realistically giving kev and v a guatemalan foster kid and having them be more or less good to him and walk away with him saying they're not "the bad ones" was probably an attempt to walk back the fact that "being extremely anti-immigrant" was a character trait unintentionally conferred onto both of these characters, particularly with how the throuple plot ended. plus the fact that shameless seemed to decide kev and v should be "nice" at some point (the idea v "should" be genuinely progressive -insofar as the writers can express what being progressive is, the idea that kevin should be too socially inept to notice racism?) but it's indirectly a very effective way to frame them as like. exactly the sort of principled in theory bigoted in practice behavior you get from american liberals
because it's so easy to support a nice soft spoken (though i mean, limited english can make anybody seem soft spoken.*) teenager - particularly who sings the fucking american national anthem, which im sure to nationalists who like to play at opposing oppression seems super uplifting** & in fact, i think kev and v's attitude towards trying to find santiago's family was pretty good.
when contrasted with how kevin treats mexican laborers in s4 (hearing mickey complain about the exploitation of immigrant labor, going "that's a fucking fantastic idea" and offering these men not even PPE to remove asbestos), and how quickly kevin and veronica are willing to turn to immigration enforcement (s8 aired in 2017, when liberals felt allowed to critique american border policy because trump was president, so we all knew damn well about how rampant abuse of migrants is) to resolve or avenge a personal problem - the same thing that sammi is rightfully hated for at the end of s5 - we get this picture that advocating for a nice victim - who plays sportball, and is just a kid, and hasn't "done" anything - is more about feeding kev and v's egos as nice people, moreso than actually having principles when it comes to separating families at (any) border
i'll say i think v's plotline about being somewhat politically aware is slightly better than kevin's - if for nothing else than that i think it's a supported read that people were by and large being assholes to her for being in an interracial relationship, and to some extent you could claim the narrative is more sympathetic to her than to people who give her a hard time
kevin, though, also has a glaring homophobia problem. it's never made sense to me how much of a reputation people seem willing to confer onto him for being a super-ally or something. i joke that ellen degeneres being brought up when you come out is worst case scenario, but tbh! the fact that mickey felt relief at being mocked at instead of physically assaulted is more of a reflection on how much fear he had, rather than of how good kevin was at supporting him - though i mean, had kevin tried some peace and love bullshit, for sure, mickey would've reacted poorly. still, "haha everyone could tell, and being gay is just about sex anyway" is a homophobic response
kevin still has this attitude where he does THINK he's super pro-gay. and for sure, comparatively, he does a lot better than other characters. it was a relief as a viewer, feeling sort of mad and conflicted that gentrifiers, who i hate, were being homophobically harrassed, which i hate, had kevin come up to say "can we do this without the gay-bashing" but that's still kevin taking the opportunity to be supportive when there are no very personal conflicts or influences on his life.
kevin's homophobia seems magnified, also, by misogyny. he has no problem fetishizing svetlana and v's relationship when they seem shallow, or he can't wrap his head around v being seriously interested in svetlana outside of sex - he thinks it's cool and hot to have "lesbians" [sic] at home. his tone changes, IMO, when he starts to realize that v has real feelings for svetlana. because he can't treat svetlana, and her relationship to v, as a sexy commodity anymore. suddenly he, who doesn't actually understand polyamory, is forced to see svetlana as a threat*** and no longer happily accepts that his wife has a wife.
as a side note, i think every concern about mickey's treatment of svetlana/her coworkers in s4 could more accurately be expressed about kevin, who really didn't take these people seriously outside of a source of cashflow. as much as mickey was motivated by money, he really was grossed out by how they were treated, and has actual (usually hostile, because he's an abrasive jackass, but on-the-level) interactions with these women. tbf, at points kevin's attitude almost includes mickey - see his approval of mickey's "if they complain we beat the shit out of them" not leading him to hesitate when it comes to robbing mickey later. not entirely, but you could claim mickey was valued as a source of ideas, and a body to perform violence. kevin's sort of soft and emotional nature (+misogyny) cause him to see mickey also as a peer through being around him a lot, though, and he never spends time with any of mickey and svetlana's "kelly girls"
v's role in kevin's throuple homophobia/misogyny/xenophobia is a little weird - the point could be made about internalized misogyny influencing whose personhood and feelings she values more? or, more forgivingly, she just knew kevin longer. v has also been sort of weird about kevin before - being depressed makes random shit devastating, but the "that was my hair" comment is still a very presumptuous way to talk about someone else's body
*a point here is about how more nominally accepting people are of those who can't express their own position clearly - WRT: language proficiency, when someone speaks english very well like svetlana, you can no longer project onto her the idea of someone being "nice" or even just a misunderstanding if she's dismissive or calls you a dumb fuck. nobody likes it when someone they're advocating for has criticisms for them, and taking issue with tone is a favorite dodge. it's all fun and games until you have to listen to the perspective of who you're advocating for. this is why "the unborn" are a favorite cause of feel-good conservatives. they'll never contradict you!
**btw, i've read quite a bit of history on immigrant groups playing up US patriotism in response to facing bigotry (particularly 2nd+ gen mexican/central americans in the 1940s - & latinos still make a huge proportion of the US military) in the idea that if you look patriotic/"real" american that'll save you from the specific xenophobia of being treated as enemy by virtue of foreignness. this is largely a lie, racism and xenophobia don't operate on logic, but does create a population that's willing to work US imperialism's dirtier and more painful jobs for the faint promise of being respected. there IS an extent to which veteran status does confer some idea of "americanism" that promotes people internally - god, how fucking many politicians promote themselves as veterans?
***there's a lot to be said here about how even very very feminine gay/bi women are treated as "like men" or predatory for stepping into a man's "territory" - being interested in women, fulfilling the emotional needs of other women. svetlana's assertiveness is again demonized in a new context. this time her as a gay woman taking a "man's role" (loving a woman) rather than as a closeted "homophobic" woman terrorizing mickey (for her own reasons, but still). secondary aside, "like men" is not actually Like Men - gay women accused of being a dangerous man-like presence never receive any actual privilege for it. it's similar to how transmisogyny frames trans women as dangerous for being "like men" in situations where no one actually seen as a man would be socially punished