Homosexual TV Characters — Proportional Representation, or Propaganda?
by Peter Sprigg
October 2, 2008
The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) reported in triumph last week that the number of “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT)” characters on broadcast TV will more than double in the new TV season.
Of course, TV writers, producers, and networks are free to create whatever type of characters they want, but the public needs to look at those characters and programs with a discerning eye. Are they just there to reflect what America actually looks like (GLAAD’s claim)? Or are they really there for propaganda purposes, to promote a sociopolitical agenda demanding affirmation of homosexual conduct?
There are two ways to test this question. One is to ask whether the depiction of homosexual characters is accurate. Does it accurately reflect the higher rates of sexual promiscuity, STDs, mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, and child sexual abuse among homosexuals? If the homosexual characters are always depicted as the smartest, funniest, most noble characters on the show, on the one hand, or only as victims of persecution, on the other, then you know you’re seeing propaganda.
The other test is whether other groups are proportionally represented on TV as well. For example, how many evangelical Christian characters are there on TV series, and how are they portrayed? There are many times as many evangelical Christians in America as there are homosexuals, but I doubt you’ll find that reflected on TV.
[See also CNN.com: In Hollywood, sexuality is less secret, still can be big deal]
Family Research Council is a 501c(3) non-profit organization. If this post has been helpful to you, please consider a gift to help us continue to advance Faith, Family, and Freedom.
Comments
Hollywood is not in the business of being accurate. People don’t want accurate. They want to escape from reality.
They’ll put in whatever characters best reflect in the TV ratings. If they create any contriversy, it will be quite deliberate in order to attract viewers.

By: Dusty Fohs | October 3, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I’m rather shocked at this post. If a story on TV has nothing to do with sexual promiscuity, STDs, mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, and child sexual abuse, then why in the world would it be reflected in a program regardless of who the characters are? Besides, those topics are HARDLY reserved for homosexuals. I mean really… domestic violence? Child sexual abuse?
The reason there are more homosexuals on TV than evangelical Christians is because homosexuals for the most part are nice, happy people, and they make for pleasant and often comical television.
After reading this post, I don’t believe I could say the same for evangelical Christians unless the role called for someone filled with ignorance and a dark heart.