Opinion
THE SOAPBOX: More diversity needed in TV’s LGBTQ characters
By Bridget Clare Lavin ’18
May 7, 2015
Television and films feature a large push for greater representation in media. Often viewers will turn on the TV and see groups of young, white people living some upbeat city life and dealing with arbitrary issues of dating and employment. People want to be able to look at popular media and see accurate representations of themselves, rather than just stories of someone with whom they do not identify. One of the reasons Glee was so popular when it began its run on television was that people wanted to see characters that were LGBTQ, disabled or belonged in some minority group as the main stars of the show. Viewers want diversity and representation, but networks are not doling it out in the quantities that are needed.
Although in the last five years, we have seen an increase in the number of queer characters on television, there is virtually no diversity among them. Almost every queer character is white, male and gay. They often act as sidekicks and best friends to the straight, white main character, and their characterization usually exclusively surrounds their identity as a queer person. Furthermore, they rarely receive in-depth storylines that reflect them as multi-faceted characters; rather they are presented as an afterthought or a prop in a larger story. If these characters do receive a storyline, it will more often than not surround their sexuality. For example, Showtime’s Shameless gives significantly less airtime to gay teen Ian Gallagher than it does to his straight siblings, Fiona and Lip, and their father, Frank. This means that the experiences of queer individuals are narrowed to a single aspect of their identity, sending the message that their entire self is not important and that society only cares about one part of their identity. Furthermore, it lets them know that their lives are not interesting on their own, and their place is simply as pawns in the story of their privileged friends that society holds as more relevant and interesting.
It is worrying that the queer characters we see on television now almost always fall under one demographic. We rarely see lesbians, we rarely see queer men or women of color and we rarely see other identities such as bisexual, asexual or trans. There is endless diversity in the queer community, and it is simply not being explored. The popular television networks remain obsessed with gay characters who are, “whiter, male-er, and richer” than real queer people. In the 2012-2013 TV season, 70 percent of LGBTQ broadcast series regulars were white, and 61 percent were gay men. There was one trans character portrayed on primetime television as a series regular. Cable television was even less racially diverse, as 79 percent of LGBTQ characters were white. These numbers do not accurately reflect the vast diversity prevalent in the queer community. We need greater representation of queer individuals so that a young girl, who may be struggling to come to terms with her asexuality, may relate with a character on screen and subsequently accept herself. We need greater representation because a transgender man may feel more comfortable coming out to his parents when the main character of the show his family watches is also transgender and seeing his parents’ reaction each week may help him be confident that they will react positively to his announcement. We need greater representation to reflect the immense possibilities “queer” means so that more individuals are able to feel comfortable with themselves and their identities.
The tendency to narrow queer individuals down to white, gay men perpetrates the idea that the only queer it is “okay” to be is a gay man. Throughout recent decades, the queer community has taken great strides forward, but this more often than not is based on heteronormative principles so as to not seem too progressive. The Marriage Equality Movement is a major player in this sense. Allies can quickly align themselves with the movement by agreeing that everyone should be allowed equal rights to marriage because this is a simple issue that can seem obvious. But this erases a large part of the queer community that perhaps do not want to be married or do not want to be involved with just one partner, or even simply do not want to be constantly compared to the heterosexual norm in which society is so entrenched in order to feel normal and accepted. Viewers love Mitch and Cam on Modern Family because they are just like the other families depicted on the show and do not represent a queer lifestyle that is fundamentally different from a straight one. The fact that the media only portrays white, rich, gay men gives viewers the idea that these are the only queer people to be concerned with, and that the issues facing these characters are the major (and only) issues plaguing the queer community, which is categorically false and can distance a great number of queer people from feeling accepted and “normal” in society.
Moving forward, we need to see more depictions of queer characters that span a larger breadth of identities. Let us get some asexual characters, some characters in a poly-relationship or a pansexual character onto television. These identities need to be portrayed so that the entire community is not narrowed down to one formulaic character. Doing so will help young queer people struggling with their own identity to feel comfortable and will help society as a whole understand queerness at a greater level.
Bridget is a first-year student from Manhasset, N.Y. She is a prospective Women’s Studies and Theatre double major, and also enjoys debating and watching TV.