@Fiona225 I absolutely agree that the sexual preference of a character doesn't affect the character.

Honestly, this whole thing doesn't really affect me. Personally (because of my religion) I don't agree with LGBTQ+, but that's not to say I don't treat people who are of this community the same as anyone else. So to me, it's not really a big deal. All the same, it's good for all the people who have been waiting for this for quite some time, as I know some fans have. :)

Chloe Zhao has specified that making the character gay is not entirely just because diversity. Just as much as gender and ethnicity, this movie is meant to show a lot of diversity, and her goal is for people to not look at the movie because this character has a determined sexual orientation or because its from a specific ethnicity or gender, the point is that, despite those differences, we can all comprehend all these individuals belong to one united family and that at the end we are all the same, regardless of these variables.

I don't think an LGBTQ character should be defined only by the fact that he/she are LGBTQ.

Isn't Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie already a LGBT character?

@DarkDemon2099 Yeah, that's pretty much common knowledge, but she hasn't yet been OVERTLY gay in any of her relationships, though the rumor is that she will be in the upcoming Thor: Love and Thunder. I think they are going to use her to dip a toe into the Angela: Asgard's Assassin character concept, at least in that regard. A lot of time people get so excited about the idea of 'firsts' when it comes to representation in movies, they conveniently brush aside those who have indeed come before... I can't tell you how many times I've heard that we are FINALLY getting a female-led action hero movie or sci-fi movie, when there have already been too many to count (my girl Ripley always comes to mind).

@TR4EVR I agree. That's often the problem with characters written in for 'representation' purposes, whether they are meant to represent women, gay, transexual or PoC. When a character's primary purpose is representation, they immediately become a flat, boring, two-dimensional character by default, in large part because they can't have any flaws, or personal demons, any of the things that make characters great - because when they do, they are projecting those flaws and demons onto the entire group they are meant to represent. They are making a statement that 'this group is this way and you know that because I'm meant to represent them'. The result is inevitably for the character to only deal with the flaws in OTHERS the entire time, rather than facing and overcoming their own, and it becomes a judgement on the world - and by extension the audience - while leaving that character with some sort of Mary Sue status.

It is similar to but different from the problem we see with so many characters being fundamentally altered by race or sex, again for the purposes of 'inclusion'... the main difference being the suggestion that characters who are gay, of color or female are somehow unable to inspire or connect with fans on their own, that for some reason they need to be piggy-backed onto existing white, straight and/or male characters to have any worth or significance, which we all know is patently absurd.

Kamala Khan (Miss Marvel) is a fantastic example of a minority character done right in my opinion. She is a new, unique character rather than one that has merely been race or gender-swapped and who is telling her own story. She is female, Pakastani and Muslim, but none of those things inherently define her as a character... they just happen to be what she is. What defines her is her hopes and her struggles and her fears and her dreams, and because of that, we can ALL identify with her, relate to her and empathize with her, not just that narrow field she is meant to represent.

Wasn't the first LGBT character Justin Hammer's friend in "Item 47"?

So 9 years ago.

Favoritism is discrimination too, evn if it's positive.

And lifting up/picking out lmbtq from everything else, is discrimination...

I don't think that any white dude went to watch (any movie of) Captain America BECAUSE of the character's race and gender... I don't think that any white dude enjoyed (any movie of) Captain America because of the character's race and gender.

So neither others should watch and enjoy any movies because of a reason that supposed to be not important...

Create a great fem-led content, and people generally (including women) will like it because it's great, and not because it's fem-led.

@Itlosz Agreed. Likewise, I don't know a single person - black, white or otherwise - who doesn't love Sam as CA or doesn't mourn the loss of Chadwick Boseman the same way they did Heath Ledger because of the loss of a phenomenal talent and special soul... the key here is spending LESS time focused on race, gender, sexual preference and other things that may divide us and MORE time on hope, fear, fallibility and redemption... those things which have the capability to unite us. I'm all for more LGBTQ+ characters in film or television in general, but putting them there just to prove how 'diverse' you are - or worse yet, retconning established straight characters as gay in an effort to 'even things up' - is missing the forest for the trees and ultimately disrespecting the very groups you claim to champion imho...

I'm a HUGE reaction video person, I watch way too many of them to be honest, and the thing that always strikes me is how common it is to see POC invested beyond imagining in shows with predominantly white casts (like Game of Thrones or earlier Marvel films), or female reactors invested in male characters... and just as importantly, it runs the other way as well. These are FANS, not activists, and they appreciate and value great characters and great writing above checking the various representation boxes to see whether or not the film meets some social justice criteria... these are fans, and they should be the ones that the studios concern themselves with. THEY are the ones who are going to go see the movie five times in theaters, going to buy the t-shirt and the lunchbox and spend hours discussing and promoting the property online... not see it once and then use it as a rallying flag or whipping boy on social media for whatever particular political viewpoint they might embrace.

Well, his husband will die in the show, so, it won’t be that important anyways... I am excited to see how his character is, and not define him on his sexual preference.

I understand not defining the characters as LGBTQ+ or just as “gay” but also I don’t think you understand how big of a moment this is for us people in the LGBTQ community