RpNation

As opposed to an unnecessary homosexual romance? xD  

When is any homosexual romance unnecessary considering there are barely any in the media...? 

I just find romance unnecessary a lot of times anyway... Doesn't matter what the sexuality is. All the shows I hear about, or books, or even roleplays I encounter tend to revolve around pairings and romance... Not necessarily a bad thing for those who enjoy it, but I'm just more of an adventure person. Thankfully, others exist, but I guess I shouldn't complain because I certainly don't make it a point to seek them out half the time.

I just wish they would hurry it up rather than taking five years to kiss. 

When two characters have no chemistry and the creators just put it in there for diversity.


Unneccessary romance overall annoys me, they either just put it in there to appease to a certain audience, make the show "interesting" or "dramatic" or as said before, for some kind of diversity so they'll be praised for it. (This is coming from a lesbo btw)


Only put romance in when the characters could realistically be together.

Well, it's like a novel. Just... split up. Really split up. Haha. But thank you, RIPSaidCone--- I try to explain this when I try to have a one on one with someone... Needless to say, it doesn't fly very well with people. xD

Oh, when I say unnecessary I mean the word as in "not needed", its literal definition. Chemistry is subjective so them not having chemistry for you doesn't mean they just don't have chemistry at all, hence why I mean it the other way. In this context I basically just mean every show being flooded with too many straight romances to count, y'know? 

No problem, Magick ^^


Yeah I get what you mean and I agree, but I always think about these things logically. Sure a lack of homosexual romance in media sucks (well a lack compared to the amount of straight romance at least) but the vast majority of media consumers are straight and so it makes sense from a business standpoint to have something that more people will relate to. If you get where I'm coming from.

"Too many straight romances to count?" About three fourths of my friends are gay, bi sexual, lesbian or somewhere in between... I've got no qualms with any sexuality, but really? Maybe my friends are different than the general LGBTQ population, I don't know-- but none of them have ever said anything like that. They support all sorts of rights-- gay, trans, you name it... But they also support heterosexual relationships, just as much as other heterosexual individuals support them. I'm sorry for turning this into a bit of an argument... I won't even stick around to bother people like most internet jerks. But I just wanted to throw this out there.

I get where you're coming from but.. it still changes literally nothing? A "business standpoint" isn't an excuse to underrepresent a large portion of the population just because a couple of straights might be offended. Like. 

I lowkey don't know why you're acting so... butthurt [isn't the right word but whatever] because I said the truth? There are too many straight romances for me to keep count of in the shows I watch? It's a literal statement. I don't care if you're straight or anything but if there are too many for me to count then... there are too many for me to count? Like how else would you want me to word it? People have different experiences, different lifestyles, different communities, I'm the only lesbian I know - in my entire school, even. Which, y'know, would definitely affect the way I view constant heterosexual romances over the very few homosexual ones there are (most of which are m/m as opposed to f/f, statistically). You don't have to be lowkey rude* just because someone's tired of seeing straight people be over represented, I mean honestly. 


*loose term

It is an excuse if you think about capitalism and the way our economy and businesses run. They want people to relate to and therefore enjoy their show. LGBT people aren't actually a large portion of the population, I think it was something like 3.5% of the US adult population was LGBT, and it's nothing about people being offended really it's just a kind of. "If it ain't broke don't fix it." type deal which the media tends to have a problem with since they do it with everything. (IE, movie reboots and a lack of original movies, games or TV shows)

All I have to say to this is (a) the US is homophobic as fuck in a lot of places so that statistic is probably a load of bananas considering most LGBT+ people are closeted. And (b) from a business standpoint you'd probably do better if you added gay characters because the amount of people supportive of the LGBT+ population generally outweighs those who don't support it. I mean.. need I tell you about the new Ghostbusters movie 'cause..


Plus I'm not even American so. Again, in relation to different standpoints etc.

It's a government census, pretty sure it's illegal to lie on it and everyone with any form of maturity knows that it's confidential information, plus it's done via mathematics to make a rough estimate on the population of LGBT people, unless math is wrong also. And the new Ghostbusters was an appauling movie, I hate the fact that whenever anyone critizes it the response is just. "You must hate women." or whatever, it's a stupid excuse to hide the fact that it's just a horribly made, unfunny waste of space. Granted it wasn't as bad as I thought it was gonna be but that still doesn't excuse it from how bad it still was.


Some shows do better with gay characters granted, but for the most part it's not really noticed unless it's the vocal point of the show, IE Orange is the New Black.

I can't even be asked anymore because you just seem to love traipsing around in circles and honestly I'm in the middle of something. If you want to debate mathematics and logistics while privately being rude then.. go do it with someone who wants a debate because honestly this is just a status with my opinion and it's really late at night so I'm done bothering. 

I just thought we were having a discussion on something. But it's clear you aren't mature enough to handle different opinions and use "rude" as an excuse to get away from other thoughts. Have a nice night.

Actually it's true? You lowkey called me immature and ignorant in your response so you are the rude one? We weren't having a discussion on something, you just bumped your way in and started climbing down my throat about a topic you clearly seem to take issue with. Like if that's what you do for a hobby then fair enough but I'd prefer not to indulge in the same pastime. It was just a status, 'cause you post those to express your thoughts and feelings. It's not automatically a gateway for some heated debate lmao, which seems to be the general assumption on this site. 

Yes, of course I did. "Lowkey" I openly stated that you weren't mature enough to deal with this discussion. I believe it's more rude to call someone rude because you don't agree with them, making up assumptions of that person's lowkey intentions in your own mind, I didn't climb down your throat I just brought up my own points because I thought the topic was interesting to talk about, you didn't agree with my thoughts so you just shut it out and called me rude. It wasn't heated until you made it so. Ending the "heated debate"

I'm not even going to bother giving in intelligible response anymore because I'm tired and frankly circling the drain with you is boring. 

Isn't all romance unnecessary? By technicality, you do not need love in your life, therefore it isn't a necessity?