Scooby Doo: Mystery Inc

Yeah, this comes off a lot as one of the writers attempting to claim that something that became a popular, progressive thing late in the show was actually planned all along after the fact (long past the point where anyone could contradict it, or more on the nose past the point where saying so could have any consequences whatsoever), to score points. It happens very, very often.

As for applying it to the other series, we added it up in one of the other threads and Velma has the most amount of love interests / crushes / relationships across the franchise of any of the main cast (even Shaggy, though he's a close second), with Marcie being the only lesbian one, so nah. I could see her as bi, but it's doubtful another Scooby series is ever going to care enough about the characters' romantic relationships to explore that.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Jul 12th 2020 at 10:15:49 AM

Since it was corroborated by multiple producers I don't see a reason to be so cynical about it.

Also, Velma dating guys is not proof she cannot be a lesbian. There is such a thing as bisexual, after all.

That is something I said, yeah.

Eh, it's not like whenever Word of Gay happens, it's only ever one person each time. IIRC, Voltron Legendary Defender got into a spot of trouble with its LGBTQ fanbase for their team mostly just saying characters were examples of representation, more than they were actually willing to put into the series itself beyond customary moments.

We absolutely live in an era where studios want to look progressive about LGBTQ representation but don't want to rock the boat by actually following through. This kind of "after the fact" confirmation is pretty standard. In fact, it's not even the first time it's happened with this show.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Jul 12th 2020 at 11:08:15 AM

I mean, the reality is that until several years ago getting clear queer representation into kids shows was nigh-impossible and had to be relegated to subtext. Saying that creators confirming the subtext (that many people picked up upon) was intentionally placed there is simply trying to get unearned brownie points is, again, somewhat cynical.

That reality doesn't mean that every time a group of producer said they totally meant to do a thing all along, they should be instantly believed and touted as heroes.

Not every producer or writer in this situation is a poor, repressed crusader trying to push for representation against execs that won't let them. Some are just trying to ride the wave, and are content to go halfway. I'm not saying be cynical, I'm saying be critical. This doesn't necessarily make any of them bad people, but it does mean that for as many series where they attempted to make a full story but were forced to cut it down, there's another where you got exactly what they meant to put on the screen.

This happens with pretty much every group that craves representation in a world that won't give it to them, over and over again. Heck, doing it with feminism made Joss Whedon's career, and it's only decades later that people started looking at that sideways.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Jul 12th 2020 at 11:28:41 AM

Considering the fact that he's said the same thing multiple times and it took now for it to finally take off, I doubt clout was the intention. He was just clearing up things people were confused about, like what Velma and Marcie's relationship was in the new world.

The reason I believe them is because it lines up with what happened in the show. There are many many people who noticed the gay subtext years before these statements came out. Just assuming they are lying with no reason for doing so is being cynical, not critical.

As I recall, Velma was written as heterosexual in the first season, then rewritten to not be in the later seasons when HDG was re-written back into the show, several years in. It's only in WOG that we're now getting the idea that "all of that stuff in the first season was fake." Which, yeah, comes off as a bit off, in a JK Rowling sort of way.

In any case, I suppose you're expecting me to return the name-calling, but if all this going to come down to is "you're a cynic, you're a cynic!" over and over again, this doesn't feel like it's going to anywhere especially positive. I've said my piece, so believe what you want to.

On an unrelated note, was Velma still Mindy Cohn in Mystery Inc? It feels like it would've been too early for Kate Micucci.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Jul 12th 2020 at 11:47:26 AM

Yeah, this was the last tv show where Mindy Cohn was still Velma.

It's easy to think of her as something new, just cause of how Mystery Inc's dour, cynical Velma is such a contrast from the cheerful, precocious Perpetual Smiler Velma that Cohn usually played.

Funnily enough, Micucci kind of went through went the opposite. She first played a deadpan version of Velma in Be Cool, but now she plays the more typical, cheery characterization in Guess Who.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Jul 12th 2020 at 11:52:50 AM

??? I'm not trying to insult you or call names, I'm just pointing out that going "you should automatically assume the creators are lying for clout" is a cynical viewpoint, because it is. Like, if you had a solid reason for assuming so it would be a different story, but even if you don't feel their intention for Velma's compulsory heterosexuality came across at all, I just don't buy the clout idea because I don't think Bisexual Velma and Lesbian Velma would elicit meaningfully different values of clout.

Edit: never mind. I said I was out, so I'm out.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Jul 13th 2020 at 12:07:59 PM

Nvm, saw this too late.

Edited by GamerSlyRatchet on Jul 13th 2020 at 12:21:16 PM

The thing is that they specifically said Velma was gay, not bi. If they had said she was bi, I would have believed that was their intent all along, no problem. But Velma really does seem interested in Shaggy. They didn't do a story where, for example, she has to figure out why she isn't happy with Shaggy. No, she likes him and the only real problem is that he spends too much time with Scooby and not enough time with her.

For the record, I'm happy to accept MI!Velma as gay. It's just a little hard to believe that was always the plan.

I get that, but I’m not sure how to do a dealing with comp het story that’s under the radar enough for execs.

Right now I'm just sitting on my roost with popcorn, watching everyone eat themselves alive over this. While the producer did give Word of Gay on this, everyone else seems to ignore the fact that he stated this for this particular iteration of her.

But the screwball fans and their precious headcanon keep begging for it to be a franchise-wide thing, when in past series examples she has either: A) had obvious male love interests or B) was simply unconfirmed and it was irrelevant to the plot of a bunch of teens and a talking dog messing with kooks in latex masks.

I'd be okay with the M.I. iteration being gay too, if all evidence in the show didn't point to the opposite. Sometimes you have to wonder if they were going to do so proper, or just throw it in for brownie points. Because that tends to happen.

Edited by GreatT on Jul 13th 2020 at 4:13:51 AM

I mean, Velma did have a lot of problems with Shaggy in general, like that one episode all about her forcing him to change the way he talked. With the knowledge that she was supposed to be gay, it's easy to see her as forcing herself to like Shaggy despite seemingly liking nothing about him.

It's believable to me because, from personal experience, I know a couple of people that were deep into compulsive heterosexuality. That they were in denial or forced themselves into straight relationships where they tried too hard, yet convinced no one. Velma and Shaggy's whole ordeal reminded me a lot of that.

Also, I don't understand why this is very controversial, while the cops in Gravity Falls or Korra and Asami in The Legend of Korra are more accepted. It's literally the same thing, and I'd argue this show did a better job at applying subtext.

The mermaid episode was not subtle at all. You had Velma getting flattered that she traveled all the way for her, the protectiveness towards her "super special best friend", and then her delivery of "You're not...a mermaid" when she sees her kissing her husband, almost like she switched midsentence what she wanted to say.

Edited by GamerSlyRatchet on Jul 13th 2020 at 1:20:01 AM

I don't really see that relationship with Shaggy being like that. It's more like she had high standards for Shaggy and it fell apart due to them having different priorities. I again really think Velma had genuine interest in men, but eventually grew to discover she might like women as well.

No one is eating themselves alive over this. At least not on this forum. It's a discussion. We don't have to agree on every minute detail.

Edited by ThriceCharming on Jul 13th 2020 at 2:56:18 AM

Oh certainly not on this forum. I meant on places like Twitter.

Also it feels like a retcon saying Velma was uncomfortable when Shaggy was the one who seemed not as invested. I wonder if he was more asexual in the show, but at the same time was hetereoromantic. And Velma was genuinely interested in other men, so I don't really think she was thought of being completely gay.

Bah, people use gay and bi interchangeably all the time.

I wouldn't take the use of "gay" as evidence that they definitely did not mean "bi", is what I'm saying.

Edited by Redmess on Jul 13th 2020 at 12:42:15 PM

But Tony Cervone specifically said she was gay, not bi. Hence the brouhaha.

And I can buy Shaggy as asexual. Reminds me a big of Jughead in that way. What is it about tall, gangly Big Eater beatniks and asexuality?