I wanna see a gay main character for once...

[Neon Highlighter]

Durrenn

Exoth XIII

I have seen a gay character done well exactly once, to my recollection. One of Scott Pilgrim's friend.
Be careful what you wish for. I get the feeling a gay protagonist, in today's media, would be a bit... campy.

Scott Pilgrim's friend was promiscuous, though. I wouldn't really call that a positive portrayal of a gay man.

There's nothing wrong with being promiscuous, gay or straight.

[Metronome]

Clearly, the most LGBT-positive portrayal in mainstream media is Jeff Goldblum in The Life Aquatic.

[Durrenn]

Neon Highlighter

Durrenn

Exoth XIII

I have seen a gay character done well exactly once, to my recollection. One of Scott Pilgrim's friend.
Be careful what you wish for. I get the feeling a gay protagonist, in today's media, would be a bit... campy.

Scott Pilgrim's friend was promiscuous, though. I wouldn't really call that a positive portrayal of a gay man.

There's nothing wrong with being promiscuous, gay or straight.

While I completely agree with that, the type of people that are homophobic might be even more inclined to hate a homosexual if they're what they deem a 'slut.'

[Neon Highlighter]

Durrenn

Neon Highlighter

Durrenn

Exoth XIII

I have seen a gay character done well exactly once, to my recollection. One of Scott Pilgrim's friend.
Be careful what you wish for. I get the feeling a gay protagonist, in today's media, would be a bit... campy.

Scott Pilgrim's friend was promiscuous, though. I wouldn't really call that a positive portrayal of a gay man.

There's nothing wrong with being promiscuous, gay or straight.

While I completely agree with that, the type of people that are homophobic might be even more inclined to hate a homosexual if they're what they deem a 'slut.'

The sad thing is you're probably right. Sigh... people.

[Call of Dagon]

I feel with entertainment that there is always someone who loses. When the character is straight, then sometimes gay or bi audiences feel disconnected, but when the character is gay, then straight people tend to instantly become totally uninterested. The only times when everyone wins, I think, are the times when the sexuality of the character does not have any significance. I do not think there will ever be a solution to this, but I hope that everyone on each side can become more open-minded. smile

[Exoth XIII]

Durrenn

Exoth XIII

I have seen a gay character done well exactly once, to my recollection. One of Scott Pilgrim's friend.
Be careful what you wish for. I get the feeling a gay protagonist, in today's media, would be a bit... campy.

Scott Pilgrim's friend was promiscuous, though. I wouldn't really call that a positive portrayal of a gay man.

A promiscuous guy in his 20's. Who'd've thought?
For the record, he was probably the most intelligent guy there.

[Ringoringa]

The only cartoons I know with gay main characters are all anime, and of those, only one of them had the relationship as more of a side-story than the focus of the plot. (Think George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty Four, if the protagonists were gay and there were parasitic wasps eating everyone. blaugh ) Other than that, though, I have to say that I've never seen any children's media where it wasn't just something that was hinted at. Except maybe ParaNorman, but that was mostly a one-off joke at the end. (Didn't fail to piss a lot of people off, though. XD Totally missed the point of the movie about not fearing that which you don't understand.)

[Caerthakatha]

I just don't think this is something that's entirely possible to do without making it seemed forced or badly written: we live in a
world where people are presumed heterosexual until proven otherwise; a gay character has to demonstrate their sexuality
to be noticed. If they don't show stereotypical LGBT identifiers or don't clarify it somehow, it comes across as a publicity stunt
(such as Dumbledore) or affirmative action; if they do show stereotypes and do openly remind people of their sexual preference,
they face being known simply as 'the gay one', and that ends up being somewhat unrealistic and vaguely insulting.

This is partly because writers lack the ability to write a gay character without throwing in all the stereotypes to make it crystal
clear for any stupid people watching — hence we end up with all the gay men on television being teenage twinks who lisp
and like going to the theatre, and most lesbian women being either boot-wearing bulldaggers or pouty vegan femme feminists.
Straight characters don't have to flaunt who they find attractive constantly, because anybody who isn't obviously gay or lesbian
is meant to be wholly straight.

All I can think of is that one episode of Doctor Who from the other year — Midnight — where the Powers That Be decided that
what that episode really needed was a lesbian. And, of course, there was an obligatory 'O MAH GAWD, ITZ A DYKE' moment when
they, out of nowhere, brought up her sex life and she put the emphasis on 'she'. Yes, because that was something that we wanted
to know, needed to know, and added to the character development, apparently. As a lesbian, I couldn't really give a bugger about
whether I'm supposedly represented in television to the point of adding in exchanges like that, because knowing whether somebody
likes to ******** men, women, animals, aliens, plants or nothing at all doesn't really affect my ability to connect with them. If they're
a terrible, bland character, that's it: suddenly outing them isn't going to make me act out of queer solidarity or anything. This is
something that writers don't understand: 'Let's throw in a girl who likes girls; that'll make us legends in the LGBT community!'

It's based around what people find acceptable: ugly people aren't common because there are still people who don't like looking
at ugliness; Black and Asian characters are either the comic relief or the nerds, because there are still people who dislike
non-White people; gay characters are portrayed as either unhappy, disgusting or comic relief because there are still people
who don't like gays. It's a sad state of affairs when television has to make things ridiculous for it to be 'acceptable' — or risk
getting complaints. Gay relationships get 'concerned mothers' demanding that such 'inappropriate' and 'damaging' things should
be hidden from their precious sprogs, and that they are forced to watch such things; when a character fans presumed to be
White is played by a Person of Colour, they claim to no longer care for or like said character (think Rue from the Hunger Games);
when somebody who isn't of above-average appearance acts, the media criticises their weight, their teeth, their hair and whatever
else they think is somehow 'not acceptable'.

[i Luv katy perry]

ikr!!!!

[Savageqt]

Ok so this is probably not what you're looking for but Six Feet Under? One of the main characters is gay (Michael C. Hall from Dexter). Just a thought.

[mother of fafnir]

He doesn't realize it right away but "I Love You Phillip Morris' with Jim Carey and Ewan McGregor

Info:
Steven Russell is happily married to Debbie, and a member of the local police force when a car accident provokes a dramatic reassessment of his life. Steven becomes open about his homosexuality and decides to live life to the fullest - even if it means breaking the law. Steven's new, extravagant lifestyle involves cons and fraud and, eventually, a stay in the State Penitentiary where he meets sensitive, soft-spoken Phillip Morris. His devotion to freeing Phillip from jail and building the perfect life together prompts Steven to attempt and often succeed at one impossible con after another.

[QueerxCore]

If you want to find some shows, I suggest The New Normal or Partners.

[Metronome]

God I hate I Love You, Phillip Morris.

You wait for ages to see Ewan McGreggor to do some gay s**t, and then he has to do it with Jim Carrey.

Couldn't have been Ryan Gosling, huh?

[Nuts With Chocolate]

Caerthakatha

I just don't think this is something that's entirely possible to do without making it seemed forced or badly written: we live in a
world where people are presumed heterosexual until proven otherwise; a gay character has to demonstrate their sexuality
to be noticed. If they don't show stereotypical LGBT identifiers or don't clarify it somehow, it comes across as a publicity stunt
(such as Dumbledore) or affirmative action; if they do show stereotypes and do openly remind people of their sexual preference,
they face being known simply as 'the gay one', and that ends up being somewhat unrealistic and vaguely insulting.

This is partly because writers lack the ability to write a gay character without throwing in all the stereotypes to make it crystal
clear for any stupid people watching — hence we end up with all the gay men on television being teenage twinks who lisp
and like going to the theatre, and most lesbian women being either boot-wearing bulldaggers or pouty vegan femme feminists.
Straight characters don't have to flaunt who they find attractive constantly, because anybody who isn't obviously gay or lesbian
is meant to be wholly straight.

All I can think of is that one episode of Doctor Who from the other year — Midnight — where the Powers That Be decided that
what that episode really needed was a lesbian. And, of course, there was an obligatory 'O MAH GAWD, ITZ A DYKE' moment when
they, out of nowhere, brought up her sex life and she put the emphasis on 'she'. Yes, because that was something that we wanted
to know, needed to know, and added to the character development, apparently. As a lesbian, I couldn't really give a bugger about
whether I'm supposedly represented in television to the point of adding in exchanges like that, because knowing whether somebody
likes to ******** men, women, animals, aliens, plants or nothing at all doesn't really affect my ability to connect with them. If they're
a terrible, bland character, that's it: suddenly outing them isn't going to make me act out of queer solidarity or anything. This is
something that writers don't understand: 'Let's throw in a girl who likes girls; that'll make us legends in the LGBT community!'

It's based around what people find acceptable: ugly people aren't common because there are still people who don't like looking
at ugliness; Black and Asian characters are either the comic relief or the nerds, because there are still people who dislike
non-White people; gay characters are portrayed as either unhappy, disgusting or comic relief because there are still people
who don't like gays. It's a sad state of affairs when television has to make things ridiculous for it to be 'acceptable' — or risk
getting complaints. Gay relationships get 'concerned mothers' demanding that such 'inappropriate' and 'damaging' things should
be hidden from their precious sprogs, and that they are forced to watch such things; when a character fans presumed to be
White is played by a Person of Colour, they claim to no longer care for or like said character (think Rue from the Hunger Games);
when somebody who isn't of above-average appearance acts, the media criticises their weight, their teeth, their hair and whatever
else they think is somehow 'not acceptable'.

I repeat: Society is an a**-clown.

[Nuts With Chocolate]

Metronome

God I hate I Love You, Phillip Morris.

You wait for ages to see Ewan McGreggor to do some gay s**t, and then he has to do it with Jim Carrey.

Couldn't have been Ryan Gosling, huh?

Never seen it.