#(he isn’t homophobic just very gay and very used to hearing that particular passage)

[twentyfivemiceinatrenchcoat]

Priest getou and nun reader or villager reader....(anything other than the word both isnt acceptable...😡😡😡 /j) -🪄

🪄 ANON I SEE YOU AND YOU RAISE A VALID POINT but please consider…… priest!geto and non-believer!reader.

imagine just waltzing into a church one day. almost as if on a whim. you don’t believe in god, you aren’t interested in praying, but you’re exploring this quiant little town, and the church looks pretty from afar, and you figure it could be a nice way to burn time.

you enter the building to find that a sermon is taking place. a priest is speaking to the few rows of people listening. the church is fairly small, but paintings and sculptures and the mellow glow of beautiful cathedral glass give it a sense of mystique that you’re drawn to. you take a seat and listen along, halfheartedly, not praying like the rest, not singing along to the hymns… you stick out like a sore thumb, but hey, it’s not as if anyone is paying attention.

except someone is, and it happens to be the priest that was holding the sermon just a second ago. the same one you spent most of your time oogling once the paintings started to bore you, because he’s so pretty for a priest. beautiful long black hair, amber eyes, sharp facial features, pretty hands and fingers — and the smoothest, silkiest voice you’ve heard in your life. like a sun-soaked bundle of lillies.

… also, his cassock is just a little too tight of a fit to tear your eyes away from.

you stick around a little longer once almost everyone has left, just scrolling on your phone and basking in the quiet, and that’s when he approaches you. he jokingly tells you that it’s always obvious when a non-believer enters a place of worship, but he’s not mad; he’s amused. you end up chatting a bit about your beliefs, he’s a lot more chill than you expected, and…. well. he’s just really, really charming.

so maybe you end up coming back the week after. maybe his smile is a bit like a spider’s web. maybe it becomes a kind of routine to speak to him after his sermons; you still don’t sing along to the hymns or spend any time on prayers, and he still finds it funny. maybe once in a while you end up liking a paragraph from the scripture he’s reciting, and he’s always more than happy to discuss it with you. but mostly you’re there for him. for your chats, for standing outside and badgering him about his beliefs while he smokes and listens with an amused grin.

rain hits the ground with a steady rhythm, earthy tobacco floods your veins, spiders by the ceiling weave a web of dew, and his presence is just a little more intoxicating than you’d deem appropriate.

suguru just… isn’t a very orthodox priest. he doesn’t care for the bible as more than a literary piece, he has his own view of god, his own thoughts on worship. he smokes. he may or may not occasionally manipulate church-goers into donating money so he can invest in another overpriced painting. you ask him if there are any bodies in the basement you should know about, and he answers that any self-respecting priest wouldn’t conduct their blood rituals in the basement of their own church. he knows how to pick locks. he tells you once, very quietly, that he doesn’t believe man was created in god’s image. there’s a look in his eyes that you don’t comment on.

he’s funny. charming. pleasantly suspicious. your conversations are enjoyable for the both of you, and eventually the edges of his cedar eyes begin to crinkle the slightest bit whenever you walk into his field of vision. sometimes he eyes your lips for a little too long, and a honeyed irony seeps into his grin when you call him out on it. he asks you if you’re tempting him on purpose, and you shrug. whatever exists between the two of you remains unspoken.

one day, he tells you that he believes it was god who sent you to him. you furrow your brows with a protest, a mutter reminding him of your beliefs, how you believe in free will — how you waltzed into his church out of your own volition. no one else’s.

he only smiles, and flicks the butt of his cigarette. you think he remains unconvinced.

[treysenglishclass-blog]

Annotated Bibliography

1) Cartoon Network. “Reunited with Rebecca Sugar and Ian Jones-Quartey (Vol.3/Ep.5).” The Steven Universe Podcast, Cartoon Network, 20 Sept. 2018.

The podcast discusses an episode of Steven Universe named “Reunited”. In the episode, there is a very important scene where two characters, Ruby and Sapphire, get married. Ruby and Sapphire both use female pronouns. The network had issues with this, and Rebecca discusses the fight she had while trying to get this episode made. 

Rebecca talks about the argument she had with the network on whether or not LGBTQ+ content is suitable for children. The Network expressed that since the show would be airing in a G timeslot, this type of content wouldn’t be acceptable. Rebecca was repulsed by the idea that these two characters wouldn’t be acceptable for a G rating when throughout the history of G rated content, a majority of the stories revolved around characters falling in love and living “happily ever after”. That is the exact same thing being represented in her show, and she feels that it’s her character's right as a cartoon couple to be able to experience everything that heteronormative cartoon couples get to. An argument Rebecca makes in the podcast is that by labeling LGBTQ+ content as adult content, you are depriving children of learning about LGBTQ+ people and possibly stifling their own growth. By showing LGBTQ+ content to children it allows them to learn more about themselves and others without the subject feeling taboo. Rebecca also mentions that it's bittersweet getting the wedding approved and hearing the fans’ responses. She is happy that it went through and is proud of the fight she fought, but she feels like there is still so much more work to do. This wedding is a small piece of representation when compared to the last hundred years of heteronormative family-friendly content. 

2) et al. “Suicide Etiology in Youth: Differences and Similarities by Sexual and Gender Minority Status.” Children & Youth Services Review, vol. 102, July 2019, pp. 79–90. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.03.039.

A study done through twitter concluded that LGBTQ+ people between 14-21 are twice as likely to be at risk of suicide than other people the same age. The survey covered age, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, school enrollment and grade, social connectedness, truancy due to feeling unsafe, school-based and cyberbullying victimization, sadness, suicide ideation and attempt, social media use, and preferences regarding survey mode and recontact. The study found that support at home and school greatly decreased these numbers, but there is still a gap for the places outside of home or school. Because of the stigma of LGBTQ+, it is harder for people of this community to reach out for help, and instead internalize their feelings. While many LGBTQ+ feel more protected in homes and schools where they are accepted, there is no hard evidence for suicide prevention in LGBTQ+ youth. Places of belongingness, such as church and religious youth group involvement, are good places for hetero people to decrease suicide ideology, it has the opposite effect on LGBTQ+ youth. This journal argues that integrated learning, without excluded anyone, on LGBTQ+ people and issues is most beneficial for decreasing LGBTQ+ bullying and suicide ideology. The Journal also argues that with youth suicide in LGBTQ+ people increasing, adults should be calling for action. Since these adults have the power to teach their children, they need to be teaching their children that these people aren’t an issue. The study shows that exposure to LGBTQ+ people helped decrease LGBTQ+ youth suicide rates.

3) Kaiser, Vrai. “Interview: Gravity Falls' Alex Hirsch Talks About Disney's Censors, Pacifica's Parents, and Future Plans.” An Interview With Gravity Falls Creator Alex Hirsch | The Mary Sue, The Mary Sue, 14 July 2017, www.themarysue.com/alex-hirsch-interview/.

Alex Hirsh, the creator of Gravity Falls, is being interviewed. One of the questions asked was about the episode Love God, and Alex’s fight to show a same-sex elderly couple. The episode is about Cupid, and in this particular scene, it shows Cupid using his magic to make people start falling in love. When the storyboard artist first drew up the scene, there was a moment depicting 2 elderly ladies falling in love. Alex knew immediately that Disney wouldn’t allow this to go through, which led him to keep it in the story. Sure enough, the board came back with the note, “The scene of the two old ladies kissing in the diner is not appropriate for our audience. Please revise.” To which Alex responded with a one-word answer: “Why?”

Disney couldn’t come up with a good reason, other than the scene would make homophobic parents angry, and so that they could avoid the headache, asked Alex to just drop the moment. Alex had a discussion with Disney six more times after that; he stated that a small moment like this would make a lot of fans happy and argued that since Disney is such a big company, they should just ignore the homophobic parents; it wouldn’t make a difference in the long run. The censors told him that if he doesn’t revise the storyboard, they will cut the moment themselves. 

Alex finally gave in, but this didn’t stop him from representing the LGBTQ+ community later in the show. In the finale, two male police officers declared their love for each other, and Disney censors didn’t bat an eye.

4) Thorfinnsdottir, Dia, and Helle Strandgaard Jensen. “Laugh Away, He Is Gay! Heteronormativity and Children’s Television in Denmark.” JOURNAL OF CHILDREN AND MEDIA, vol. 11, no. 4, 2017, pp. 399–416. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/17482798.2017.1312470.

This article is about studying children’s media on Danish public service television. Most of the characters on these shows are heterosexual, and the ones that are non-heterosexual are seen as jokes. This alienates children that aren’t heterosexual or gender variant. In the article, there are interviews with various children’s organizations: Save the Children, LGBT Denmark, The Danish Media Council’s Unit for Children/The National Council for Children (the interviewee is active in both councils), and DR’s Children and Youth Department. When the interviewees were asked about casting light on LGBTQ+ people, they argued that children are extremely vulnerable at a young age, and the children’s age should be considered when exposure to certain material, especially LGBTQ+ representation, is brought before them. They also argued that they were fine with LGBTQ+ characters being represented, but stressed the importance of making sure the content doesn’t get sexual. Each answer was directly related to censoring the sexual part of an LGBTQ+ relationship. These answers show that they think LGBTQ+ people are inherently more adult. They don’t see the innocence of being LGBTQ+, and that its the same as heterosexual people. When the interviewees were asked about bullying, and what they’re doing to help stop homophobic bullying, a majority of them said they weren’t including LGBTQ+ specific bullying in their messages. In Denmark, they don’t necessarily have anything against LGBTQ+ people, but there isn’t anything being done to support these people either. These people claim to be on the children’s side, but they don’t include LGBTQ+ children.

5) van der Toorn, Jojanneke, et al. “In Defense of Tradition: Religiosity, Conservatism, and Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage in North America.” Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 43, no. 10, Oct. 2017, pp. 1455–1468. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1177/0146167217718523.

A study was done throughout North America and Canada on homophobia and which groups it was prominently featured in. The study shows that Religious and conservative groups are the main people with homophobic tendencies. Christians use passages from the Bible, such as “not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22), and state that those who do “shall surely be put to death” (Leviticus 20:13) to support their homophobia. Pope Francis has been more supportive and open-minded to the LGBTQ+ community, but little has been done to support them. Religion tends to have stakes in defining the status quo in America and it supports conservatism. Conservatives, even nonreligious ones, tend to lean toward an ideology that most religions also support. When the study continued, they found that people who do identify as Conservatives and Republicans are against the LGBTQ+ community because they tend to idealize resistance to change and opposition of equality. The study theorizes that resistance to change is more likely a reason than the opposition to equality for conservatives. They conducted 4 studies, and these were the findings: 

Study 1: The more religious someone is, the more likely they are to oppose same-sex marriage.

Study 2: The more religious someone is, the more likely they are to protest the LBGT community as a whole. 

Study 3: Conservatives tend to be much more homophobic because of the strong similarities that conservative ideals have with Religion. 

Study 4a/4b: Because of religion being a big role in North America, those ideals are mainly upheld and considered a societal standard. This influences conservatives to be more resistant to change and oppose equality in order to maintain the status quo.

6) Ryan, Caitlin. “Generating a Revolution in Prevention, Wellness, and Care for LGBT Children and Youth.” Temple Political & Civil Rights Law Review, no. Issue 2, 2013, p. 331. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edshol&AN=edshol.hein.journals.tempcr23.16&site=eds-live.

Caitlyn Ryan has been a social worker for over 40 years, and has helped numerous LGBTQ+ people. In 2007, there was an understanding that LGBTQ+ adolescents talking about their family was too painful and many organizations weren’t pushing for family inclusion in LGBTQ+ lives. There wasn’t a strong connection between LGBTQ+ people and their families. Caitlyn understood how important family can be for LGBTQ+ children's health, mental health, and overall well-being. According to researchers, on average children form an understanding of their gender identity by age three, start realizing their sexuality at age 10, and identify with LGBTQ+ around age 13. Researchers have found that children now are quicker to understand their identity because of widespread access to the information, seeing positive light on LGBTQ+ people in the media, and just knowing other LGBTQ+ people. With children understanding themselves more at a younger age, it creates this gap between LGBTQ+ children and heterosexual caregivers that may not understand. There is a common misconception that sexual orientation is strictly about sex and not felt until late teens or adulthood, when really its about human connection, and simply, who someone loves. Caregivers have admitted to not knowing how to treat their LGBTQ+ children; they’re unsure of the LGBTQ+ community and grow scared and angry when they see the paths their children are going down. Many times caregivers feel there is pressure to choose between their religion and their LGBTQ+ child. These findings led Caitlyn to create the Family Acceptance Project; an organization that aims to teach caregivers about their LGBTQ+ youth, and help these caregivers understand how important their support to their LGBTQ+ youth is. 

They conducted a study gauging both LGBTQ+ people and the family’s responses to LGBTQ+ coming out. “We started with in-depth individual interviews ranging from two to four hours each with LGBT youth and key family members who were accepting, ambivalent, and rejecting of their adolescents' LGBT identities. Our research explored family, school and peer experiences, gender expression and related experiences, cultural and religious values and experiences related to the adolescent's sexual orientation and gender identity, the development of their LGBT identity, specific family reactions to their LGBT identity, victimization, social support, and future hopes and dreams.” Their interviews found that children who were rejected are more likely to (1) More than eight times as likely to have attempted suicide; (2) Nearly six times as likely to report high levels of depression; (3) More than three times as likely to use illegal drugs; and (4) More than three times as likely to be at high risk for HIV and 2 sexually transmitted diseases. They also found that families who’ve rejected their children had the ability to change over time, and wished that they had more information on how to accept their children. Caregivers sometimes don’t understand that their behaviors and actions, in an attempt to help their LGBTQ+ children have a “good life” can sometimes be highly problematic, even when motivated by care and concern. Caregivers should avoid attempts that try to change the adolescent's sexual orientation or gender identity, prevent them from having an LGBTQ+ friend, or include heavy religious studying. Also avoid behaviors that are not always thought of as rejection, such as not talking about/discouraging an adolescent from talking about their LGBTQ+ identity, or denying/minimizing an adolescent's LGBTQ+ identity. These reactions are commonly seen in phrases such as, "It's just a phase", “he'll grow out of it", "how could he possibly know?", or "he's just confused.". These actions lead to higher risks for their LGBTQ+ children. Caregivers should instead advocate for their children when others mistreat them because of their LGBTQ+ identity, require respect for them within the family, and help their congregation become more welcoming of LGBTQ+ people in an attempt to keep their children connected with their faith. 

Caitlyn teaches caregivers proper ways to support LGBTQ+ children when they come out, by helping them understand how impactful their words, actions, and behaviors are. “Nearly every family in our study has said that "We needed to know this information when our child was little," or. . ."Why didn't the nurse tell me this could happen in our family when I took my baby home from the hospital?’” She reflects on a Chinese dad who was monolingual Mandarin-speaking who said, "’Why doesn't every Chinese newspaper have this information? Why don't they tell us how to help our gay children? We need to know this information before we know who our children will become.’” In short, Caitlyn has been teaching families ways to support LGBTQ+ children when they come out because she understands that support saves lives.

7) Kelso, Tony. “Still Trapped in the U.S. Media’s Closet: Representations of Gender-Variant, Pre-Adolescent Children.” JOURNAL OF HOMOSEXUALITY, vol. 62, no. 8, pp. 1058–1097. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00918369.2015.1021634. Accessed 6 Nov. 2019.

Children need representation young so that they can identify with something. It’s great that we have this representation for adults and teens, but at that point they’re already well into their LGBTQ+ journey. Because sexual orientation first manifests in childhood, there needs to be more role models for LGBTQ+ children. Adults who rarely converse with the LGBTQ+ community need to not base their knowledge of LGBTQ+ people on depictions in the media. Often times in media, the tragic queer trope can be seen. This trope instills the idea that LGBTQ+ people will live sad lives because they’re LGBTQ+, when in reality, they lead sad lives because people don’t support them. Scholars have argued that the lack of representation can lead members of the LGBTQ+ community to feel they’re victims of “symbolic annihilation” and may receive the message that they don’t matter to culture at large. 

The article goes on to explain all the different types of media gender-variant children have been portrayed in, and the effects this has had on people. “In advertising, probably the promotional material of late that has drawn the most attention to childhood gender variance was a single image in a J. Crew catalogue featuring a mother (none other than the company's president and creative director, Jenna Lyons) painting the toenails of her young son (Ms. Lyon's own 5-year-old boy) in hot pink, with the caption, "Lucky for me I ended up with a boy whose favorite color is pink. Toenail painting is way more fun in neon." When it ran, it became controversial, evoking considerable online discussion and news coverage, both in print and on the Internet (e.g., Stadtmiller, [170]), and on television (e.g., Cibrowski, [31]). Not surprisingly, comments from both media personalities and the public spanned the range from "Yeah, well, it may be fun and games now, Jenna, but at least put some money aside for psychotherapy for the kid" (Ablow, [ 1]) to "I think the add [sic] is adorable, at least the son and mother are having a great time and she is actually spending time WITH her son" (Jessica, [99]).”

While things have been getting better over the years, there is still a lot to be done in terms of representation, especially for gender-variant representation. Children cannot make this change, which is why it comes to the parents to be the outside force to make this change.

8) “Media Portrayal of LGBT People.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 4 Nov. 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_portrayal_of_LGBT_people#cite_note-3.

This Wikipedia article contains a timeline of LGBTQ+ representation in film, music, and television since the 30s. There was little shown from the ’30s to the ’60s, with most representations used for a joke. When the Stonewall Riots occurred, shout out to Marsha P Johnson, there was a large push in equal treatment and acceptance of LGBTQ+ people. Because of the riots, there was also a large push for LGBTQ+ representation placed on Hollywood. Things started to slowly make progress, but then the AIDS epidemic hit. When the epidemic hit, acknowledgment about the LGBTQ+ community increased, but ultimately the LGBTQ+ community was shown in a negative light. This drove off supporters of LGBTQ+ people. In the ’90s people started to slowly get used to and accept LGBTQ+ people, but it’s still been an uphill battle. It’s getting better and better each year. The article also touches on LGBTQ+ representation in children’s media and goes over a few examples. Such as Legend of Korra, Steven Universe, Adventure Time, and Andi Mack. The examples of LGBTQ+ people in the media are both helpful and hurtful. Representation of LGBTQ+ people can start to create stereotypes, especially when a lot of LGBTQ+ people exist in film and movies as either comic relief or tragic queer motif. There needs to be a debunking of this stereotype, and the way to do that is with more exposure to diverse LGBTQ+ people in tv and movies. The more you learn and are exposed to something, the more understanding you build on the topic. 

9) Mares, Marie-Louise, and Emory Woodard. “Positive Effects of Television on Children’s Social Interactions: A Meta-Analysis.” Media Psychology, vol. 7, no. 3, 2005, pp. 301–322. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0703_4.

This study sets out to find what the effects of prosocial content in the media has on children. Because of the arguments that “violence on screen can lead to violence off-screen”, researchers wanted to test if the same is true after viewing prosocial content on screen. Through their studies, they found that children learn the most through the preschool to adolescence stage of their lives. In these stages children’s minds are still developing, and each year their comprehension of the world around them grows. The study found that the older the child is, and the more prosocial content they consumed, the more likely the child would behave prosocially. For younger children, around 5 years old, they too may behave prosocially, but they have a harder time grasping the ideas of morality. The study yielding the following findings: 

“1. Children exposed to prosocial content have more positive social interactions, show more

altruistic behavior and self-control, and have less stereotyped views of others.

2. The strongest effects of prosocial content were found for measures of altruism.

3. Relying on children’s ability to pick out the moral messages from programs which feature violence or conflict and some prosocial resolution may backfire, leading to more aggression than

merely showing the conflict.

4. Effects of prosocial content are often strongest when viewing is combined with discussion.

5. The effect sizes overall ranged from small to medium.

6. Effects of prosocial content were strongest for pre-school and grade-school children, diminishing in adolescence.

7. Effects are somewhat stronger for girls than for boys.”

“In any event, the conclusion is that television has the potential to foster positive social interactions, reduce aggression, and encourage viewers to be more tolerant and helpful.”

10) The American Psychological Association. “Answers to Your Questions For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality.” American Psychological Association, American Psychological Association, 2008, https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.

The American Psychology Association created a pamphlet to help people understand more about LGBTQ+ people. The pamphlet explains that, people start to become aware of their sexuality during middle childhood and early adolescence, and while there is no scientific consensus as to why people have a certain sexual orientation, people overwhelmingly feel no sense of choice in their identity. Homosexuality is not a mental disorder either. “Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience”. During adolescence, people tend to be the most exploratory with their sexual feelings. When these young people come to their conclusion, it’s important to be supportive no matter what. Support leads to happy, satisfying, and healthy lives. Young people today may face discrimination and bullying, which commonly results in suicide idealization and higher risk activities. It’s important to support your child if bullying does occur. During much of the 20th century, LGBTQ+ people have been largely discriminated against. “Public opinion studies over the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s routinely showed that, among large segments of the public, lesbian, gay and bisexual people were the target of strongly held negative attitudes.” (This may be a big factor for why older generations tend to be more homophobic.) The AIDS pandemic was a large push back in accepting LGBTQ+ people. Discrimination is still alive and happening today, leaving many LGBTQ+ people with major mental health concerns. A good way to combat this discrimination is through awareness. Being openly LGBTQ+ or openly an ally does wonder in creating representation for the community.