| spurgeonryan said: None were female or black..? |
Well, the actor who played Finn was actually amazing in his job.
| spurgeonryan said: None were female or black..? |
Well, the actor who played Finn was actually amazing in his job.
nuckles87 said:
Luke had a pretty clear attraction to his sister in the first two movies, so he pretty clearly wasn't gay. |
Over the years I have had PLENY of romantic and sexual attractions to both males and females, and I have had PLENY of married men hitting on me so... yeah, is not that simple.
chakkra said:
Over the years I have had PLENY of romantic and sexual attractions to both males and females, and I have had PLENY of married men hitting on me so... yeah, is not that simple. |
Yes, we are all aware of bisexuality.
spemanig said:
Is being straight essential to the story? i don't think so |
Well, actually, IT WAS essential to the story. I mean, one of the main reasons Anakin went to the dark side was because of his love for Padme, because he wanted the power to save her.
Now, if he had been gay, the writers would have needed another excuse to make him go dark. Sure, they could have made Padme a male, but in that case we would need a different origin story for Luke (if he was ever to exist in that scenario).
Now, with all that being said, I wouldnt mind an homosexual romance (with a kiss included) in the Star Wars universe.
JWeinCom said:
Yes, we are all aware of bisexuality. |
Apparently nuckles87 is not.
Yoda is so totally open gay








Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!)
| Shiken said: If it is essential to tell the story lr if it is part of his vision sure, no problem. If it is nothing more than trying to cater to the idiots who think that if you do not include such a character, then that is another story. Judging how oversensitive people are and how they want nothing more to shove their views down our throats these days regardless of the group, I am betting on the later. So sick of this nonsense...the only reason such a question was asked was to stir the pot in some way. Nothing against JJ, but the interviewer in this case is a joke. |
Yes, but the question is, how can you determine whether the incusion of any kind minority in a movie is the result of catering to a certain group of people? There are all sorts of straight chracters and I never hear anyone complain about them. Sometimes their love story is important, others it's a simple "she's hot" comment. Why does a writer have to justify using a group from a minority every time?
It's like: female protagonist? Pfft, it's all because of them feminists
Gay character? pfft. Pushing the gay agenda.
Black character? pfft. Token character and how dare they kill him? (ignoring that there are tons of white characters who also get killed early on in the move or have a tiny roll).

What's next?
I fucking hate this diversity for the sake of diversity only.
Make a good Fitting story.
naruball said:
Yes, but the question is, how can you determine whether the incusion of any kind minority in a movie is the result of catering to a certain group of people? There are all sorts of straight chracters and I never hear anyone complain about them. Sometimes their love story is important, others it's a simple "she's hot" comment. Why does a writer have to justify using a group from a minority every time? It's like: female protagonist? Pfft, it's all because of them feminists Gay character? pfft. Pushing the gay agenda. Black character? pfft. Token character and how dare they kill him? (ignoring that there are tons of white characters who also get killed early on in the move or have a tiny roll). |
When the media shuts up about it and lets the artist make his vision. My issue is not the inclusion or cut of a gay character, it is how the media is always harping on it in some way that puts the arist in a tight spot. If JJ had done this and no one knew about it, obviously this was his vision. However when an interviewer tries to put him on the spot, he has either two choices. Express interest in it, or express disinterest and get crucified by the media as a result. Writters are being forced to consider supporting this just to stay in the medias good graces.
I see your point, it is hard to tell what they are doing in these situations. However the reason for this is because the media and activists won't shut up about it and keep trying to force their way into everything. My point is the entire subject needs to be dropped and artist need to be able to just portray their vision how they intend. Then and only then will it be appearent that the story is being told the way it is meant to be told.