woke propaganda in Children's Cartoons

Back in the 60's cartoons weren't "woke". Coyote and Road Runner was the opposite of woke.

Speedy Gonzales was even less woke and the leftists in the 80's or 90's got that removed from the air. Ironically my wife, who is Mexican, and her family and extended loved Speedy Gonzales. They were offended that they took it off the air. Leftists never seem to care about that. Once they deem something racist that entire race can say otherwise. Leftists know what is best for any given race, not the people who make up that race.

Yeah, I thought about that as I posted it, not the best choice of a template for a comment, totally agree with you. The even older cartoons (30s & 40s) used to dress in drag, there was gun play aplenty, they smoke and drank, put on black face - good times!

Don't worry about it. You still got an up vote from me.

Oh no, TV isn’t all straight and white what should we do??? I don’t know, maybe except it as it is, don’t hide your kids from this. Hiding them won’t make them straight if that’s what your thinking.

Its 90% gay and trans now. Can't find a decent show to watch that doesn't have gay sex in it.

Growing up, it was hard for me to find a decent show to watch that did have anyone gay in it. TV shows were nearly 100% cishet. It's about time we had consistent inclusion.

As a Byzantine Catholic I didn’t have any shows to watch that represented my beliefs. As a white kid with curly hair I didn’t have many main characters I could relate to. Did I ever thing “Oh, no! There are no characters like me, I feel so left out. This makes me mad!”? No I did not think that. Why? Because I am not a narcissist.
There’s not very many Czechoslovak, German, Irish, Italian, English, Swiss, Swedish, Dutch people around in tv shows. Did I feel sad about that? No.
I also didn’t feel represented as a 5’3 10 year old, though I didn’t care. “Why?”, you ask? Well, because only about 5% of ten year olds were as tall as me and therefore it made no sense to feel left out.

Sorry I didn’t specify. I meant mixed ethnicity.

Maybe watch shows that don’t have sex in it

Kid shows?

What kids shows are you watching that have have gay sex in them? Name one!

No, I'm only watching kid shows because the lack of gay sex.

I mean, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is one, even if they ended it a year or two ago, and they had incredibly ample opportunity to have a gay main character, yet they didn't, because it didn't fit with the cast.
Attack on Titan is another one, if you watch Anime. Fullmetal Alchemist falls into that same boat. And those are just ones I've watched recently.

If you look, there's a lot.

That's 3 out of hundreds and they did have a gay character on S.H.I.E.L.D in the last few seasons. Full Metal Alchemist was a pre-teen show and they are not allowed to show that kind of stuff in Japan for that age group.

Even still, I don't think there's too much of a problem. It's not like every character in every show is queer. Even if only 5% of the population is LGBTQ+, there's a very high statistical probability that out of, say, 30 characters in a show, one of them is going to be, if they want to have realistic amounts of representation. Some studies have the numbers even higher than that. For a historically underrepresented demographic that companies are recently "allowed" to pander to, it makes sense that shows are being oversaturated with them right now. It's not like there are zero straight relationships in media. Things like this happen. They're not going to stop representing people though, so don't expect to never see a gay couple in a movie ever. That's a change that's probably gonna be permanent.

It's actually 1%. It's 3% acceptance. As in 3% of people watch gay shows. You are forgetting that most shows don't automatically include them. The billion dollar homosexual lobby pays or sues the studio to have them put in.

(Replying from a bit lower down)

I reiterate, where are you getting your data?

Wait, triple-checking to make sure, looks like they do have a smaller sample size

Also, the census data shows a sample size of 34 million. Pretty sure that a sample size of over 10% of the US population is pretty sufficient

Looks like the analyzed standard margin of error, accounting for the lower sample size, was about... 2% for households, at most. Which is a decent number in the grand scheme of things, but not nearly enough to knock 5% down below 1%. This also doesn't account for a lot of younger respondents, either, which typically have higher LGBTQ populations, due to demographic and socioeconomic backgrounds and the nature of how the study was conducted. So the chances of an over 20-sigma event it being of less than 1% of the population are pretty much negligible.

*over 20-sigma event OF it being less than 1%. Sorry, forgot a word there

You aren't accounting for regional differences. Since areas have around 10% others less than 1%

This was a study conducted across every state in the US, and accounted for a large number of counties in each. This was designed to account for, again, over 75% of the US, and it included tables for standard deviations. Its results concluded that about 7% of the population identified as LGBT. For it to be even as low as 5% would be, if my calculations are correct, a sigma-16 event. Even accounting for smaller sample sizes with the standard deviations, or assuming a significantly higher standard deviation, that's still a quite low probability. Getting a cumulative value of below 1% is an extremely low probability, even relative to that.

I must have missed your source. Can you provide it again?

If you reply from below you should include a quote so we know what you are responding to.

Yeah, sorry. It was the "If you were to survey fly over country you would get much lower than 1%"

Correction: the sample size was 252 million. So, y'know, over 75% of the US population.

I-... what?

Where are you even getting these numbers from?

From the studies that have been done. You can look them up.

Turns out, I did. A study by UCLA pins the number at at least 3.7%, with cross-referential data from Yale putting it in the 5-15% range. According to recent census surveys, the figure hovers around 8%, and some other data puts it at just over 7%. But looking at the Law of Large Numbers here, and the sheer number of studies done, I'd say results put it at around 5-8% of the total US population.

source?

crickets

Thanks!

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/visualization/lgbt-stats/?topic=LGBT&compare=percentage#comparison

https://www.census.gov/data/experimental-data-products/household-pulse-survey.html

https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/we-are-here-lgbtq-adult-population-in-united-states-reaches-at-least-20-million-according-to-human-rights-campaign-foundation-report

https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/17/lgbtq-americans-gallup-poll-survey

https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/the-global-closet-is-hugevast-majority-of-worlds-lesbian-gay-bisexual-population-hide-orientation-ysph-study-finds/

Sorry to put you through the trouble, but I was asking loki, and rhetorically, as he was just winging fake numbers.

The all look to be localized studies that are amplified. In reality homosexuals congregate in certain areas. If you were to survey fly over country you would get much lower than 1%

Ah, it's all good. Happy to provide some data anyway.

I appreciate the effort.

(Replying to "I must have missed your source. Can you provide it again?")

Yeah, of course! Here ya go!

https://www.census.gov/data/experimental-data-products/household-pulse-survey.html

That looks like a covid tax credit survey. I don't even see the homosexual part of the survey.

Should be in their demographics data.

That only proves homosexuals are more likely to answer this kind of survey.

7 times more likely than the average person?

That doesn't feel super likely, unless it was a coordinated effort by an absolutely massive amount of the LGBT population, which would have been a very visible and public endeavor, and that's also drifting into major conspiracy theory territory.

In addition, they tried to account for that. Again, there are standard deviation tables. Even if every single LGBT US citizen was accounted for in the data set, and the remaining <25% had zero, and even if queer people were twice as likely to take this survey, that's still a standard deviation that would make dropping that value below 1% an incredibly improbable endeavor.

Also, just look around. There are significantly more people who are openly LBGT now than there were just 5 years ago, let alone 10. There being a 1% or more chance that a given random person is queer just makes sense nowadays.