#I would 10/10 prefer to watch a movie where the production crew researched/brought in advisors/did workshops than just went

[puff-the-cereal-box]

If rephrasing it helps for anyone look at it this way: think of a sexist female character. The vast majority of the time: she's played by a woman. It's not different for any other aspect of identity.

obviously i believe that lgbt actors should have equitable access to jobs. but purely as a viewer, i honestly don't care if an actor in a gay role is gay. that's not enough for a project to be "good representation" in my book. because there are lgbt actors who have acted in homophobic/transphobic media, and there are cis straight actors who have portrayed lgbt characters with compassion, and then there's also everything in between. rami malek could come out as gay tomorrow and it wouldn't make bohemian rhapsody any less homophobic because the movie is homophobic regardless. heath ledger was straight (as far as we know), but brokeback mountain is no less heartfelt. to me, an authentic performance starts being made possible with the script, then the producer, director, and so on. but most importantly, i wish more people would ask what a piece of media or story is trying to say about lgbt people. that's way more important than the identities of anyone involved. is it being made with compassion? with empathy? with humanity? with care? that's the questions that should be asked BEFORE asking whether the performer is gay! because i promise you if the script is homophobic garbage, one actor's identity won't save it!