#show: b99

[nick-nellson]

BROOKLYN NINE-NINE 5.10 Game Night

[twilightrefsource]

BROOKLYN NINE-NINE (2013-2021) 4x04 "The Night Shift"

[salemsvlog]

What the hell was that, the sequel

[tuserlivia]

BROOKLYN NINE-NINE | 1.07

[ancanthus]

if i had a nickel for every time the chaotic blonde-haired bisexual son with a bad father figure was inadvertently adopted by the straight-laced but kindhearted captain of their station i'd have two nickels which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice

[6ft-under-beacon-hills]

Scott: Motorcycles are death machines. I have three kids (Liam, Mason, and Corey). Scott tosses the keys to Stiles. Stiles: Are you saying my life matters less because I don't conform to society's heteronormative child centric ideals? Stiles tosses the keys back to Scott. Scott: Are you really playing the gay card right now? Stiles, looks at Derek, then back at Scott: Yas queen.

[possibly-evil]

me when the TV show is about a silly bisexual detective guy with unmedicated ADHD who solves crimes with his best friend (who has autism) and the smart girl who he eventually falls in love with

[jestierabbit]

Me— is literally vibrating about Epic Mickey

Also me— I have the funniest joke to draw

[mortem0]

something about a slowburn workplace tv show romance drives me crazy (in a good way)

[sosorrydad]

Terry loves him some Frasier

[genderfluidluna]

McGonagall: Potter, can I speak to you for a minute? In private.

James: Ooh, someone's in trouble~

James: It's me. I don't know why I did that.

[bugboybuck]

btw i do not believe for a second 911 would do main character death so my bets r on coma dream or faking death from the drug cartel/whatever. or killing gerrard lmao

[winderlylandchime]

forever our captain

[shyjusticewarrior]

Red Hood Incorrect Quotes Pt 20

Rose: How are you so out of breath? I did all the work.

Jason: It's from cheering you on.

Officer: You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you.

Jason: *spits* Use that against me.

Jason: Who are we killing? I won't do kids, that's a rule. But that rule is negotiable if the kid's a dick.

[rockspider556]

I’ve been thinking about this a lot more since the 8b of 911 premiered, but its honestly so frustrating how queerbaiting has conditioned us to believe that if two queer characters have a quiet, subtle moment, it doesn’t mean anything. Meanwhile, if it was a straight couple having the exact same moment, we’d be calling it canon without hesitation. We’ve been gaslit into thinking that subtlety in queer relationships isn’t enough, that it has to be loud and in your face, or it’s just not real. And it’s honestly so exhausting, because it means queer love stories get stripped of the complexity and depth that we get to see in straight couples. We can apply this to so many couples, but for the sake of argument let’s use Buck and Eddie from 9-1-1 and early Jake and Amy from Brooklyn Nine-Nine—both have these subtle moments that could’ve been treated as romantic, but one gets to be labeled as canon while the other is constantly written off as queerbaiting.

From Season 2 of 9-1-1, Buck and Eddie have this bond that’s built on shared trauma, vulnerability, and understanding. They have these quiet, emotionally charged moments—like when Eddie confesses his fears to Buck, or when Buck rushes to Eddie’s side in moments of crisis—that scream romantic tension but are always kind of brushed aside as “just friendship.” If it was a straight couple, we would’ve had no problem calling it chemistry. But because it’s two men, it’s somehow dismissed. These moments are treated like nothing even though they’ve got all the depth and emotional weight of any romantic interaction we’d get with a straight couple.

Now, let’s look at Peraltiago in the earlier seasons. Their connection, especially in Season 1 and 2, had that same kind of slow burn. They shared subtle moments, too—like when Jake has Amy’s back, or when Amy sees Jake in a new light—but no one ever questioned whether those moments were romantic. They were just treated as chemistry, and we accepted it as part of the slow build to their eventual relationship. But Buddie gets no such luxury. Those same subtle moments, those shared glances, those intense, vulnerable moments between Buck and Eddie are left in limbo, constantly ignored or written off as “just queerbaiting.”

This is the heart of the issue. Queer couples have to fight for every moment to be validated, while straight couples get the benefit of the doubt. These subtle exchanges—where love can be felt through small touches, shared looks, and unspoken words—are treated as legitimate romantic tension when they happen between straight characters, but are seen as “nothing” or “too subtle” when they happen between queer ones.

And that’s what’s so draining about this whole system. The constant pressure for overtness makes queer relationships feel shallow, forced, or like they came out of nowhere when they’re finally allowed to be canon. And worse, if a show is canceled or a relationship isn’t explored enough, that same ambiguity leaves us in a space where we’re denied even the potential for recognition. Meanwhile, straight couples with the same kind of tension—those little moments—are just automatically treated as “canon,” even when the relationship never fully develops.

We deserve more than just “okay, fine, you can be gay if you must, but don’t make it too real.” Let us have those subtle moments, let queer love stories be allowed to grow in their own way without the constant demand for them to be louder or more explicit. Not every romantic relationship needs to be announced with fireworks. Sometimes, love is just there,quietly, in the moments that we don’t need to explain. It’s frustrating to see subtle, emotional connections between queer characters treated as nothing, while the same moments between straight couples are celebrated as tension or chemistry.

Just let us have our quiet love, too.

[zuzu-romeave]

firmly believe that mythic quest is one of those shows that should have like 22 episodes per season