GLAAD’s latest television study puts LGBTQ representation on streaming in the spotlight, with Netflix leading the platform breakdown in the figures supplied here. But there’s an important wrinkle: GLAAD’s accessible 2025 report gives different totals. Here’s what the research measures, why the mismatch matters, and what renewed shows such as The Hunting Wives can tell us about visibility.

Essential Takeaways

  • The supplied figures put Netflix first: They list 116 LGBTQ characters across 58 series, but these numbers differ from GLAAD’s accessible report.
  • The published report counts more: GLAAD records 372 LGBTQ characters across eight streaming services, with Netflix at 177, or 48 per cent.
  • The research has a defined scope: It covers regular and recurring characters in selected scripted series during the 2024–25 television season.
  • Renewals matter: GLAAD says many characters counted in the study may not return, while Netflix confirms The Hunting Wives has been renewed for a second season.

Netflix leads, but the figures don’t line up

The figures in the supplied findings give Netflix the biggest share of LGBTQ characters on streaming: 116 across 58 series. Prime Video follows with 68, while Hulu, Apple TV, HBO Max, Paramount+, Peacock and Disney+ are listed with smaller totals.

But there’s a significant catch. GLAAD’s accessible 2025 report counts 372 LGBTQ characters across eight services, including 177 on Netflix, or 48 per cent of the total. That’s a marked difference from the lower Netflix figure in the supplied passage, so readers shouldn’t treat the two sets of numbers as interchangeable.

What GLAAD’s study actually measures

This isn’t a count of every LGBTQ character available across streaming libraries. GLAAD’s twentieth annual Where We Are on TV study tracks regular and recurring LGBTQ characters in selected scripted series during the 2024–25 television season, from 1 June 2024 to 31 May 2025.

The report records 233 series regulars and 139 recurring characters across streaming. That clear scope is useful, but it also means the figures are a snapshot of defined programmes and dates, rather than a live inventory of what viewers can watch now.

Renewals can keep representation on screen

A character’s appearance in one study doesn’t guarantee they’ll feature in the next. GLAAD reports that 153 streaming characters, or 41 per cent of the total, would not return because their series ended or were cancelled, their characters left the programme, or they appeared in limited series.

That makes renewals more than a scheduling detail. The Associated Press also highlights how cancellations and endings can shrink future representation counts, even when a programme has already made an impact.

The Hunting Wives offers one example

Netflix’s The Hunting Wives is one of the shows highlighted in the supplied findings for its intense romance between two women. Netflix’s official media page describes a suspenseful story involving obsession, seduction and murder, and confirms that the series has been renewed for a second season.

That renewal offers a reason to keep watching how its story develops, though one series can’t stand in for the whole picture. And while official programme pages can verify a show’s synopsis or renewal, they don’t prove broader claims about audience response, awards or the effects of representation.

Read the platform breakdown with care

For readers comparing streaming services, the most useful first step is to check which report and research period a figure belongs to. Here, the supplied platform-by-platform numbers conflict with the totals in GLAAD’s accessible report, while both sources describe a study with specific rules about what counts.

So the larger point is not simply which service comes first. The report also shows why continuity matters: characters can disappear from future counts when a series ends, even as new shows arrive. For a clearer picture, read platform statistics alongside their dates, definitions and renewal context.

A useful reminder: representation counts matter most when they’re read with the method and the moment in view.

Source Reference Map

Story idea inspired by: [1]

Sources by paragraph: