Velma is new Scooby-Doo Halloween movie identifies as LGBQT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

…are the straights okay? You can’t possibly think that because ONE bookish brunette with glasses is now canonically lesbian in one cartoon, all bookish brunettes will be seen as lesbian.

LMAO This is like old men with long beards being mad because JK Rowling said Dumbledore was gay. “Oh GREAT, all old men with beards are now seen as gay!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Velma wasn't artsy, she was into the sciences. But fear not, you've centered yourself way too quickly for anyone to mistake you for a member of an underrepresented group.

Lmao. Right! “But what does this mean for ME?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Yep

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Yup! We all think you’re gay now! Thanks democrats!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

I'm a straight guy who is often thought of as gay and it hasn't bothered me since I was a teenager.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

Because lesbians are presented in entertainment as unattractive and frumpy and butch-looking and nobody wants to be thought of that way? How in the world should anyone guess you are gay unless it’s by what you look like?

I know you’re waiting to dance around and scream HOMOPHOBIA but it’s a little more complex than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

Because lesbians are presented in entertainment as unattractive and frumpy and butch-looking and nobody wants to be thought of that way? How in the world should anyone guess you are gay unless it’s by what you look like?

I know you’re waiting to dance around and scream HOMOPHOBIA but it’s a little more complex than that.

Are you old? Genuinely asking. Because that’s just not the case anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

Oh, but it’s ok to go ballistic if someone misgenders a trans person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

Because lesbians are presented in entertainment as unattractive and frumpy and butch-looking and nobody wants to be thought of that way? How in the world should anyone guess you are gay unless it’s by what you look like?

I know you’re waiting to dance around and scream HOMOPHOBIA but it’s a little more complex than that.

Are you old? Genuinely asking. Because that’s just not the case anymore.

Then why is Velma gay and not Daphne? Or Fred?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

Because lesbians are presented in entertainment as unattractive and frumpy and butch-looking and nobody wants to be thought of that way? How in the world should anyone guess you are gay unless it’s by what you look like?

I know you’re waiting to dance around and scream HOMOPHOBIA but it’s a little more complex than that.

Are you old? Genuinely asking. Because that’s just not the case anymore.

Then why is Velma gay and not Daphne? Or Fred?

Because it’s been long established that Daphne and Fred are attracted to each other? It wouldn’t make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

Because lesbians are presented in entertainment as unattractive and frumpy and butch-looking and nobody wants to be thought of that way? How in the world should anyone guess you are gay unless it’s by what you look like?

I know you’re waiting to dance around and scream HOMOPHOBIA but it’s a little more complex than that.

Are you old? Genuinely asking. Because that’s just not the case anymore.

Then why is Velma gay and not Daphne? Or Fred?

Because it’s been long established that Daphne and Fred are attracted to each other? It wouldn’t make any sense.

How? I’ve seen the original cartoon and got none of that. Fred wears a freakin’ scarf for Christ’s sake. They can’t make him come on to Daphne because he’s been in denial?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's always been a lesbian, it's just that mores have changed enough that subtext can now be text.

Right? She was always LGBT. It was clear subtext.

How so? Just because she wasn't a Barbie clone? Why does everyone want to classify and type women so badly?

DP, the people who have been most vocal about her always been a lesbian to me (both before and after this) had been lesbians. "I see myself in this character" is different than stereotyping.

Oh, great, I've been told a number of times that I look like Velma.
So any artsy, bookish brunette with glasses and bangs is now seen as a lesbian. In the USA, of course.

Does that bother you? Why?

Yes. Because straight people don’t want to be thought of as gay.

Why not?

Because lesbians are presented in entertainment as unattractive and frumpy and butch-looking and nobody wants to be thought of that way? How in the world should anyone guess you are gay unless it’s by what you look like?

I know you’re waiting to dance around and scream HOMOPHOBIA but it’s a little more complex than that.

Are you old? Genuinely asking. Because that’s just not the case anymore.

Then why is Velma gay and not Daphne? Or Fred?

Because it’s been long established that Daphne and Fred are attracted to each other? It wouldn’t make any sense.

How? I’ve seen the original cartoon and got none of that. Fred wears a freakin’ scarf for Christ’s sake. They can’t make him come on to Daphne because he’s been in denial?

https://scoobydoo.fandom.com/wiki/Fred_Jones_and_Daphne_Blake