Disney sails into new LGBT waters with 'Jungle Cruise' film

Fight oppression and bigotry. Diversity is our strength.

How about real life diversity reflecting true US demographics?

Approximately...

50% Liberal

50% Conservative

75% Religious

25% Nones

98% Hetero

1.9% LGB

0.1% Q+

65% Caucasian

13%Black

5%Asian and others

15% Latino

Etc.

It will never happen because Hollywood execs are not interested in real life diversity. They them selves are heavily of one particulat ethnicity.

At concerned, Judaism is not an ethnicity, if that is what you are referring to in your last sentence.

Couldn’t smell this “was what “The Rock’ had cookin’ ?

Of course, it’s Disney who supplied the ingredients.

Just a ‘headline’, folks! (There’s NO issue to debate here.) - It’s a recent Disney ‘special marketing ploy, using press releases ad ‘advertising in advance’ to attract only a small demographic that may feel there are some issues in a larger, yet naturally-diverse society.

In a nutshell, there’s no actual mention of any ‘group’ in the film:

- “Young British fop MacGregor does not use the specific word "gay," but explains how he broke off three engagements with women because his "interests happily lay elsewhere," prompting skipper Frank to raise a toast to "elsewhere." -

So if someone’s looking for their ‘representation’ on this screen,…

“But "the scene's innuendo makes it easy to overlook by anyone not paying close attention, or by youth who are too young to understand the reference," he added.” -

… it remains ‘in the closet’.

The usually boisterous Dwayne Johnson is oddly silent in this article, but this could give an indication of his feelings about other people’s’identity politics’ and his own preferences & personal opinions:

“Dwayne Johnson @TheRock- Jul 2, 2017 Replying to @jeremiahharbert. - “I'm confused. What does you being gay and struggling w/ your identity have to do with a joke I said to my buddy on Twitter?” -

Emily is usually quite Blunt since 2014 with her enthusiasm for promoting certain aspects of certain films…

“I love it. I think it’s so cool, because one day I hope to be a gay icon.” -

but now, seems she’s again retreated from Into the Woods and remains closer to A Quiet Place ?

I reserve my right to keep my children away from this Disney movie.

I reserve my right to keep my children away from this Disney movie.

You have the right to keep your kids away from any movie.

It's not like the rest of us care either way.

Something tells me you would be equally as upset, if not more, if Disney had decided to flesh out the character even more. But please, correct me if I'm wrong. Would you like to have an entire gay romantic arc with a big kiss at the end? The other info is in the story - did you read it?

"The "Jungle Cruise" representation goes further -- MacGregor explains he joined his scientist sister (Emily Blunt) on her expedition to Brazil because she "stood by" him while others in World War I-era London spurned him because of who he "loved."

Disney is no longer family friendly.

Disney is no longer family friendly.

I think they probably don't mind you not being in their family.

You really have to answer the question as to why there's a necessity to represent minorities in every piece of entertainment. Minorities are minorities for a reason and as minorities appropriate representation and respect is needed. No more no less. Don't need to overexert and force things.

More importantly it is really disappointing and troubling how easily this "sexual diversity" is accepted by some and promoted by others and surreptitiously thrown in there by others.

It is true love and happiness are humanity's goals, and to each his own right to do as it pleases in their private lives. But so much science was suddenly eschewed and halted when the politics went woke to claim there was nothing inherently abnormal or wrong with homosexuality. However, due science did exist and countless of psychological studies.

Developmentally a great deal of the switch was established as a compensation or correlating with a coping mechanism for childhood trauma or abuse. There's a whole spectrum of why people go that way. Very few of them actually experience the "one sex in the body of another sex". Some others just progress to it as a form of perversion as they go throw all forms of sexual fetishism and deviancies, and it comes as the next dark thing in the list. Anyways, now all this very scientific study is politically incorrect, and ALL of it has been de facto normalized??? I understand not discriminating against people or being rude or deriding them for their practices, but normalizing it and more so, promoting it, making it the cool thing, and even more outrageous putting it in the minds of kids... all the while the science of it has been stopped for decades now??? Not all homosexuals are made equally and as hurtful as it may be, it is not normal. Not the popular thing to say. But just biologically it isn't. As humanity we have to look at it more seriously rather than just another choice of drinks, or choice of colors. The impacts and consequences could be and surely are being in some areas disastrous and painful.

And this is all without the religious aspect of the matter for some.

I think they probably don't mind you not being in their family.

The shareholders will once the box office figures are in.

I reserve my right to keep my children away from this Disney movie.

So, the same as any parent in regards to anything. Well done I guess.

Very few of them actually experience the "one sex in the body of another sex". Some others just progress to it as a form of perversion as they go throw all forms of sexual fetishism and deviancies, and it comes as the next dark thing in the list. Anyways, now all this very scientific study is politically incorrect…

It’s best if you just stop talking. You’re clearly an idiot.

This is gonna be a blockbuster!

“The slippery slope! The end of civilization!”

Homosexuality has been prevalent in all recorded history and certainly long before, yet the human population has grown exponentially and there hasn’t been a wave of people marrying horses yet.

What a headscratcher!

How weak and insecure do you have to be to feel threatened by a gay guy in a movie?

JsapcToday  01:27 pm JST

How weak and insecure do you have to be to feel threatened by a gay guy in a movie?

People should be strong and protect their children from lifestyles they disagree with.

It's not about liking them or not. They are people who deserve all due considerations and respect. And nobody is ever forced to like all people in the world anyway. All we owe each other is respect and love(understood as consideration as an equal) as human beings. It's about agreeing with some practices or not. Take adultery or smoking for instance. Not agreeing with them, doesn't consequently mean disliking people who practice them. And it certainly doesn't call for any type of disrespect. Although, certainly association with them would not be actively sought. Likewise aldultery and smoking are not actively thrown at you in every A rated entertainment or promoted to kids. 

The science never stopped you say? Really? I spent nearly a decade in the physiological psychology field, the hard science branch of psychology, and I can tell there was a time when studies and scientific programs were halted and other prevented from starting when politics moved to "normalize" it and policies changed. I would be very surprised to see science has made headway into understanding the homosexuality spectrum. As not all homosexuals are created equal.

Sorry @Jaspc 1:27pm in addition the earlier quotes @8:21 & :25am, can’t find ANY reference that the character is a “gay guy”, homosexual or any other specific words of an expressed sexuality or sexual preference. (There’s more to this than the article itself; )

- “explains how he broke off 3 engagements with women because his "interests happily lay elsewhere," prompting skipper Frank to raise a toast to "elsewhere." -

Reads like the character’s got ‘commitment issues’ (3x’s?) and ‘other’ interests, like world travel, etc?

*- "I felt that the scene was really exactly [??} what it was, 2 men talking about what they loved, *and who they loved," -

Love my parents, grandparents, relatives, friends, etc doesn’t indicate any specific identity other than “family”?

*- “But the exchange is likely to make waves upon the film's release Fri, with each of Disney's tiny steps toward LGBT representation…”*

‘Marketing by attachment’ to a cause but NOT a commitment.

*- “And a fleeting lesbian kiss in "Star Wars: The Rise of Rei Palpatine" was cut from versions of the film playing in Singapore and Dubai, where same-sex marriage is illegal.”*

… and to get past censors with their financial-backers in China.

*- “But the historic "Star Wars" lip-lock was also condemned by LGBT rights advocates as tokenistic - *

More ‘marketing by attachment’. - “*Historic**” ?? What was ‘those’ *character’s names and roles in the story again?

- “as was a brief scene in Marvel's record-grossing "Avengers: Endgame"…

Avengers: Infinity War was the end of the saga. Anything that happened after was a ‘do-over’ and incongruous with most of the characters’s morals & ethics from their previously established characters arcs (Really? Captain America choosing to be ‘selfish’ in the end?)

- …in which an openly gay man participates in a support group.” -

Again, which main character and their role in the story. It was a marketing ‘bait & switch’ by the Russo Bros. directors prior to the film, who made to look like it would be Steve Rogers (Cap) shedding a tear in a support group.

In the film, it was an unknown, ‘glorified extra’ taking about a date in specific, cringe-worthy ‘pronouns’.

*- “The "Jungle Cruise" representation [?] goes further -- MacGregor explains he joined his scientist sister (Emily Blunt) on her expedition to Brazil because she "stood by" him while others in World War I-era London spurned him because of who he "loved." -"It was a scene that we really wanted to get right," said Whitehall, a British comedian-turned-actor, …*

… “who is straight.” - The actor wanted that clarified in press junkets to insure he’s not ‘typecast’ from other, future potential roles.

It’s ALL a non-issue that Disney chooses to avoid specifically yet routinely exploits as ‘free advertising’.

One additional question: What’s an “*LGBT* child” ? - From the article:

*- “Whitehall told Variety “I hope that it's a scene that audiences enjoy” adding that he hoped it would be a positive for LGBT children watching.” -*

Just more questions and carefully-marketed controversy created by your friends at Disney!

*- “But the film's failure to use the word "gay" has already stoked criticism on social media. "Disney will really do anything to avoid using the word 'gay' in its mainstream content won't it," wrote, a Twitter.*

What are LGBT children and why is he specifically targeting them? Children shouldn't know anything about sexuality, and we don't need movies grooming them. What I love about this though is these kinds of people can never keep their mouths shut about it, so I always have warning before I waste money on their films.

I don't find this particular instance to contain any homosexual references though; I think anyone who is looking for explicit sexual references to be put into kids' movies will be disappointed on this one.

The science never stopped you say? Really? I spent nearly a decade in the physiological psychology field, the hard science branch of psychology

Sounds fascinating. So you’ll be able to explain why some people have a propensity for talking a right load old bollocks. You’ve already given us a practical example. What’s the science behind it?

Sounds fascinating. So you’ll be able to explain why some people have a propensity for talking a right load old bollocks. You’ve already given us a practical example. What’s the science behind it?

It's easy to be sarcastic when having no real counter argument.

My research field was not sexuality, and I wasn't a full time researcher, I spent some 8 plus years in the research lab as undergraduate and then some other positions, mind you this was not in the US. We did sleep research. However, this university lab is one of the biggest if not the biggest in the nation, with several branches and divisions, and buildings. So there were several researchers there doing sexuality related research. And our professors oversaw all of them. I got to sit in research meeting were research technicality and minutia were discussed and determined for all kinds of studies as well as results reports and analysis. This is where at some point policy makers sent some letters and suddenly homosexuality research was eschewed in a way or another.

My argument is simple. As humans let's respect each other, love each other. But we don't have to agree with all our practices. And we don't need to throw them at other people's faces, and or ram them to kids. Specially the most controversial ones, where the hard , unbounded science has been compromised to say the least. Like I said, you don't actively promote adultery or smoking, right? One has no scientific mark, but there is plenty of social science about it, and the other there is plenty of science. That should be the way. Not just touting as "normal" and "ok" or such without an abundance of science, both hard science and social science.

One Million Moms (1MM) just needs to shut up. They're always trying to find something wrong with everything and nobody wants to hear their BS,.

I personally don't care one way or the other but I do think there is 'tokenism' and 'bandwagoning'. And some things are too complex for young children to comprehend so don't confuse them.