#asexual robot stereotype

[rjalker]

This does absolutely nothing to refute the fact that Murderbot is only nonbinary and aroace because it has no genitals. Martha Wells has been doing this biologically essentialist crap long before she wrote The Murderbot Diaries.

There are no robots in this series that are not nonbinary, there are no human characters who are more than blatant tokenization that are nonbinary. There are no human characters even implied to be aroace.

This series is biologically essentially and people have the right to be disappointed and angry that the protagonist is literally only aroace and nonbinary because it literally has no genitals, and the author equates that to having no gender and sexuality.

Please do not lie to people about these books being more progressive about nonbinary and aspec people than they really are. It really, literally, is just the bigoted "nonbinary/aspec robot" stereotype again, with no redeeming qualities outside of "I like the characters so that means it's okay"

Martha Wells could have made it not just more biological essentialism by giving us named, important, reocurring characters who are also explicitly aroace and nonbinary, but she has not done that in over seven books now, because she is just another cis person who loves biological essentialism.

You can recommend these books to people but you cannot go around telling people it's not Actually the harmful bioessentialist stereotypes that it literally is. It is.

The only reason Murderbot or any of the robots in this series are nonbinary or aroce is because they don't have genitals and that makes Martha Wells think they can't have genders or sexualities either.

This is a *long established* pattern in her writing. She is a biological essentialist and telling people that the series ISN'T just the shallow harmful stereotypes will accomplish nothing except making people feel betrayed and hurt that you lied to them.

Do you know how many people have been driven in digust out of this fandom forever because of posts like this lying to them and telling them this series is more than the stereotypes that it has no intentions of ever fighting back against /because the author agrees with them?/

#it is not aro/ace and autistic bc it is a robot!#it is a robot that also happens to be aro/ace and autistic!!

I'm sorry but you are literally incorrect. Murderbot literally only is nonbinary and aroace because it has no genitals. That is the only reason Martha Wells wrote it this way, because that is the only way she can imagine an aroace or nonbinary character.

If this series were more than harmful shallow stereotypes, then half the Preservation Aux team would also be nonbinary and aroace despite having the genitals that Martha Wells thinks means Murderbot and any of the actual robot characters can't have sexuality or gender.

And yes, she has indeed confirmed that Murderbot is a cyborg, not an anthroid. That does not make the bioessentialism any better or less harmful.

broke: oh yay another asexual/aromantic and autistic character is a literal robot 🫩🫩🫩

woke: murderbot is a construct, part human part machine, grappling with what it means to be a person, knowing that much of it in part is the same as the humans around it (organic) and yet owing to the other different parts it was born with is unable to connect/understand so many things about humans, does it have the capacity for this and if so does it even want to be like the humans (a thinly veiled metaphor for neurodivergence and aro/aspec)?

[lolo3h]

Happy release day for Episode Aigis! I threw together a quick asexual icon for Metis and Aigis, since I do headcannon them as asexual (y'know, because they're robots)

[rjalker]

If you lie to people about how The Murderbot Diaries "isn't" literally just the harmful, biologically essentialist nonbinary/aspec robot stereotype, you are literally going to accomplish nothing except making people hate you and this series because you've now lied to people about it being more progressive than it truly is, so when they spend money to read these books you've promised them actually care about nonbinary and aspec people beyond harmful, bioessentialist stereotypes, they're going to have to find out the hard way that Martha Wells does not in fact, have a single human aroace character or even aspec character of any type in this series of more than 7 books now.

They're going to find out the hard way that the only human nonbinary characters are literal tokens who are on screen for about 2 mintues before being shoved out of the story again, never to be seen again. Long enough to get people like you to lie and claim the series cares about nonbinary people who are not bioessentialist stereotypes, but not long enough to actually commit to doing so.

Stop telling people that The Murderbot Diaries' representation of nonbinary and aroace people is more than just harmful, tired, bioessentialist stereotypes. You are fucking lying, and you are only going to make people hate you and this series because now you've fucking betrayed them and lied to get them to read something that is exactly what they didn't want to see: More shitty old bioessentialist stereotypes that you pretend are okay this time because you like the character and don't give a fuck that there is LITERALLY NOTHING in more than seven whole books now to make the stereotypes anything more than shallow, cis-minded biological essentialism.

Murderbot and every other actual robot in this series is nonbinary and aroace because they don't have genitals. Because Martha Wells is many things, including an absolute worshipper of biological essentialism.

Stop fucking lying to people and pretending these books are more progressive or ""nuanced"" in their representation of nonbinary and aroace people than they actually are.

Just because you like Murderbot does not mean it is not literally the walking nonbinary / aroace robot stereotype.

(And no, just because Martha Wells is so incompetant that Murderbot is actually a cyborg but she keeps acting like it's a robot because she does not know or care about the differences between them despite bragging that she's been reading scifi since the 70s does not make this any better)

[greetings-inferiors]

This episode on “Randy tries not to headcanon his favourite characters as his own orientation”:

Failure.

[atomatowriter]

Trying to explain to my quip why I want garlic knots as an end of NaNoWriMo reward instead of a cake or something: Asexuals have very few weird queer stereotypes, and this one is 200% true of me. I must embrace it.

[genderkoolaid]

maybe my least favorite anti-autistic stereotype is the trope that autistic people are ultra-rational and thus chock full of bigotry. like house m.d does this*, bones does this, i'm pretty sure the good doctor also did this with their trans episode. allistic showrunners looovee writing an autistic character who says blatantly racist, sexist, ableist, etc. things & justifies it by saying that autistics are simply too Rational and Incapable Of Understanding Emotion to pretend that our current social hierarchies aren't natural!

it sucks for one because it promotes the stereotype that all autistics are hypoempathetic, AND that being hypoempathetic means that you uncritically believe bigotry. but it ALSO sucks because it also promotes the idea that bigotry is driven by rationality and being anti-bigotry is driven by irrational emotions. and that the fight for social justice is really about making people set aside their rational bigoted beliefs because its mean. rather than making arguments based on the actual material evidence of oppression, and how the logic of oppression is deeply flawed and often extremely contradictory because it's only goal is maintaining power. and how that is in fact morally wrong.

my examples are mostly TV but i was thinking about this while rewatching munecat's video debunking evopsych (around 2:47:06). in which an evopsych guy is justifying a misogynistic paper arguing that women are less inclined towards STEM because Evolution, by saying that the author is "Aspy" and thus ~too rational to tone himself down for The Woke~. It's such bullshit and it hides behind aspie supremacy and fantastical ideas of autistic people as robots instead of human beings filled with biases and fallacies and yes, EMOTIONS, in order to push the narrative that bigotry is rational and the left is motivated by our squishy soft womanly irrational empathy rather than the fact that systemic racism objectively exists and misogyny is a self-contradictory mess.

also it's just a way of avoiding the reality of their own bigotry. if misogyny isn't scientifically valid, then that means they must choose to hold misogynistic beliefs, rather then those beliefs being natural. which means they have to actually grapple with the question of whether or not it is moral to maintain a misogynistic system rather than deconstructing it and creating a more equal society. if misogyny is just Nature and Facts and Logic then they can pretend that it's all out of their hands! they want to side-step the question of whether or not its right by arguing making an appeal to evolution as some divine ruler which will destroy our society if we ever deviate from 1950s US social hierarchies.

*to give this show credit, it has other reasons why house is Like That, and he also has plenty of moments where he criticizes the status quo and/or the audience is meant to disagree with his behavior/views. but they still do engage in "house is bigoted and his bigotry is justified by the story" such as in the infamous asexuality episode. but the writers also refused to make him canonically autistic even when they wrote him Like That so who gives a fuck

[leikeliscomet]

Sex repulsed, averse and indifferent asexuals are not harming you just for existing. Sex repulsed, averse and indifferent asexuals are not erasing you just for existing. Sex repulsed, averse and indifferent asexuals aren't stealing your representation just for existing. Sex repulsed, averse and indifferent asexuals are not puritans just for existing. Sex repulsed, averse and indifferent asexuals having the rights to not have sex, asserting indefinite refusal to sex, not having children, relationships and having full bodily doesn't have any negative impact on you.

I will always support sex favourable asexuals. I will always support asexuals right to wear what we want, asexual biological parenthood, asexuals in sex work and asexuals that enjoy sexual activities. To paraphrase Sherronda J Brown, I will always support every queer person's right to be a sexual being. But what I'll never support is compulsory sexuality. To paraphrase the rest of the quote, there must always, always, ALWAYS be the option to say no and the right to affirm that no. I'm noticing pushback from some, not all and i have to stress it's not everyone, sex favourable asexuals for simply asserting that no. This is compulsory sexuality. There's literally no other reason why another asexual in your community not having sex or not wanting to and asserting this makes you so upset. The idea it's sex favourable erasure or worse, puritanism for sex repulsed, averse and indifferent asexuals to state our unconditional right to exist with bodily autonomy including *yours* is compulsory sexuality. And this community isn't going anywhere till this shit is unpacked.

Im not gonna get into how and why I got into the ace community and why i care so much today but there's parts of sex favourable asexuality that I can't acess and parts of sex indifferent and sometimes repulsed asexuality that I need. And when you come to my page to decentre me in my own experience you are adding to the long list of shit in society that already makes sexuality difficult for aces like me.

When you assert that your participation in (heterosexual) sex makes you more normal, valuable or human than my ace experience and that that need to centre that participation you are fundamentally no different to every lesbophobe I've ever met, every Catholic puritan that's fantasised over my reproductive potential & every non ace cishet person that stigmatised my lack of sexual attraction to men.

When you treat me existing as a Black asexual as somehow regressive to your idea of sex positivity, especially as a white or non Black sex favourable ace, and have the need or frankly audacity to 'remind' me about having sex you are no different to every anti black racist ive ever known who claims Black girls are fast, thats shamed the Black girls of my community for having the inappropriate behaviour of wearing clothes on bodies they think aren't suitable and every non ace cishet person that's sexualised me since day.

And when you assert that sex repulsed, averse and indifferent asexuals, heavy on the repulsed, are bad representation, stereotypes, children, emotionless, robotic and sanitised you are fundamentally the same as those puritans you claim we are.

Stepping on the backs of the stereotypes, the childish, the frigid, the prudes, the sexless, the hags, the spinsters and the virgins you hate won't ever make you tall enough to reach the validation you think compulsory sexuality will offer you.

As long you as you have a knee jerk reaction to any repulsion, aversion or indifference alongside asexuality or simple terms, that asexuals being repulsed, indifferent or averse to sex is wrong, are the exact same as the 'allosexuals' you claim to hate on a regular basis.

It worries and pisses me off that i even have to say this but people are putting words in my mouth. Ace community, I mean this in the most direct way possible: Get your fucking shit together.

Merry Christmas.

[rjtbot]

Shoutout to stereotypical/controversial/weird a-specs

Shoutout to a-specs who are a-spec due to traumatic incidents

Shoutout to loveless, averse, agamous, and otherwise "forever alone" a-specs

Shoutout to prudish, repressed, and/or virgin asexuals

Shoutout to innocent a-specs who want to be infantilised or not included in "mature" conversations

Shoutout to a-specs who are waiting for the right person, circumstances, or whatever else

Shoutout to a-specs who choose to be a-spec because "people aren't attracted to me" or feelings of insecurity in your appearance

Shoutout to immature a-specs who may not be/feel "mature enough" for a relationship

Shoutout to robot, alien, and other non-human a-specs

Shoutout to asexuals who just "haven't had good sex yet"

Shoutout to asexuals who are asexual due to sexual trauma

Shoutout to aemotionals who are aemotional due to emotional/mental trauma

Shoutout to asensuals who are touch averse autistics

Shoutout to aromantics who are aromantic due to sexual and/or emotional trauma

Shoutout to emotionless a-specs

Shoutout to a-specs who feel like a relationship could "fix"/change their a-spec identity

Shoutout to asexual who do have a medical issue/reason for being asexual

Shoutout to asexuals who have a low libido

Shoutout to late bloomer asexuals

Shoutout to a-specs who believe/feel like their identity is "just a phase"

Shoutout to a-specs who are a-spec due to mental illness(es)

Shoutout to a-specs who don't experience oppression or discrimination (good for you)

Shoutout to evil aemotionals

Shoutout to asexuals who are/feel incapable of sexual interaction

Shoutout to a-specs who are only a-spec because they're shy

Shoutout to a-specs who chose to be a-spec

Shoutout to mentally ill a-specs

Shoutout to asexuals who don't know if they're really asexual due to the lack of sexual interactions

Shoutout to erotophobic asexuals

Shoutout to a-specs who don't feel like their identity makes them apart of the LGBTQ+

Shoutout to asexuals who don't/can't masturbate

Shoutout to a-specs who feel like they're "missing out" due to their lack of attraction

Shoutout to asexuals who are plants

[doodler16]

May I ask *how* Mammon from Helluva Boss is bad asexual representation?

I'm ace myself, & have a video script about asexuality I hope to one day be able to produce once I get some recording & editing equipment/software, & analyzed Mammon's appearances so far (so just S2) for it, & I came to the conclusion that he's not as bad as most people say he is when it comes to asexual representation. His ace portrayal is DEFINITELY FLAWED, but not to the degree I think most people make it out to be. To summarize...

1.) He actually has some moments in his debut episode that subtly imply he's ace (while still staying in character with him being a jerk), they're easy to miss to the point one might be able to write them off as plausible unrelated coincidences though; these moments including his deflection about making robots of whoever wins his clown pageant being seen as "weird" at the beginning of the episode, calling his customers "sick degenerate adults" during the Robo Fizz ad, & possibly him not quite understanding the implications when he tells Fizz during the fan-meet, "The better the impression, the more they’ll want a piece of you to take home & fuck! Don’t you want that, Fizzie? To be fucked?!"

2.) When he says in Mastermind, “Oh shut up, you two. We all know you enjoy slumming it with the lower class plebs. Unlike the rest of us, heh. Right Levy?” definitely read as ace to me the first viewing alone.

Most of his moments DEFINITELY needed another pass, especially by an experienced & asexual writer since the stuff he says to Fizz during the fan-meet doesn't read as ace at all, the way he doesn't say anything to Beelzebub about him being ace when she says stuff that shows she either doesn't understand asexuality or just doesn't care to learn anything about him in Mastermind in favor of unnatural dialogue between the two mindlessly insulting each other, & Mammon's dialogue & body language/expressions when he flirts with Leviathan don't read as asexual in the slightest, at least to me.

So what I'd like to know, if possible, is what evidence is there that he's as bad of asexual representation as so many folks seem to imply? The way everyone talks about him (without explaining their reasoning alongside the facts), makes it sound like he's clearly harmful representation with loads of misinformation, but I couldn't find any evidence of something like that when I wrote that part of my script. If there's something really bad about him I've missed, I'd love to add it to my script!

I understand Medrano's personal opinions of asexuality over the years is full of red flags & misinformation (that hopefully she'll finally bury with her potentially being on the ace-spectrum & actively trying to learn more about it), but just looking at Mammon's portrayal alone, is there something I'm missing? I'm approaching this as someone who just wants to learn, so if you can teach me something here & don't mind taking the time to do so, please do!

My main beef with Mammon and his asexuality representation is that it feels like stereotype of what some think asexual people are. Portrayed as selfish jerks who don’t care about others but themselves, inflated ego, etc. It also doesn’t help that Mammon is portrayed as this greedy, disgusting pig (metaphorically and literally) who uses others when it benefits him. I get it, he’s the sin of greed but with the asexual representation added on top of that, it is not a good look but hopefully Vivziepop does a better job handling it when season 3 and 4 comes.

[roboj0e]

I don't think ppl understand Viktors character if they think Viktor being asexual is bad representation...him being a "robot" doesn't make him unfeeling. He's the most empathetic and loving character in the show his love for those in need drive him to do what he does in the show.

I know the writer who said that he was ace wasnt doing it bc he cares about the community it was more for angry homophobe reasons and his definition of asexual is very stereotypical and limited but Viktor is accidently very great ace rep. Hes passionate but he loves deeply. He has a best friend he loves and cares for. He cared about sky and her passing even tho he didn't return her romantic feelings. Viktor isn't an unfeeling robot y'all. Him being a robot doesn't make him unfeeling. He feels soo soooo much. All his actions are bc he cares so fucking much. How can y'all say this dumb shit. Y'all aren't thinking straight y'all want to push back on a homophobic writer without actually examining Viktors character correctly.

I don't head canon Viktor as asexual and I'm of the mind even as a queer person u can do WHATEVER u want with fictional characters even if it means playing with their canon sexuality (queer or not) so even if he was canon asexual I'd do whatever I wanted with him but in the context of the show Viktor is very asexual in his presentation. But he's not unfeeling. He's not uncaring. He's lonely sure. And is married to his love of science but a queer character being lonely isn't bad representation. He's misunderstood and ostracized. Viktor is most definitely asexual. And great representation.

But that writer sucks fuck him.

Also if any asexual folks have any other opinion u want to share pls do but I think some ppl are entirely too focused on him being a robot. But even as a robot he feels. His robot transformation wasnt even his fault. Even tho he wanted to cute his disease he was ready to die from it bc his actions killed someone he cared for. How are y'all mistepresentating him so bad. And I mean the arcane version not any earlier LoL version that exists. I mean what is presented to us in arcane is great representation.

And literally only AFTER he's killed by said best friend does he suddenly go "man emotions kinda suck y'all". Like...what are y'all even saying frl?

[adobe-outdesign]

I lowkey dislike the aroace Cyrus headcanon as an ace myself bc it falls into the "Unnatractive hateful evil person isn't shippable with anyone- ahem, doesn't deserve love- ahem, I mean they're Aroace" stereotype

But on the other hand, I'm all onboard for autistic Cyrus as an autistic person??? Like "Hell yeah I'm sick of neurotypicals thinking we're all soft and baby, be evil"

Very confusing

I don't think very many people see Cyrus as unattractive or unshippable. However, I'm not big on the aroace headcanon just because it seems to equate asexuals/aromantics as being unemotional or robotic, which isn't true at all (and not even really true of Cyrus).

[dozzerxb]

im just ranting about the fandoms take on detey and how it has gotten to a point where its kind of sexist, so ignore this if u want (not hating on the ship, I love those two like I love my own mother)

I've seen that most of the new fandom has taken some stereotypical roles when shipping dogman and petey, making dogman this supper athletic, big and protective guy who is also freaky for some reason, and petey is a small petite man who is also very feminine and a malewife. tbh at first I didn't have an issue, but after some time I realized they're mostly reducing the characters to just that, forgetting their personalities on the comics AND movie

like yes, the movie makes dogman and petey look different from their original media which is the comics, making dogman look more freaky and petey more sassy, but the fact that the fandom is forgetting that they're both super smart and have their own issues going on makes me sad tbh

I know this kind of things will always be part of a fandom, but I just wish it wasn't so misogynistic sometimes. why does the skinny guy always have to be feminine guy? why can't dogman wear dresses and cute pink stuff? why the slightly bigger guy always have to be masculine and huge and not smart? isnt that dogman's whole thing? being super smart and having knight's body as a plus, making him the best cop? why does petey get reduced to be a sexy malewife? isn't he an inventor who likes to build robots for fun with his son? not that he can't be that way, but I find it kind of weird that it always has to be like that. plus the nsfw content is not making them any favors

it's like people refuse it to do it or SEE IT any other way. I understand headcanons, I believe petey is kind of feminine myself, but take it to the extreme where petey is nothing more than just an accessory to dogman instead of the genius he is? it's weird for me, sorry. and yes I've seen people portray him like that sadly

I'd like to see more media where petey is taken as the amazing inventor he is, where dogman also wears dresses and it's not bothered by being seen like that, where they both act like grown ups with a son instead of sex machines, where petey is taken seriously and not as a joke, where dogman is smart as he is in the movie and books and not some stupid guy without a clue of anything, where petey doesn't have to get PREGNANT all the time and he can just be himself (seriously, they have a clone machine after all. why does petey always have to be the one getting pregnant????), where dogman is not portrayed as a cheater because people like that for some reason, and if the fandom really likes that trope, then make petey a cheater too! equality is key!

maybe I'm looking too much into it, but it's kind of like the fandom is trying to make dogman into a manly man and make petey into a feminine woman in a SUPER misogynistic way, with the excuse that they're just gay so it's okay. gay people are more than just that, they're more than super feminine guys and clueless bears, it's basically an spectrum and taking those two as the only way a gay person can be portrayed it's awfully hurtful, because you're just making them that, a stereotype. it's the discussion of "who is the man in the relationship" all over again. there doesn't need to be a man! or maybe there can be two men who work equally!

maybe I'm just overreacting, maybe I'm just too asexual or maybe I'm just too woke, who knows, but I just needed to get this off my chest

if you read this far, thank you! I'd like to hear other opinions too so, maybe leave yours under this! I'll be glad to read it :)

[givemebishies]

It’s a harmful stereotype in media that asexual people are all cold emotionless robots/aliens

Spock: Sexual attraction is a primitive and illogical human instinct

God he’s so right

[nylloth]

Not so happy about Viktor's asexuality. I always knew he was a man of science and not really interested in relationships, you don't need special proof for that, it's evident in the first season. It's just not something he cares about, but that doesn't mean he's giving it up completely either.

What's annoying to me is that you create a male character of non-masculine appearance, with a disability, and start adding things like asexuality and who the hell knows what else they're announcing for him in the future. It actually reinforces stereotypes that these types of men have no attraction or love. That men who don't throw themselves at women/men like dog, who are polite, gentle, considerate, have a certain body type, and so on, are always FEATURED in some way and can't be…. just a man, you know. I'd be pleasantly surprised if they did that with a character like Vander or Jayce. Why? Because they look stereotypically masculine. Such a trait could be unexpected and enjoyable. For Viktor, it's just “well, it's to be expected, he's an disabled stick scientist”.

His later, robotic version, moreover, attributes this to his physical condition rather than personal preference. A robot who has no feelings or emotions is obviously not interested in relationships of any kind. He's more like a savior angel, remembering that they made him extremely religious.

[mattdevil]

Saw this discussion in the jayvik tag and wanted to wade in:

I think the larger problem with the "Viktor is ace!" "Ace people can still like sex/romance!" discourse is that the Viktor-being-ace bit hit a lot of people, myself included, as a kneejerk reaction from CL to try and kibosh any and all mention of there being ~something more~ between the two. It was treated as a "gotcha" in a way that implies CL doesn't have a good understanding of aspec identities, and I think a lot of people had very strong reactions to that; so in an attempt to counter what feels like bad faith stereotyping, the pendulum gets swung too far back the other direction with the unfortunate side effect of making it seem like everyone participating believes that ALL aspec folks can, or even should, also participate in sexual or romantic relationships. I think if he'd said "hey it's cool you see it that way, our intent was to have V be aroace with no interest in sexual or romantic relationships because that is criminally underrepresented in media" (which is true), there would have been a very different reaction. There were two missing elements: an expression or acknowledgement of deeper understanding of aspec identities, and a willingness to accept that creative intent doesn't somehow trump or disenfranchise how your audience receives it. He missed on both, so now we are here.

Yeah you're totally right.

I agree with the valid criticisms of what Linke did. I don't think he actually knows the difference between asexual and aromantic. Based on what he said, he just asked around about which orientation was underrepresented anyways and he seem to have gone into this with minimal research, which made this maybe well intentioned attempt at ace representation turn into a shitshow. Because I agree with him in viewing Jayvik as a platonic ship gives the dynamic a fresh spin. I believe he actually intended to make Viktor aroace, but it was kind of a shitty move to reveal this as a way of bashing all the other interpretations, which made a lot of people perceive it as homophobic as this was done in response to shippers.

People are also upset with the stereotypical implications Viktor being ace implies, such as making disabled characters ace which makes them seem devoid of sexuality.

That being said, I think a lot of people have lost the plot too because Linke is now being accused with being ableist, homophobic and aphobic a lot more than what's proportional. I've seen people say he only made Viktor asexual because he is disabled and "robotic", because he saw Viktor as undesirable and quite inhuman. These are bullshit takes and people are pulling them out of nowhere imo. I have never seen anything suggesting Linke viewing Viktor's disability as something negative. Calling him a robot is outright wrong too because he got merged with the arcane, he didn't robotise himself like in the games. So none of these really contribute to Viktor's "negative" representation. Also, Linke could very well be homophobic but it kinda doesn't seem quite anormal for creators to talk about the intended details in the show after the show is over, so I don't think he did that reveal at a very odd point. Which now got me wondering aside from giving the homophobic fans the excuse to bash Jayvik shippers, whether we jumped the gun on calling him homophobic too.

I also agree with how the reactions would be a lot better if Linke handled the creative intent speech a lot better, but I'm not sure if it still would've made stop everyone from saying "hey even if he is asexual he can still have sex with Jayce" because this is just what shipping culture is like. As I've talked about it on the previous ask, people LOVE shipping, and they make aspec characters a part of this phenomenon regardless of how their sexual or romantic desires are presented in the source material.

Overall I agree with what you're saying though. Thank you for your insight.

[pigfartsviatardis]

Does anyone else think that if Linke was so committed to ace rep in arcane - as he claims was his intention with Viktor - then wouldn’t Jayce have been a more interesting option??

I mean it’s in the name… jACE ba dum tshh 👉👉 no but seriously, linke said something about wanting to do an ace character who isn’t the usual emotionless stereotype. And I would absolutely agree that Viktor isn’t emotionless, but tbh he also doesn’t do much to push the boundaries of ace stereotypes. After the ace!viktor Thing came to light, I spoke to an aroace friend who watches arcane cause I was interested to know if Viktor gave off any vibes she’d picked up. She said she couldn’t think of anything in the storytelling that might have been trying to portray Viktor as ace, and then she said it was weird of linke to go ‘hmm I want to do an Asexual Character (and I definitely know what that word means), but I don’t want to fall into ace character stereotypes… so I’ll make it the disabled character who becomes a robot’.

Like. I have no problem with ace!viktor, but she makes a good point 😅 plus, viktor is kind of exactly what I associate the most with ace character stereotypes: he’s obsessively fixated on his one passion (science) and has very little social life or family ties.

However, Jayce actually would be kinda a groundbreaking choice for ace-spec rep. He’s not only emotional, he’s completely guided by emotion. He’s friendly and exuberant. He’s conventionally sexually attractive and successful. He’s got charisma and popularity. He’s got loving relationships with both bio family and found family. He’s got the hottest woman in the show flirting with him.

This brings me to my next point: Jayce being ace-spec would, I believe, fit well with what we know and see of him. I mean… this man had THEE Mel Medarda giving him flirty eyes for SIX YEARS, yet apparently nothing happened between them that whole time. It’s not like he’s not into women, or not into her specifically. He already seems into her BEFORE the timeskip. Everyone always talks about viktor’s salty jealous lil face in this moment (just aroace platonic bro things):

But the thing he’s reacting TO is Jayce’s heart eyes as he watches Mel walk away (fair Jayce, me too). Yet even then, it took poor Mel six goddamn years of touching his shoulder fifteen times a minute and sashaying around temptingly and telling him how special and cool he is… and EVEN THEN he was still so clueless he seemed surprised when she kissed him. I would say ‘classic lesbian’ but sadly he’s not a lesbian. However… if he were ace-spec then maybe flirting and suggestiveness and Vibes just wouldn’t be on his radar??

And it would have been amazing to have a scene where Mel is like ‘finally, I’ve been dropping hints that I’m into you for years’ and Jayce goes ‘you have???? Tbh none of that stuff ever makes any sense to me, which is why I don’t date or really ever sleep with people, but I think you’re amazing so I’m very glad this is happening’ but like a better written version by a professional screenwriter. Yknow, like ACTUAL ONSCREEN REP instead of just slapping a random label on a character after the show has aired.

Should clarify that I don’t even particularly headcanon Jayce as ace-spec, I just think it would actually fit and would be cool rep. I kinda sometimes headcanon Viktor as demi but not because of what linke said or anything in the show really, I just vibe with it for him. I mean no disrespect to the canonicity of ace!Viktor and I understand why people might be defensive of that with so little ace rep out there. I just think it was handled poorly and reads as an odd choice made for odd reasons.