fig96 said:

---

Another thing that hasn't been mentioned: you people saying you didn't see if because of your anti whatever argument weren't going to see it anyway. Animated scifi is historically a terrible idea and almost never does well at the box office.

Anyone want to name the last successful animated scifi film at the box office? That would be 2014's Big Hero 6 (that was more superhero movie than scifi). Other than that you could probably include Wall-e (2008) or maybe Lilo & Stich (2002). And that's pretty much it.

There's been many good to great animated scifi movies that have bombed at the box office (Atlantis, The Iron Giant, Treasure Planet, Titan AE) not to mention a whole lot of live action scifi bombs.

So yeah, maybe some people stayed away because of a value difference. But the chances of this or Lightyear being big successes were minimal from the jump.

---

This is a ridiculous argument but ok.

We absolutely would have seen Lightyear and Strange World. My kids LOVE toy story and Star Wars. My 8 year old was NOT happy that we were not going to see either of them.

Sure, maybe animated sci-fi doesn't typically do as well if you treat it as actual sci-fi. But treat it as a kids movie (which it is supposed to be), and I would guess that a LOT of families would have gone to see both. I know we would have. And I know quite a few families just in my small sphere of influence that feel the exact same.

Sexuality, no matter what type, has NO BUSINESS in a kids movie. Period.

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

I haven't seen it so I'll take your word for it, but it seems to have been a very minor part of the film from all indications. And in my experience most kids take things at face value and don't overanalyze to the extent adults do.

Also, genuinely curious, do you not think most 7 or 8 year olds know what being gay is?

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

Rule Number 32 said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Another thing that hasn't been mentioned: you people saying you didn't see if because of your anti whatever argument weren't going to see it anyway. Animated scifi is historically a terrible idea and almost never does well at the box office.

Anyone want to name the last successful animated scifi film at the box office? That would be 2014's Big Hero 6 (that was more superhero movie than scifi). Other than that you could probably include Wall-e (2008) or maybe Lilo & Stich (2002). And that's pretty much it.

There's been many good to great animated scifi movies that have bombed at the box office (Atlantis, The Iron Giant, Treasure Planet, Titan AE) not to mention a whole lot of live action scifi bombs.

So yeah, maybe some people stayed away because of a value difference. But the chances of this or Lightyear being big successes were minimal from the jump.

---

This is a ridiculous argument but ok.

We absolutely would have seen Lightyear and Strange World. My kids LOVE toy story and Star Wars. My 8 year old was NOT happy that we were not going to see either of them.

Sure, maybe animated sci-fi doesn't typically do as well if you treat it as actual sci-fi. But treat it as a kids movie (which it is supposed to be), and I would guess that a LOT of families would have gone to see both. I know we would have. And I know quite a few families just in my small sphere of influence that feel the exact same.

Sexuality, no matter what type, has NO BUSINESS in a kids movie. Period.

---

It's a ridiculous argument that almost no animated scifi film has ever done well but these two would have?

And again, while this might be a big deal in your circles most people would have had no idea about it.

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

Exactly what I was getting at.

fig96 said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

I haven't seen it so I'll take your word for it, but it seems to have been a very minor part of the film from all indications. And in my experience most kids take things at face value and don't overanalyze to the extent adults do.

Also, genuinely curious, do you not think most 7 or 8 year olds know what being gay is?

---

You are arguing my point for me. Thanks! Glad to know you didn't even go see it yourself but have a problem with everyone else having a reason why they wouldn't take their kids to see it...

No, my 8 year old daughter does not know what being gay means. But she does know that girls typically like boys, and boys typically like girls. If there is a boy, who is flirting with another boy in a movie (and getting dating advice from his dad and grandpa about it from what I've read), then yes, she is smart enough to know that isnt what she has seen, and would ask about it. In my opinion, she is not old enough to have that conversation in any meaningful way.

fig96 said:

---

In that clip the actor literally just talked about how it wasn't called out or highlighted in any way, it's just part of who he is. It's as innocuous as it could be. How is that promoting it?

---

Definitely not addressed in the script or his relationship encouraged by the parents in the movie I'm sure. The actor was hired for being the best available voice talent on the market too. Not because he's gay, right? He probably has as many movies to his credit as his costars right? Probably all just a coincidence.

"Sexuality, no matter what type, has NO BUSINESS in a kids movie. Period."

People love to say this but never have ANY problems at all with more explicit expressions of straight "sexuality".

There was an actual (though oblique) reference to sexual procreation in this very movie and I've not seen one person bring it up as objectionable.

But a boy saying he has a crush on another boy is just too much. It's silly.

schmendeler said:

---

"Sexuality, no matter what type, has NO BUSINESS in a kids movie. Period."

People love to say this but never have ANY problems at all with more explicit expressions of straight "sexuality".

There was an actual (though oblique) reference to sexual procreation in this very movie and I've not seen one person bring it up as objectionable.

But a boy saying he has a crush on another boy is just too much. It's silly.

---

Another stupid argument....

My kids watch me and my wife kiss on a daily basis. That is normal to them. I don't have to explain to them why a heterosexual couple would hug/kiss in a movie.

There shouldn't be any reference to procreation though...I'll give you that. Again, its a kids movie, and the company decided to push agenda instead of just making an entertaining movie.

Rule Number 32 said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

I haven't seen it so I'll take your word for it, but it seems to have been a very minor part of the film from all indications. And in my experience most kids take things at face value and don't overanalyze to the extent adults do.

Also, genuinely curious, do you not think most 7 or 8 year olds know what being gay is?

---

You are arguing my point for me. Thanks! Glad to know you didn't even go see it yourself but have a problem with everyone else having a reason why they wouldn't take their kids to see it...

No, my 8 year old daughter does not know what being gay means. But she does know that girls typically like boys, and boys typically like girls. If there is a boy, who is flirting with another boy in a movie (and getting dating advice from his dad and grandpa about it from what I've read), then yes, she is smart enough to know that isnt what she has seen, and would ask about it. In my opinion, she is not old enough to have that conversation in any meaningful way.

---

You're free to not take your kids for whatever reason you like and I don't have any issue with that. I may think it's silly, but that's your prerogative.

I personally think you're making that explanation out to be a far bigger deal than it would be as another poster illustrated, and if she knows that boys typically like girls and vice versa then it doesn't sound like the concept is as foreign as you might imagine.

schmendeler said:

---

"Sexuality, no matter what type, has NO BUSINESS in a kids movie. Period."

People love to say this but never have ANY problems at all with more explicit expressions of straight "sexuality".

There was an actual (though oblique) reference to sexual procreation in this very movie and I've not seen one person bring it up as objectionable.

But a boy saying he has a crush on another boy is just too much. It's silly.

---

Yeah, because a movie for kids needs society to make kids to make money and kids come from a mom and a dad and we all know it. So no, it's not a big deal for kids to know where they come from.

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

How do you have that conversation if you think homosexuality is morally wrong? I'm sure you don't, but some parents do.

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

How do you have that conversation if you think homosexuality is morally wrong? I'm sure you don't, but some parents do.

---

"God says that is wrong"

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

How do you have that conversation if you think homosexuality is morally wrong? I'm sure you don't, but some parents do.

---

"God says that is wrong"

---

You wouldn't add a caveat that you should still love such people and don't openly tell them they're wrong?

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

How do you have that conversation if you think homosexuality is morally wrong? I'm sure you don't, but some parents do.

---

"God says that is wrong"

---

You wouldn't add a caveat that you should still love such people and don't openly tell them they're wrong?

---

I wouldn't because i don't have a problem with gay people existing nor telling my children about them without also trying to make sure they know being gay is bad. But if you need to do that, then sure. I think it's still a fairly straightforward conversation to have with a kid without the need to get into anatomy or sex.

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

How do you have that conversation if you think homosexuality is morally wrong? I'm sure you don't, but some parents do.

---

"God says that is wrong"

---

You wouldn't add a caveat that you should still love such people and don't openly tell them they're wrong?

---

I wouldn't because i don't have a problem with gay people existing nor telling my children about them without also trying to make sure they know being gay is bad. But if you need to do that, then sure. I think it's still a fairly straightforward conversation to have with a kid without the need to get into anatomy or sex.

---

I would think you'd have to. Having platonic feelings for a same sex friend is not wrong, but homosexuality is. How do you explain that without explaining sex first?

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

How do you have that conversation if you think homosexuality is morally wrong? I'm sure you don't, but some parents do.

---

"God says that is wrong"

---

You wouldn't add a caveat that you should still love such people and don't openly tell them they're wrong?

---

I wouldn't because i don't have a problem with gay people existing nor telling my children about them without also trying to make sure they know being gay is bad. But if you need to do that, then sure. I think it's still a fairly straightforward conversation to have with a kid without the need to get into anatomy or sex.

---

I would think you'd have to. Having platonic feelings for a same sex friend is not wrong, but homosexuality is. How do you explain that without explaining sex first?

---

I think you're being obtuse here. Little children understand romantic love without knowing about sexual intercourse.

Well that's true for some little kids. Those of us that grew up in rural America....


Me: Dad, what is the bull doing to that cow

Dad: making calves

Me: Ewwwwwww

Just for clarification, if one is "Born" a pedophile is that ok? I mean, it can't be morally wrong if they were "born" that way.

"Born that way" has nothing to do with the morality of one's "sexuality". It just illustrates how f'ed up a "creator" would be to create people to be a certain way then deem it "abominable" to be as they were created.

The morality of it rests on whether or not it is harming someone. We have all the peer reviewed evidence we could ever need to know that 2 adults of the same sex simply being in a loving romantic relationship with each other is 0 harm and quite emotionally benificial. Not so much for the scenario you are asking about.

The System said:

---

Just for clarification, if one is "Born" a pedophile is that ok? I mean, it can't be morally wrong if they were "born" that way.

---

Homosexuals don't typically prey on children, despite all the "groomer" talk from a certain crowd. For the most part, homosexual relationships have zero tangible effect on your life, and are overwhelmingly consensual, no different than most heterosexual relationships between two consenting adults.

The pedophile dynamic, however, obviously revolves around a nonconsensual relationship, wherein children are abused in myriad ways, both psychologically and physically. As a society, we have come to the agreement that pedophiles should be punished for acting on their sexual urges, because their sexual urges, by their very nature, require a victim, one that is non-consenting, underdeveloped, and objectively harmed.

The difference with homosexuality is that its practice has no tangibly harmful effect in remotely the same way. Sure, people can point to homosexuality technically not aiding in the procreation of our species, but because the population is still rapidly growing, and because 99% percent of issues with homosexuality are religious in nature, and thus personal issues/beliefs, homosexuality is and should be treated differently than pedophelia.

I seriously can't believe any of this needs explaining.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

"Born that way" has nothing to do with the morality of one's "sexuality". It just illustrates how f'ed up a "creator" would be to create people to be a certain way then deem it "abominable" to be as they were created.

The morality of it rests on whether or not it is harming someone. We have all the peer reviewed evidence we could ever need to know that 2 adults of the same sex simply being in a loving romantic relationship with each other is 0 harm and quite emotionally benificial. Not so much for the scenario you are asking about.

---

Ding, ding, ding. Said so much more succinctly than my post (I was typing when you posted).

So for arguments sake, there has to be a victim in order for someone to be immoral?

The System said:

---

So for arguments sake, there has to be a victim in order for someone to be immoral?

---

100%

If your sticking point here is that "well if one is hurting themselves then there is no victim", One could argue that when one knowingly causes a lot of harm to themselves that there are victims in friends and family.

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Create Account said:

---

schmendeler said:

---

Rule Number 32 said:

---

Except that it isn't just a passing mention of him being gay. It is him shown being nervous, and flirting with another boy. You don't understand why parents dont want to have to explain that to a 7 or 8 year old?

---

"Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys"

That's almost verbatim what we told our kids. They just said, "oh, ok."

It was literally one of the easiest "explainer" conversations we've had with them.

---

How do you have that conversation if you think homosexuality is morally wrong? I'm sure you don't, but some parents do.

---

"God says that is wrong"

---

You wouldn't add a caveat that you should still love such people and don't openly tell them they're wrong?

---

I wouldn't because i don't have a problem with gay people existing nor telling my children about them without also trying to make sure they know being gay is bad. But if you need to do that, then sure. I think it's still a fairly straightforward conversation to have with a kid without the need to get into anatomy or sex.

---

I would think you'd have to. Having platonic feelings for a same sex friend is not wrong, but homosexuality is. How do you explain that without explaining sex first?

---

I think you're being obtuse here. Little children understand romantic love without knowing about sexual intercourse.

---

Having a young child, I disagree with the first part. Most young kids don't really understand the difference between platonic love and romantic love. They have no reference other than observation for the latter, and this is why you often hear kids say they want to marry mom or dad or sister or bother. Their understanding is you marry someone you love and they love mom and dad and their siblings, so that makes perfect sense to them. They don't understand the difference between platonic love between parents and children or siblings and the romantic love between parents.

Telling a child, "Some boys like boys instead of girls and some girls like girls instead of boys," requires an understanding and maturity on their part about what you mean. You can't expect them to understand what you're saying untless they understand the physical component of romantic love. That's something that really only a parent is going to, and should, be able to judge.

That said, yes kids don't necessarily need to know about sex to understand romantic love, but they do need to understand how physical attraction separates it from platonic love to understand it. They also need to understand the concept of physical attraction to explain the difference between heterosexuality and homosexuality because that IS the difference. While you don't have to explain sex per se, you do have to get closer than some parents feel is appropriate for their children.

I dunno. The trailer looks pretty good. I had to google it because I haven't ever heard of this movie. How did this have 30m more budget than Encanto and had such a poor awareness campaign? That movie and Coco were everywhere when they release as far as I recall.