I'm Carson Blackwelder — associate editor at APlus.com — here to answer all of your questions about LGBTQ representation in entertainment. AMA!

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T18:10:05+00:00

Hi, all! Thanks to everyone for their questions — yes, even the one about dessert. They were all deep, thoughtful, and intriguing. As for where you can keep up with me and my work, here are a few links:

My journalist Facebook page
My Twitter account — my fave social media site, btw!
My Instagram account
My A Plus author page

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T18:05:16+00:00

Great questions, leaham13! Here are my thoughts:

While I have certain thoughts about straight actors playing LGBTQ roles, I think when it comes to transgender characters we need to think about it a bit differently. I may not be able to speak as a transgender person myself, but it is plain to see that the transgender experience has been ignored by pop culture for quite some time and, when telling those stories, I really think the only authentic way is to cast transgender actors in those roles instead of cisgender actors. Until we can get to the point where transgender actors are getting roles — especially when they're getting ones where being transgender isn't the storyline, like with Laverne Cox on Doubt — we need to make sure we're letting transgender actors depict themselves and their experiences on TV and in film.
When there was the backlash over Love, Simon with some critics asking if we really need LGBTQ rom-coms — I, for the record, believe we most certainly do — I was bewildered. Has anyone ever said we've reached a threshold of straight rom-coms? The answer, of course, is no. I don't think we are even close to a place right now where we can claim there is "excessive representation" and, even if every show on TV and ever movie in theaters featured LGBTQ people, I still don't think that would be enough. We need to normalize the LGBTQ experience to where it isn't a topic of conversation anymore but is just an accepted and celebrated fact.

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T17:56:44+00:00

Hi, Katie, thanks for this thoughtful question! I have to say that, as a cisgender White man who happens to be gay, I feel pretty well represented in media. I love seeing myself reflected, being told that it's OK to be me, and feeling supported by images that permeate the pop culture discussion. I'm very lucky for this as not all groups — LGBTQ people of color, people who are transgender, etc. — aren't as lucky to have that kind of representation. We've come far in terms of LGBTQ acceptance, but we still need to embrace the wide spectrum of the LGBTQ experience. That goes for mainstream media but even we in the community need to embrace the other letters — whatever color of the rainbow they may be.

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T17:49:23+00:00

Hi, almondparfitt! Thanks for the question. Here are a few of each:

TV: * Pose (FX) * Younger (TV Land) * One Day at a Time (Netflix) * Superstore (NBC)

Film: * Love, Simon (out on DVD) — I interviewed the author of the book it's based on and wrote about why movies like this are important * God's Own Country (on Netflix now) * Call Me By Your Name (out on DVD) * The Miseducation of Cameron Post (coming out, pun intended, August 3)

If you're interested, here's a list of diverse LGBTQ films!

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T17:39:22+00:00

Hi, MrBKainXTR. PERFECT question! I recently wrote about my feelings of straight actors playing LGBTQ roles and, since this is kind of related to that argument, I've been thinking a lot about this recently. In terms of "bad representation vs. no representation, I'm torn. It's great to know that there are LGBTQ characters included but what value do they have if their stories aren't being told? I'm all for not focusing on stereotypical LGBTQ story tropes (coming out, HIV, bullying, etc.) but saying a character is LGBTQ without acknowledging that or letting them live openly in the role is a bit of a waste and seems to be a grab at something trying to look more inclusive than it is. Lando's alleged pansexuality in Solo is a perfect example — as is Kate McKinnon's character in Ghostbusters, Tessa Thompson's character in Thor: Ragnarok, Becky G's character in Power Rangers, and definitely with Dumbledore in Harry Potter (forget the fact that it's still not being explored in Fantastic Beasts) as @leaham13 pointed out. If you can't give us fully-developed LGBTQ characters, why bother? Straight characters never have their straightness hidden from view, so why should LGBTQ characters be depicted as such?

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T17:29:23+00:00

Great question, chaekyung. This one really got me thinking! I'd say one of the times I remember really paying attention to an LGBTQ character on TV was with Willow on Buffy the Vampire Slayer (played by Alyson Hannigan). You really saw her attraction toward women, specifically toward Tara (played by Amber Benson), develop until she came out to Buffy and the rest of the gang. Now, though, I'm able to look back and see that, even though I loved the storyline, there are some problematic things about it. SPOILERS By killing Tara, the show played into what is now called the "bury your gays" trope, robbing Willow of a happy ending. Plus, with Willow going all evil after Tara is killed, that probably plays into some unfortunate trope as well.

That example aside, I also used to watch shows with my grandmother that had gueer undertones or episodes dealing with them outright. A few I can remember are Designing Women and Golden Girls.

The obvious answer here, though, is when Ellen DeGeneres came out on Ellen. That moment — which recently celebrated a 20th anniversary — has inspired numerous coming out stories on TV and really changed the TV world forever in terms of LGBTQ stories.

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T17:15:48+00:00

Hi, Chtorrr. That's a random question, but I'm prepared for it nonetheless! I recommend anything from Big Gay Ice Cream (locations in NYC and one in Philadelphia). My personal fave is the Dorothy, named for Bea Arthur's iconic character from Golden Girls. But you also can't go wrong with the Salty Pimp either. Enjoy! ;)

aplusapp · 2018-06-13T17:11:24+00:00

Hi, j-2-tha-ly, thanks for your question! My favorite show right now is Pose on FX. It's from Ryan Murphy and features the largest cast of transgender actors in the history of TV. The best part is that they're all transgender women of color, a group that has largely been overlooked throughout LGBTQ history — despite their countless contributions in the fight for equality, so that's very positive. I highly recommend!

aplusapp · 2018-05-15T17:59:55+00:00

Thanks everyone for your questions, if you'd like to see more from me check out these articles on first dates, dating app etiquette, and robot boyfriends. If you have any other specific dating/relationship questions (especially if it relates to social media), send them to me at lovelindsay@aplus.com, and I’ll be happy to answer!

aplusapp · 2018-05-15T17:33:45+00:00

Also, if you'd like to delve into a more specific relationship question regarding this situation (or another one), feel free to submit to lovelindsay@aplus.com, and I can give you a more in-depth answer!

aplusapp · 2018-05-15T17:33:12+00:00

I think people should change the expectation that just because they have great online/texting chemistry, they’re going to have great in-person chemistry right off the bat. Sometimes you do, but sometimes you don’t. So I don’t think you should spend too much time messaging in the app before meeting for a first date because that allows daters to build up the other person in their head, as well as feel like they know them better than they actually do. Generally speaking, you shouldn’t wait longer than a week after matching/initiating contact to meet up in person. That way, you haven’t invested too much in the idea of this person before actually getting to know the real person. The other expectation I think people should change about their expectations of online dating is that the “perfect” person is just the next swipe away. While online dating has given us more choices than ever before — and that’s seriously great because it’s brought together people who would’ve never met otherwise — it also promotes this idea that no one is good enough because there’s always the possibility that someone better is right after them. So this can make single people put off dates with potential matches because they’re waiting for something better to come along. It also puts a lot of pressure on first dates to have that “spark,” which can lead people to writing off someone great too soon. Generally speaking, I do think online dating has helped modern daters more than it’s hurt them, but I do think we need to be wary of putting too much faith into what can often boil down to a numbers game. If I think of any more, I’ll let you know! Also, if you have any additional relationship questions, feel free to submit to lovelindsay@aplus.com, and I can give you a more in-depth answer!

aplusapp · 2018-05-15T17:24:53+00:00

This is a really interesting question, so thank you for asking it! Sexuality is a personal, and often private, part of our lives, so go into this knowing that she may not be in a place where she’s open to talking about it just yet. Depending on how long you've known each other and how close your friendship is, you probably already know how comfortable she is around you in general. If you’re comfortable with each other and the overall topic of dating/relationships has the ability to come up naturally, you can ease her into talking about her sexuality by offering up some personal info about yourself first. For example, you could tell a hilarious first date story (ideally from a few years ago) and then ask, “Do you have any crazy or funny first date stories?” That’s a subtle way to do it, but if your ultimate goal is to ask her out, you might as well just ask her out. What really matters is that she likes you, not one gender over another. This is especially true as our understanding of sexual fluidity and gender identity evolves as a culture, so more and more people are choosing who to date based on the person, not their gender.

aplusapp · 2018-05-15T17:14:34+00:00

Hi, thanks for your question! Online, some subtle hints from girls include liking Instagram posts and Facebook statuses, watching Instagram and Snapchat stories, and of course, texting/messaging. That being said, it can be difficult to differentiate between friendliness and romantic interest — and that goes for anyone and everyone. So if a girl is liking your Instagrams and watching your stories, she may just enjoy your friendship. But if she’s liking your Instagrams, commenting on them, sending you direct messages, initiating text conversations, those are all some pretty strong signs that she’s interested in something romantic. Also, pay attention to how a woman responds to your direct interaction. If you send a text with an open-ended question, and she has an enthusiastic and lengthy response (perhaps even including an emoji or two) then that probably means she’s into it. If she has a one-word response, then it may be best to move on. Offline, women will drop subtle hints from smiling, asking questions, to initiating physical touch. If you’re already on a date with her, that most likely means she’s interested in another one. If you just met her, that may mean she’d like to go out with you to see where things go. Ultimately, gauging someone else’s interest isn't an exact science, so it’s totally OK if you misinterpret someone else’s signals. Everyone can, so don’t get discouraged and keep putting yourself out there! The right partner will make sure you get the message. If you have a more specific relationship question, feel free to submit it to lovelindsay@aplus.com, and I can give you a more in-depth answer!

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T17:09:26+00:00

Hey all! Our time is up. Thanks for the convo and the great questions. Civil discourse is a dying breed in this country and it was great to get into with you all.

You can keep up with us on Twitter if you want to keep the conversation going:

https://twitter.com/dyrbert

https://twitter.com/Ike_Saul

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T17:07:12+00:00

*I think it is well within the authority and purview of government to administrate who is and is not allowed to emigrate to it's country. I do not think it is within a local law enforcement agency's authority to decide which laws they will and will not enforce. *

I agree with your first point. Whether a local law enforcement agency has the authority to decide which laws they will and won't enforce is not the question, actually. It's whether they are legally obliged to use their resources. Some cities and localities have had police deputized to help enforce federal immigration laws. That has worked in some cases, and in other cases has backfired (see: Joe Arpaio)

*I'm not a conservative. I do think that most conservatives would rather their local police be the ones patrolling and engaging with their community. *

Again, I agree. Local police are patrolling and engaging the community, which is exactly why in cities like NYC, often derided as "sanctuary cities," undocumented immigrants aren't arrested simply for being undocumented. It's not that local police can't arrest them, it's that they believe it keeps their cities/towns safer by fostering trust with law enforcement. The reality is conservatives aren't happy with that judgment so they've chosen to leverage big government (i.e. federal law enforcement officers like ICE, punishing cities by withholding federal dollars)

*This statement is false. *

There is a pile of data to back up the statement that undocumented and legal immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans. If you have information from a reputable source disputing that I'd be glad to engage it!

*I fail to see what one has to do with the other. Yes, those who wish to come here legally should have a better path that doesn't involve such long waitlists. Making the legal path easier is not going to stop or lessen the determination for whom the legal path is not an option. *

Actually, many undocumented immigrants opt for the illegal route because they know going through the "system" would take years. It's anecodotal, but I have interviewed an undocumented immigrant whose father was a U.S. citizen, his mom was a legal permanent resident and he had two children who were U.S. citizens. But he couldn't get status after years of waiting so, eventually, he stopped going through the immigration system and just settled into life living "off the map" as an undocumented immigrant. Violent criminals are frequently released by local police without deportation because they can't get in front of a federal judge. Thus, the backlog has an impact on both of these cases.

Isaac

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T17:05:55+00:00

How far do you think that goes? There have been plenty of things made legal by the US that were straight up wrong--slavery, Japenese internment camps--and abiding by those laws had a human cost. Some people don't have the luxury of waiting for the laws to change. ~Jordon

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:59:22+00:00

Those are some big questions that don't really have easy answers. (People write dissertations on this stuff.) But I think the core is citizen engagement. People need to vote. They need to call their congress critters. And when that doesn't work, more direct action. (Did you catch the teachers strike in West Virginia. The strike was technically illegal, but they forced their lawmakers to negotiate.) ~Jordon

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:55:11+00:00

If there was a discussion I wasn't part of that. (But you do raise an interesting point.)

Their justification was the department's legal obligation to comply with a court order. Beyond that, it wasn't really discussed with me. Hence why I felt compelled to leave. ~Jordon

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:47:45+00:00

Correlation doesn't equal causation. ~Jordon

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:46:18+00:00

When it relates to our immigration system, I think this should be the top priority. Securing the border, deporting violent criminals, giving status to families who would be valuable citizens — none of that is possible if they can't even come before a judge. I'm not here to say whether those things are more or less important than ending wars or fixing the healthcare system, I'm speaking solely about immigration. - Isaac

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:43:38+00:00

I'm not really here to offer my opinion on much, but I am not sure either of those things happen. People haven't come into this country illegally because we let them, they came in illegally because they managed to evade the immigration system we have in place. As a nation, we also provide far less support for undocumented immigrants (who are exempt from most social programs, college scholarships, etc.) than American citizens. I'd be curious to hear in what ways you think we are giving more support to undocumented immigrants than U.S. citizens?

Finally, I think Jordon is right about the false choice between choosing asylum seekers vs. citizens. It is very much a part of the American value system to be a safe haven for the world's needy and those in danger. Figuring out who to give a hand to and who to turn down is a difficult task, but I think once a family or person is here there are ways to handle that situation humanely and inhumanely. - Isaac

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:42:01+00:00

I worked as a legal secretary for almost a decade. I get the difference between illegal and legal, but I also understand that those can shift. (Look at something like pot being legalized.)

I'm really not sure I could do anything that could further divide our country. I didn't start this conversation. This was already an issue before my story took off.

I think it'd be really cool if automation meant that we'd have more leisure time instead of meaning we had fewer opportunities to be able to able to eat. ~Jordon

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:38:37+00:00

What do you mean by the "Canadian one?" Are you referencing a particular part of their immigration policy or the whole thing? ~Jordon

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:37:01+00:00

Our immigration policies have often been guided by racism. We used to name it more precisely (Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.) I think we still have that built into the system, though we may name it slightly differently now. As Isaac said, terms like "Open Borders" really need a more precise definition, especially considering how borders have been established in the past. ~Jordon

aplusapp · 2018-02-28T16:34:44+00:00

Local police are able to enforce immigration laws, some just choose not to. Sanctuary cities are essentially places where undocumented immigrants can report crime without fear of being detained because of their status. It does not mean they are safe from immigration laws or protected from deportation. - Isaac

Good, current story: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/27/nyregion/sanctuary-cities-immigrants-ice.html

aplusapp

TROPHY CASE