lol. Hell some female fans push for that now.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

No, it was the former.

I don't really know what to tell you, other than to watch the film again. Even then, I don't know if you're going to get it, but it's not like your opinion really matters.

One of the characters is literally named "Needy Lesnicki." There are long shots of the two main characters staring at each other or holding hands. They are completely obsessed with each other to the point it dominates their lives. When they do kiss, it's filmed in extreme close up of their lips to indicate intensity and intimacy rather than zooming out for spectacle. Needy, who is normally the sexually repressed one, literally climbs on top of Jennifer in order to kiss her. Jennifer's dialogue in that scene indicates that they've fooled around before. Jennifer specifically seduces and kills boys who Needy is attracted to, ostensibly as a kind of rivalry but also very obviously to control Needy's sexuality. In the end (spoilers by the way) Jennifer literally lets Needy kill her by stabbing her in the heart. These characters are in love, they have a toxic, volatile, intense relationship with each other which they themselves don't understand, but which is incredibly obvious to anyone in the audience who spent a minute thinking about it (or doesn't try to pretend that two women passionately kissing is 100% hetero).

And if you're bisexual, you may well have been one of these characters, or both of these characters. You're a normal straight (you think) teenager living your normal straight life and you're as happy with it as any teenager is, but you have that one friend you're way too close to, and you don't understand what's happening to you or why you feel the way you do, so it turns weird and intense and toxic and inevitably breaks down. I think that's part of how a lot of us figure out that we're bisexual, and I can't think of any other film off the top of my head that tries to capture that weird, fucked up part of a bi person's life.

I didn't say the characters were 100% hetro. I said the film being presented as such makes sense cause it would take a lot more persuading for that 3 some if both of them were straight.

As far as if my view matters or not? Well not to you that's fairly clear but based on what you said about the way the film was marketed I guess my views mattered or was shared by a Hollywood executive or something marketing the film.

Maybe not (I can't be bothered to check), but she works for a right wing thing tank whose explicit purpose is to publish misleading bullshit.

So what has she been so misleading about?