Unfavourable representation

[LeakyLibido]

Hello,

I am writing a story that involves the typical vampire vs. werewolf scenario. With a twist. It's actually a western.

Also, the werewolf is gay and fancies the vampire. He's also the main antagonist of the story...

My concern is that by only having the one gay character, and making him the "evil" side of the "tension-device", I am kind of being... homophobic? The character has more to it than simple homosexuality of course, but I wondered what people's views were on having a gay antagonist, and a hetero protagonist?

Any advice people could give me on whether this would be considered stupid, rude, ignorant etc. would be much appreciated.

Also... My other protagonist is a female punk sheriff, who could be considered "butch". I don't want to come across as hating on homosexuality, so again, should I be concerned that I seem to be representing homosexuality in light that could be considered by some to be... unfavourable?
Bear in mind however, my female lead is definitely a hero. I just need some input, somebody to say "whoa there, slow down" or "stop worrying you wimp".... thanks.

The sexuality of the sheriff is not intrinsic to plot development at this moment. Some dialogue does tend towards her being homosexual.

[leahzero]

It depends how you handle it. As long as the villain's homosexuality is just a part of who he is, and not the reason he's evil or the method by which he does evil things, then it's fine.

(And it could be those things, too, but you'd have to handle it with a great deal of sensitivity and thoughtfulness.)

Gay villain doesn't automatically equal homophobia. Homophobia is a far-reaching bigotry that corrupts many things, and tends to be evident in a writer's worldview.

Most people will be able to distinguish between an evil character who happens to be gay, and a character who is evil because he's gay.

[Gale Haut]

I do get tired of seeing gay antagonists sometimes, but I've yet to stop reading something as a result.

[pandaponies]

I actually was wondering this very thing myself, since my current antagonist is a lesbian. I AM a lesbian and *I* wouldn't take offense to the way I've written her (since it's just a facet of her personality and not the reason for her evilness), so I hope it'll be okay, heh. I'm inclined to agree with leahzero.

[Anna L.]

I wouldn't read a book if I heard the villain, and only the villain, was gay. I'd rather skip a potentially good book than risk reading something that might piss me off.

[Ardent Kat]

I wouldn't rule out a story with a single gay character who is also an antagonist. I thought the movie 3:10 to Yuma (a Western, no less!) handled this very well with the Charlie Prince character. He's not a mustache-twirling villain; he's a well-fleshed human being who is loyal to his gang and fearless in conflict. He is also gay, but it's so subtle, many viewers could easily miss it. His homosexuality is just one attribute of an already well-rounded and believable character. His homosexuality is never vilified, a weakness, or his downfall.



However, your story has me worried...

I am writing a story that involves the typical vampire vs. werewolf scenario... the werewolf is gay and fancies the vampire. He's also the main antagonist of the story.

I'm guessing if it's vampire vs. werewolf and the gay werewolf is your antagonist, that means the vampire is a protagonist, yes?

The crush the gay bad guy has a crush on the straight good guy has a lot of potential for problems. Based on that one fact, I'm already cringing in expectation that:

* The villain's gayness is a plot device or "weakness" that at some point will give the straight hero the upper hand over him.

* The gay antagonist's attraction to the straight protagonist won't be believable or well-developed as hetero characters' relationships

* At least once during the story, the straight antagonist will show revulsion and disgust at the villain's attraction to him (at which point revulsion over gayness and revulsion over his villainy can't easily be separated)

* In the end, the antagonist's gay infatuation will in some way contribute to his downfall

* Poor gay werewolf will forever be lonely, single and sexually rejected (like countless other gay characters before him)

This is pure speculation based on badly-written gay characters I've seen in the past, but if any of this strikes a chord with your story, consider some revisions.

If the gay werewolf has his own twinkie boytoy back at his wolf den, awesome. I'd much rather see the werewolf have his own sexual agency, a successful relationship on the side that doesn't hinge on the plot or the hetero heroes.

Having the antagonist's gayness become a plot device--particularly one that brings down the gay character down--is a no-no.

It's incredibly annoying when a straight guy IRL acts paranoid that every gay guy he meets is going to hit on him. Having the gay werewolf in an unrequited infatuation with the straight hero could easily play into this narcissistic trope.

[JohnnyGottaKeyboard]

When I read the OP, my first thought was: are the vampires and werewolves fighting because the werewolf is attracted to the vampire? Cos, y'know, that could be very bad.

Then I thought, surely not, it's probably some ancient war they are fighting...Which led me to my second question, why would this ww, who hates vampires, be in love with a vampire? Cos, y'know, that could be very bad too. You might could come up with some swell reasons--Shakespeare tried--but, to quote Ardent Kat, that

Originally Posted by Ardent Kat

has a lot of potential for problems

In fact, I think my feelings here are the same as AK put forth in her second *.

Generally speaking, I feel there isn't enought info in your OP to either absolve or condemn the scenario. You could pull it all off without a hitch or completely screw the pooch. To quote LeahZero

Originally Posted by leahzero

It depends how you handle it.

Completely off-topic:

Originally Posted by Ardent Kat

Having the antagonist's gayness become a plot device--particularly one that brings down the gay character down--is a no-no.

...flooded my mind with the most hilarious ideas--none of which are inoffense enough to share here--that I nearly fell out of my chair laughing.

[LeakyLibido]

Wow, thank you all for the thoughtful responses.

Particularly Ardent Kat, gave me some real food for thought...

As of right now, the gay character is chasing the vampire. It is a mechanism to get the characters into the main setting of the story.

I definitely don't want the gay character to come across as evil based on his sexuality, it is the fact that he is a gangster Indian <-[this isn't evil in-itself] werewolf that makes him evil! His being gay lends to the plot development in the first book, but not to his being evil.

And I don't want my other characters to be repulsed by his sexuality, I will be sure to avoid that kind of behaviour.

The vampire is a con-man/hustler, and he played the indian werewolf's casino out of a lot of money, and ran away. The exact way this plays out is the main backbone of the second book, but the fact that he can cheat the casino is partly down to the werewolf being infatuated with him.

In fact, in the second book it is the antagonist (werewolf) of the first book that becomes the protagonist. I hope to develop some sympathy for him, yet maintain his ferocity and gangster appeal. I will be sure to develop his relationships and flesh him out as I would any other character, that was never going to be an issue.

I will consider how the whole thing resolves carefully. I guess I had the werewolf not "living happily ever after" as he is a bad-guy.

thanks again, all of you.

[Gale Haut]

There was a gay antagonist in this TV drama that I found to be very well done without being offensive. I think it had a lot to do with the depth and significance of his sexuality to the humanization of his character.

[JohnnyGottaKeyboard]

Originally Posted by Gale Haut

There was a gay antagonist in this TV drama that I found to be very well done without being offensive. I think it had a lot to do with the depth and significance of his sexuality to the humanization of his character.

And Jack was played by Sebastian Stan, which, y'know...Well, y'know.

But what pissed me off about that series was that it was a reworking of the biblical story inwhich Jonathan and David are "very very close friends". (When they spent the night together in the field was one of my all-time favorite bible stories!) But Jack and David were not friends in the tv series "very very close" or otherwise.

It was one of those weird moments in history when the bible was more progay than modern storytelling.

Hmm, what were we talking about? Oh, yes, gay werewolves. Carry on.

[LeakyLibido]

A great homosexual character that I admire the writing of is Omar Little in the television series The Wire. A stick-up boy, anti-hero, charismatic, charming and bad-ass. He was a great character.

[LeakyLibido]

While I'm thinking about it, Greggs is another character from that show who's awesome.

[Gale Haut]

Originally Posted by JohnnyGottaKeyboard

And Jack was played by Sebastian Stan, which, y'know...Well, y'know.

But what pissed me off about that series was that it was a reworking of the biblical story inwhich Jonathan and David are "very very close friends". (When they spent the night together in the field was one of my all-time favorite bible stories!) But Jack and David were not friends in the tv series "very very close" or otherwise.

It was one of those weird moments in history when the bible was more progay than modern storytelling.

Hmm, what were we talking about? Oh, yes, gay werewolves. Carry on.

It didn't bother me as much. I remember someone bringing up the weirdness of the relationship when I was in college, and after rereading it I had the sense of Jonathan's relationship with David being a kind of unrequited love, where David didn't necessarily have sexual feelings for the other.

I mean... I really don't know, but a literary interpretation of them not both being gay doesn't upset me in the least. Especially not when it's as well done as Kings.

[Raventongue]

Ya know Johnny & Gale Haut, I just might have to watch this show now. I'd never heard of it.

[JohnnyGottaKeyboard]

Be warned that there is a less than satisfying resolution to the series

[Gale Haut]

Got canceled.

[Raventongue]

Aw, balls. Well, at least it wasn't an intentionally unsatisfying ending.

[cray]

Originally Posted by Anna L.

I wouldn't read a book if I heard the villain, and only the villain, was gay. I'd rather skip a potentially good book than risk reading something that might piss me off.

are you talking about any/all books or just books in this context?

Originally Posted by Anna L.

I wouldn't read a book if I heard the villain, and only the villain, was gay.

[robertsloan2]

Hm. It's interesting, especially as I read down the thread to find that you're turning this antagonist into a protagonist in the sequel. That may help sort things out for the reader if it's foreshadowed well enough.

[Anna L.]

Originally Posted by cray

are you talking about any/all books or just books in this context?

Fifty years later, a response...

I'm not sure what context you mean? If all the good guys in a specific book are straight and ONLY the villain is gay, it sounds like a case of 'being gay is something that only evil people do'. If I think a book might have a slant like that, I stay away from it. There should always be a LGBTQ character on the 'good' side too.

Edit: I'm slow, but now I get it. You're asking if I avoid other types of books that might piss me off, correct? Well, yes. I don't read books that glorify rape and abuse either. No matter how awesome it supposedly is, I will not read a book where the main character falls in love with her abuser and they have a Happy-Ever-After ending. I read to have fun, not because I want to feel homicidal.