Originally Posted by springvalley112:
I've heard Jupiter is a planet as well but then i heard it was a star only
. . .
moving along
There is nothing sexual about representing families that have two same-gender parents. If there were, having opposite-gender parents would also be sexual content in children's programming. It's not.
Or is it? Is it sexual content to show opposite-sex parents or to have adult figures in children's programming mention an opposite-sex spouse?
The writers' choice to make the teacher gay is no more forced than the writers' choice to make the teacher straight. Chances are strong that some of the writing staff actually are gay, and grew up watching a TV fantasy land where everybody like them didn't exist. It's not a good way to grow up, with only one model of family presented to you. You can find yourself at age 30 in a mixed-orientation marriage suddenly realizing that all the girls you grew up with
weren't faking it when they said boys were cute.
So . . . there's a demand for stories like that. You don't want the kids to see stories that include people who aren't heterosexual. A lot of people do. That's not how it was when we were children. The money lay elsewhere. If you don't like the narrative, show nature documentaries.