hocumflute OP t1_jdhlydv wrote

"everyone with criticism that I dislike is a 'homophobe'"

Your persecution complex is showing. Nobody is talking about "heterosexual", or "homosexual" relationships being better or worse on screen.

You need better reading comprehension if you are going to be this childish


hocumflute OP t1_jdhjizi wrote

>Then you follow it up by saying that everything that the writer added to the story through the relationship could have been achieved by a hetero relationship instead

You are literally the only one talking about anything hetero.

I never even used the word.

Stop making shit up and delete your account


hocumflute OP t1_jdhhbpy wrote

>you follow it up by saying that everything that the writer added to the story through the relationship could have been achieved by a hetero relationship instead.

Imagine making this up, then calling people names from this imaginary argument nobody made.

Seriously - point to where I said anything of the sort, or delete your account.


hocumflute OP t1_jdgul4e wrote

>>The question remains - why. > >Because bisexual men exist and clearly the writer wanted to make Flint one of them.

Imagine if Walt suddenly had a romance outside of his marriage and drug empire in breaking bad.

Do you see why that would detract from the story, regardless of gender?

> Your dog whistle is really showing using terms like 'ham fisted token characters'.

I'm not going to respond again if you attack me again.

Stop it. Address my point, or shove off.


hocumflute OP t1_jdgt9mn wrote

>You come across as either young, homophobic or a bit heartless by the way

Stop. I'm talking about the quality of a show.

There are PLENTY that explore sexuality while successfully driving the plot (will and grace, 6 feet under, boondocks saints - off the top of my head)

Attacking me doesn't make ham fisted token characters and plots any more valid.

>Sure, they could have had that entire arc done through a hetero relationship, but maybe, just maybe, the writer wanted to make the lead character bisexual and have those same things achieved through his love with another man.

The question remains - why.

> It wasn't a fucking 'twist to shock the viewers'

It wasn't?

What else did it achieve which the Barlow relationship wouldn't?


hocumflute OP t1_jdgq15x wrote

>How does being gay 'progress his character'? Literally everything he does is as a result of his relationship with Thomas and their treatment under the Crown and Thomas' father. His entire character is shaped by that relationship. Black Sails is basically a show about how Flint wants to take down the British Empire, because of how much it destroyed his and Thomas' lives

The Barlow relationship did that already. There was no need to add another love interest


hocumflute OP t1_jdfelzg wrote

First, any relationship softens the character by humanizing them.

Look at breaking bad - the whole story is about Walts adultery - to building an empire instead of his family.

Had he suddenly had a love interest (male or female), that would detract from his "true" love of building an empire against his love for his family.

The Barlow relationship was introduced first, and was a clear enough motivation for Flint to become what he was - hell bent on chaos against the British empire, exploiting his crews love of gold to get there.

The twist was from out of left field, and (to my recollection) wasn't really spoken of afterwards. It didn't push his character forward, and it "softened" him by diluting his motives beyond piracy and vengeance.


hocumflute OP t1_jdben4s wrote

yeah, that was out of left field and really softened our hardest and most ruthless character imo. They had already set up a whole romance between him and Barlow - it came across as superfluous and detracted from his clear love for gold.

However, piracy in general is a great opportunity for narratives around slavery, gender, and sexual orientation as pirates notoriously didn't give a shit so long as it earned them money.