Unfavourable representation

It depends how you handle it. As long as the villain's homosexuality is just a part of who he is, and not the reason he's evil or the method by which he does evil things, then it's fine.

(And it could be those things, too, but you'd have to handle it with a great deal of sensitivity and thoughtfulness.)

Gay villain doesn't automatically equal homophobia. Homophobia is a far-reaching bigotry that corrupts many things, and tends to be evident in a writer's worldview.

Most people will be able to distinguish between an evil character who happens to be gay, and a character who is evil because he's gay.

I do get tired of seeing gay antagonists sometimes, but I've yet to stop reading something as a result.

I actually was wondering this very thing myself, since my current antagonist is a lesbian. I AM a lesbian and *I* wouldn't take offense to the way I've written her (since it's just a facet of her personality and not the reason for her evilness), so I hope it'll be okay, heh. I'm inclined to agree with leahzero.

I wouldn't read a book if I heard the villain, and only the villain, was gay. I'd rather skip a potentially good book than risk reading something that might piss me off.

I wouldn't rule out a story with a single gay character who is also an antagonist. I thought the movie 3:10 to Yuma (a Western, no less!) handled this very well with the Charlie Prince character. He's not a mustache-twirling villain; he's a well-fleshed human being who is loyal to his gang and fearless in conflict. He is also gay, but it's so subtle, many viewers could easily miss it. His homosexuality is just one attribute of an already well-rounded and believable character. His homosexuality is never vilified, a weakness, or his downfall.



However, your story has me worried...

I am writing a story that involves the typical vampire vs. werewolf scenario... the werewolf is gay and fancies the vampire. He's also the main antagonist of the story.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing if it's vampire vs. werewolf and the gay werewolf is your antagonist, that means the vampire is a protagonist, yes?

The crush the gay bad guy has a crush on the straight good guy has a lot of potential for problems. Based on that one fact, I'm already cringing in expectation that:

* The villain's gayness is a plot device or "weakness" that at some point will give the straight hero the upper hand over him.

* The gay antagonist's attraction to the straight protagonist won't be believable or well-developed as hetero characters' relationships

* At least once during the story, the straight antagonist will show revulsion and disgust at the villain's attraction to him (at which point revulsion over gayness and revulsion over his villainy can't easily be separated)

* In the end, the antagonist's gay infatuation will in some way contribute to his downfall

* Poor gay werewolf will forever be lonely, single and sexually rejected (like countless other gay characters before him)

This is pure speculation based on badly-written gay characters I've seen in the past, but if any of this strikes a chord with your story, consider some revisions.

If the gay werewolf has his own twinkie boytoy back at his wolf den, awesome. I'd much rather see the werewolf have his own sexual agency, a successful relationship on the side that doesn't hinge on the plot or the hetero heroes.

Having the antagonist's gayness become a plot device--particularly one that brings down the gay character down--is a no-no.

It's incredibly annoying when a straight guy IRL acts paranoid that every gay guy he meets is going to hit on him. Having the gay werewolf in an unrequited infatuation with the straight hero could easily play into this narcissistic trope.

When I read the OP, my first thought was: are the vampires and werewolves fighting because the werewolf is attracted to the vampire? Cos, y'know, that could be very bad.

Then I thought, surely not, it's probably some ancient war they are fighting...Which led me to my second question, why would this ww, who hates vampires, be in love with a vampire? Cos, y'know, that could be very bad too. You might could come up with some swell reasons--Shakespeare tried--but, to quote Ardent Kat, that

Ardent Kat said:

has a lot of potential for problems

Click to expand...

In fact, I think my feelings here are the same as AK put forth in her second *.

Generally speaking, I feel there isn't enought info in your OP to either absolve or condemn the scenario. You could pull it all off without a hitch or completely screw the pooch. To quote LeahZero

leahzero said:

It depends how you handle it.

Click to expand...

Completely off-topic:

Ardent Kat said:

Having the antagonist's gayness become a plot device--particularly one that brings down the gay character down--is a no-no.

Click to expand...

...flooded my mind with the most hilarious ideas--none of which are inoffense enough to share here--that I nearly fell out of my chair laughing.

There was a gay antagonist in this TV drama that I found to be very well done without being offensive. I think it had a lot to do with the depth and significance of his sexuality to the humanization of his character.

Gale Haut said:

There was a gay antagonist in this TV drama that I found to be very well done without being offensive. I think it had a lot to do with the depth and significance of his sexuality to the humanization of his character.

Click to expand...

And Jack was played by Sebastian Stan, which, y'know...Well, y'know.

But what pissed me off about that series was that it was a reworking of the biblical story inwhich Jonathan and David are "very very close friends". (When they spent the night together in the field was one of my all-time favorite bible stories!) But Jack and David were not friends in the tv series "very very close" or otherwise.

It was one of those weird moments in history when the bible was more progay than modern storytelling.

Hmm, what were we talking about? Oh, yes, gay werewolves. Carry on.

JohnnyGottaKeyboard said:

And Jack was played by Sebastian Stan, which, y'know...Well, y'know.

But what pissed me off about that series was that it was a reworking of the biblical story inwhich Jonathan and David are "very very close friends". (When they spent the night together in the field was one of my all-time favorite bible stories!) But Jack and David were not friends in the tv series "very very close" or otherwise.

It was one of those weird moments in history when the bible was more progay than modern storytelling.

Hmm, what were we talking about? Oh, yes, gay werewolves. Carry on.

Click to expand...

It didn't bother me as much. I remember someone bringing up the weirdness of the relationship when I was in college, and after rereading it I had the sense of Jonathan's relationship with David being a kind of unrequited love, where David didn't necessarily have sexual feelings for the other.

I mean... I really don't know, but a literary interpretation of them not both being gay doesn't upset me in the least. Especially not when it's as well done as Kings.

Ya know Johnny & Gale Haut, I just might have to watch this show now. I'd never heard of it.

Be warned that there is a less than satisfying resolution to the series

Got canceled.

Aw, balls. Well, at least it wasn't an intentionally unsatisfying ending.

Anna L. said:

I wouldn't read a book if I heard the villain, and only the villain, was gay. I'd rather skip a potentially good book than risk reading something that might piss me off.

Click to expand...

are you talking about any/all books or just books in this context?

Anna L. said:

I wouldn't read a book if I heard the villain, and only the villain, was gay.

Click to expand...

Hm. It's interesting, especially as I read down the thread to find that you're turning this antagonist into a protagonist in the sequel. That may help sort things out for the reader if it's foreshadowed well enough.

cray said:

are you talking about any/all books or just books in this context?

Click to expand...

Fifty years later, a response...

I'm not sure what context you mean? If all the good guys in a specific book are straight and ONLY the villain is gay, it sounds like a case of 'being gay is something that only evil people do'. If I think a book might have a slant like that, I stay away from it. There should always be a LGBTQ character on the 'good' side too.

Edit: I'm slow, but now I get it. You're asking if I avoid other types of books that might piss me off, correct? Well, yes. I don't read books that glorify rape and abuse either. No matter how awesome it supposedly is, I will not read a book where the main character falls in love with her abuser and they have a Happy-Ever-After ending. I read to have fun, not because I want to feel homicidal.