Disney announced recently that they would not be including a previously planned "trans" scene in an upcoming episode of the Pixar animated series Win or Lose. Unsurprisingly, far-leftists threw a hissy-fit, accusing Disney of "erasing" trans people, and "not allowing them to exist".
Sigh.
Just because a TV series or movie does not explicitly state some personal characteristic is not "erasing" anybody nor "not allowing them to exist".
If you see a movie and, let's say, nobody states being an architect, for example, does that mean that the movie is "erasing" architects and "not allowing them to exist"? Of course not.
Or a TV series never explicitly mentions, say, stamp collecting. Does that mean that the TV series is "erasing" that hobby and "not allowing it to exist"? Obviously not.
Just because a piece of media does not explicitly mention some characteristic does not mean that it's set on "erasing" that characteristic, "not allowing it" to exist. It simply means that it doesn't mention it. Heck, background material of the movie may even mention that one of the characters is an architect and another collects stamps. It's just that it's never mentioned in the movie because there's no need for it. You can't possibly mention every single one of the hundreds of thousands of characteristics, jobs, hobbies, preferences, orientations that there may exist. Not mentioning them is not "erasing" them from existence.
Perhaps a lot closer to the topic at hand: Suppose that a movie or TV series never, at any point, depicts any heterosexual romantic relationship of any kind between two people? Does that mean that the movie or TV series is actively trying to "erase" the concept from existence?
Of course not. It just isn't telling that kind of story. It's that simple.
Comments
Post a Comment