I'm about to start my first historical research paper. It's about diversity in media. How our attitudes about it have changed since the 1960s, or have they really changed and are we are just as upset today as we were 20 years ago? One of the things I'm going to defend is Apu from the Simpsons, and there is a really good comment I found on Reddit about it. I will pm the user to ask for permission, and my teacher asked me to find it again.
I know Reddit may sound unreasonable, but it's something you can easily prove or disprove as long as you know a little bit about the content in question.
Here's the link to the comment thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/cvo945/the_simpsons_creator_confirms_apu_wont_be_written/ey60be3?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
I'm thinking for just practical reasons citing a username named "Catshit-Dogfart" is a bad strategy for your first historical research paper. It is, as we say, an inauspicious start to historical citation. At best you are showing one random person's opinion (about whom you know nothing except their user name). It is neither authoritative nor representative, nor will it impress anyone with your research skills.
Separately, your approach — "I'm going to defend is Apu from the Simpsons" — is not a very historical one. You're writing a paper on, as you put it, how attitudes have changed. It is not your purpose to defend one character or another. It is to report on how these attitudes have changed, or not. Your job in writing a historical research paper is not to write an op-ed, but (ideally) an objective piece of scholarship.
Show me how the attitudes have changed. Show me what the attitudes were in the 1960s, then show me what they are now. Do the latter by looking at a variety of takes — those in favor, those against, those from people at the "top" (e.g., experts), polling data (if it exists) from people at the "bottom" (e.g., everyday people), things like that. If you want to interrogate the media depictions themselves (which is the essence of the comment you are quoting — someone saying, "the character is treated respectfully (in their view)," go ahead and do that, as a way of explicating the situation (e.g., comparing Apu to, say, Mickey Rooney's Mr. Yunioshi). But don't "take sides" — that is not what your are meant to be doing in a historical research paper. "Report" is a better approach. What are the people who defend Apu saying, what are the people who are outraged about the character saying, and how does that differ from the past?
Yes, Reddit can be a source for popular attitudes and whatnot — as can any website, to a degree. But it sounds like you are writing an opinion piece and citing a user because you agree with them. That is not the essence of a historical paper at all.
You theoretically could, providing the comment/thread was itself an essay citing sources, and there are ways to properly cite it in newer editions of the Turabian guide, for example. But usually academic institutions prefer news media articles, academic sources, and the like when it comes to online sources. Exceptions are often narrow and specific, but if applicable, it can be done.