Lando's pansexuality thread.

*SPOILERS*


Lando can have whatever type of relationship he wants, with whatever type of person/object he wants. The issue I had in the movie, was his mourning over the remains of L3 on the Falcon. It looked absolutely ridiculous, and I was unable to buy into the emotion he tried to convey. It’s just a droid!



*SPOILERS*

 

I'm glad he was available for every species & that Leia wasn't the only one he worked his charm on.

 

"Small portion of the fandom" read it? Are you serious? This statement made headlines in industry-related publications and was even carried by mainstream news sources such as CNN, Newsweek or political leaning websites such as Huffington Post and Politico.

Was the character in that movie a major redefinition of a character who has existed for almost 40 years?

Gimme a break. The casual viewer isn't going to know or care about canon arguments. They are going to read a headline of some article, roll their eyes, and decide they will pass on the movie.

Like you said, it's really not a hard concept to understand.

 

If those general people actually saw the movie than they would notice not a single thing that they are complaining about is even in the movie. So their getting their panties in a bunch for no reason.

 

I wonder if this whole "pansexual Lando" thing doesn't even have anything to do with the movie. Maybe it's just one those things that people say to keep being part of some "social circle" (or whatever the right english word is). Mayby you just have to regularly prove your loyalty to whatever ideology is currently dominating so people you want to be a part of would continue to talk to you. Or something. Because at no point in the movie Lando was being shown as pan- or whaterver-sexual.

 

Again, please. I guarantee you it's only a very small minority who are aware or even care about that bit of trivia.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with doing that to the character. I'm just saying it's absurd to think the box office was hurt by that in freaking 2018.

 

Just a couple of thoughts-

1) Glover handled this with grace. Of course pansexuality would be more common in the GFFA. I mean, set aside the more broad definition, I think it could even apply in a small way to simply being into both of these women, for instance:




Whatever it is, it's a move complex sexuality than what we have on earth.

Basically- Star Wars is diversity. That's not an "SJW" comment, but just a recognition of the fact that even if Star Wars has struggled with representing real world diversity, their own universe has the potential to be far more socially complex than our own, given not only the different cultures but varying sentient species in it.



2) While I disagree with a lot of what @Wolfpack is saying here, I do agree with them that the lines with L3 are probably not entire reflective of this, and were probably more humorous. Besides, isn't it clear that we're getting L3's perspective on their "relationship", anyway, and not Lando's? His pansexuality would have nothing to do with that situation.



3) Adding details that don't contradict a character's established backstory isn't retconning anything. A pansexual Lando could be just as into Leia as a completely straight Lando. Nothing changed there.



4) Lando has indeed had almost 40 years of character development. However, almost of all of it is no longer canon now. It's arguable how much any of that matters anymore.



5) As much as I appreciate trying to bring diversity into Star Wars and fleshing out a character like Lando, I do think it wasn't really directly reflected in the film. Again, it doesn't contradict what was in the film either- it just seems like there wasn't much reason at all to specify Lando's sexuality. Heck, the Lando we see in Rebels is more of a player than Glover was in this film. It's unfortunately all too easy to see this and think that it's just a play to appease a certain section of the fanbase, without having to commit any actual meaningful action within the context of the film itself. A headline grabber, if you will.

And I don't really have an answer for that. We've seen it before (someone already pointed out Dumbledore, who again will be portrayed as straight in whatever new Harry Potter flick is coming out soon).

I guess here's the way I see it- bring on the LGBTQ characters. Give us realistic depictions of them- don't make them defined by their sexuality, obviously, but at least don't hide it either. Sinjir in the Aftermath trilogy is a great example of how this could effectively be done.

But stop taking advantage of the headlines too, because it's honestly kind of messed up to piggyback off of the struggles of actual people.

 

I think it's not that they are trying to imply he's bisexual that is exasperating people, but it's the absurdity of pansexuality. Being attracted to metal droids is making people angry that *this* is how some people want Lando's character to become.

 

Again, pretty sure that's not what this was in reference to, but even if it was...

People have been attracted to far weirder.

 

Cantina forum, meet AO3. : o p

 

Just like to remind you that Star Wars films are kids films. We all first saw them as kids didn't we?

Seven Year Old Star Wars Kid In The Theater: "Mummy, what is pansexuality?"
Mother: *shocked* "Where did you hear that?"
Kid: "Oh we were told that Lando Calrissian is pansexual. What is it?"
Mother *lies* "Um, It's a bit like a cape. Lando has lots of capes."
Kid: "Ahh. You're so smart, mummy. Can I get a pansexuality to wear and play with too?"

2018 is a very weird time to be a kid who just wants to see and enjoy a Star Wars film.

 

Everyone raises their children differently, and to each their own, but I gotta say...this isn't a problem in our household.

Our children are already aware of disabilities, transexualism, bipolarism, homosexuality, bisexuality, alchoholism, addiction, and abusive relationships just by proxy of having an extended family.
And you know; they really don't care.

They heard us talking about the ridiculousness of this topic in regards to the film, because um...it's really not an issue, and we just literally explained it as for what it is: Oh, it means that someone doesn't have a preference for who they have sex with, based on what gender they are or what they identify as. You know, like your aunt ____, but if they also didn't think of themselves as a girl or a boy when they thought about it.

"Oh, OK."

Done.

Whoopty doo. Kids need more credit. They can handle a lot without it ruining their world.
I've never had a problem telling them anything like this. Addiction was explained in terms of chemical functionality of the brain and the consequences of repeated behavior which feeds an inherent bias towards addiction through reinforced chemical propagation within the brain.

We're not a super liberal family either. We don't demand partyism; we pretty much advocate just the opposite.
We don't demand that they follow our way of thinking; we watch political debates and let them form their own impressions however they want to, and we'll engage them in debate to challenge them to think, but we won't tell them what to think.

One of them goes to church because they want to (they have friends and family they can tag along with); the other doesn't because they don't want to.
Neither my wife or I go to church. My wife is agnostic, and I'm apatheist (atheist to those who don't discern, but apatheist basically means I'm not against theism...I just don't care).

One of their grandmother's is bisexual in their history of relationships, and they love her to death, so I don't see them having a problem watching a robot fall in love with a human, nor would it be odd to me if their interpretation was that Lando and L3 are in a relationship together - so far, what I've seen from these two is that what matters is that the people want to be with each other, and that's about all that matters in their mind. They get mad during stories, sure, but they get mad when someone tries to take away someone from someone else; regardless of gender or sexual preferences.

Hell, one of them already talks about designing robots in the future, speaks of robots as if they were people, and gets sad when people destroy robots as readily as if a human character had just been wiped out.
They both balled their eyes out watching The Iron Giant; they thought that was just inhuman and even after they knew that the robot comes back to life, they still don't like watching all the harm and hurt (their way of thinking) that is brought on it, and they don't like that it has to suffer being exploded.

We've had some moments where we have had to explain that some people really don't like it when two or more people are together in ways that they themselves wouldn't choose, and some people don't like it to a point where they even try to make it hard for people to do things different from how they like, and they generally think that doesn't make any sense. Not in a "social justice warrior" kind of way; they just think that's weird and can't relate to it because to them; that's like not liking a cartoon and demanding that no one else watch it (neither are very "SJW", but one of them is like the Wonder Woman for Trees and fury roars in those eyes when they see people litter...and no, we didn't teach that - they, for whatever reason, bonded with ... trees. Every tree in our yard has a name, and to them, a personality).

They won't have a problem getting "through" L3 and Lando...what they have a hard time getting through is watching Kylo KILL his own Dad.
They balled their eyes out at that, and still do to this day, right before that moment comes around, they both magically have something else to go do (one suddenly has a drawing that really needs to be finished, and the other really needs to finish whatever their current room fort is).

We're taking them this weekend to Solo, and I'm expecting that they'll be excited when we walk out because it's a fun movie.

To each their own, but I really can't see the point in being all "kangaroo" about these kinds of things.
Of course, I also don't give a [beep] about swearing (one of them abhors it, the other loves swearing), and just tell them the appropriate contexts for swearing and how to swear properly (I mean, if you're going to...at least have good ones and do it right, dammit).

Anyway...I think this whole thing is blown out of proportion.

If Han had walked in on Lando under the covers in motion with L3 and been all,

HAN
Oh, God! Sorry!...um...

Han ducks back out of the entrance quickly, covering his vision.

LANDO
What the hell man?! You ever heard of knocking?

HAN
Sorry! Sorry!​

Then yeah, I could see the problem that people could have for kids, but this?
Woo.

Jabba the Hutt, a giant and disgusting slug, wanted to sleep with Leia and had her dressed up in a metal bikini.
What; that's OK because he's a bad guy?







Implied pansexual rape?
We're cool with that.


Implied consensual pansexuality?





Really?


Cheers,
Jayson

 

Yeah...thing is, he didn't do the JKR thing and make a press call and announce it.
He was asked by a reporter and answered, in condensed paraphrase, 'Lando's sexuality is vague' and then Glover was asked and (again, paraphrase) basically said, 'Isn't all of Star Wars pansexual by default?'

I think what Kasdan actually said was "There's a fluidity to the Lando's sexuality", and then he switched topics to talking about how it would be neat to see an LGBT character in the Star Wars universe because he thinks the time is good for that.

So what you have here is a media that wants something to talk about and a cast that's kind of like:


And then...



To which the media reacts thusly:


Aaand then social media blew that up into





And THEN the social media reaction, which was effectively started BY the media was "reported" on BY the media thusly:




Me:
*sigh*


Cheers,
Jayson

 

Oh man that made me laugh! Thank you.
I love Colbert, lol.

cheers,
Jayson

 

None of this is SJW nonsense. That is a term meant to dog whistle.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 1, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 1, 2018 ---

How about just friends.

 

No, IT HAS TO BE SEXUAL!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!!32121321!





You're most likely right.

 

Good post except liberal/SJW comment. The term SJW is a dog whistle term.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 1, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 1, 2018 ---

Jayson. I have to say that was an epic post. For people to get bothered by Lando being thought of as pansexual by author is really just silly. In the film I would say that yes L3 has a thing for him. Emotion in droids in Star Wars isnt new, but this kind of emotion is new. So what. Now as for Lando he has an emotional attachment to L3 like a lot of humans get to some mechanical things (lets not go into gutter). Hell my wife mourned her Camry when my son totalled it. She loved that car. L3 like many droids in Star Wars is sentient. Finally Lando in Solo flirts with women. After seeing it the 3rd time the only time he flirts is at the end before Han shows up. He is flirting with woman next to him at the card table.