Nowhere in the original comment did they say it is a gay love story.
Full disclosure: I’d probably call it a gay love story before encountering this post. But there is fair point in the title of the post - why do we need to differentiate love stories based on what sexuality are the protagonists? And if we do that, why not do the same if protagonists are heterosexual? Then the classifications you mention would have to go like:
[Insert country] gay love story
A teen hetero story.
A divorce bi story.
The sexuality really should be secundary classificator.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 8 months ago
So a post-apocalyptic love story? Cuz that seemed to be the main theme. Unless you were just too caught up over the characters being gay to notice.
Grimy@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Offermans character was deep in the closet and his future husband had to break down some heavy emotional walls. It was his first relationship with a man.
Being gay was very much part of the theme and wasn’t just some offhand detail about them imo.
There was a lot to the episode but pretending their sexuality had no impact on how the story was told or its impact is silly. I don’t think it would have been as touching without it.
Some of you really need a rewatch.
MotoAsh@lemmy.world 8 months ago
You should really rewatch it, because the genders could be changed and it’d still be a good episode.