You'd Think That The College Credentialed Scribbling Classes Would Understand How To Read The Word "Some" But You'd Be Wrong In Some Cases

AS IN "I do have a problem with some of the movie, TV show and novel depictions of gay male characters by directors, actors and writers who are not gay men."  Especially since the next sentence pointed out that many of the movies, etc. produced, directed and written by males of any gender persuasion depicted Women badly.   Not all of them, perhaps but SOME of them.

"Some" does not mean "all,"  it does not mean "most" it doesn't even mean "many."   It doesn't even mean badly intended.  I found the depiction of gay men in something as intentionally positive as "Consenting Adults" off, in a few of the scenes too stereotypical.  

It's amazing to me how deficient in the comprehension of the English language some college-credentialed people are.   As we have indefinite articles, some languages don't, by the way,  the nuance they lend to expression shouldn't be left out because of some people who were passed when they should have been retained till they learned such things and then were put though a degree-mill program because they were paying customers.

If I'd said "some of the movie, TV show and novel depictions of Black People, Native American People, etc were problematic,"  no doubt people with deep seated prejudices and indifference to stereotyping of the any of those groups would object to it.  Even when it's as obvious as some of the truly evil depictions of those groups in the movies, TV shows, novels, even alleged non-fiction.   

I can say that SOME cis-straight-white-males have absolutely no intention to try to imagine the damage that entertainment that presents beleaguered populations badly do so in real life either because they don't think it's something they are responsible to take seriously OR THEY APPROVE OF THAT USE OF PEOPLE OTHER THAN THEMSELVES.   A lot of the Hollywood and scribbling class "liberal" and even "leftist" folk are nothing of the sort when you get right down to it.  They're as indifferent to equality and justice as their typical non-liberal predecessors were, even when the problem was pointed out to them, repeatedly.   

Hollywood changes more slowly than most turgid, habitual and entitled entities, if it changes at all.  It's a bastion of powerful, rich, mostly white men.  That is likely to slow any progress like the Senate and Supreme Court are and frequently it tries to turn back progress.  I don't think it's much moved on from the first century of its existence when it became the primary vehicle for passing on some, perhaps even many and most of the entrenched bigotry of the past into the present.   Its bad habits even extend to those who may wish to do better but don't really understand how to do it.  Even some who are members of the groups so misrepresented.   I would expect that members of such groups would probably have a better success rate at, at least, avoiding the negative and widely offensive use of a group they are members of.  Not all, though, I think Clare Boothe's The Women is one of the worst stereotypical depictions of Women I ever saw in a movie, but, then Clare Boothe (later Luce) was vile and a shitty writer, as well.   Bad writers will always resort to stereotype, it's inevitable.