#I'm a queer woman in a straight-passing relationship with a queer man so yeah

[mermaidsirennikita]

besides everything you have brilliantly pointed out, there are also the underlying implications of fran theoretically not being attracted to john but having sex with him. i know they could potentially have a sexless marriage and skip the miscarriage, focusing the future struggle on the grief and guilt of moving on with someone new but... if fran doesn't really love John that would mostly be a michaela pov and we know the show isn't good at exploring the love interests (of color) trauma and motivations. also john has been presented as a sweet man that sees francesca, it would be highly unbelievable if he didn't realize she wasn't into the sex. and it seems ooc for him to keep going with it too even if at the time it happened. so if they do follow the miscarriage/pregnancy route... that could be problematic. not that they care considering what daphne did to simon but still.

First off, thank you!

Second, I've been thinking about my thoughts on this (lol thinking about my thoughts) because I want to be very careful about expressing my opinion on this subject. I know it's very sensitive and I get that, and I don't want anyone to feel dismissed or unheard (and I don't want to at all validate people who are being so homophobic and vile about this).

But yes, I thought about this as well. It seems like we really don't know where Fran and John's relationship is at all at the end of the season, even though enough time has passed for them to forge some kind of physical relationship. And I just feel like... If John was a real character in the script, if his sweet and sensitive nature was honored, then I would IMAGINE that he'd notice something, unless Fran was really good at putting on a good face (and maybe she is).

When you're with someone you care about, though.... if they held off on intimacy, he'd notice that. If Fran didn't like it, I think he'd notice that, too? Which adds some messiness to tacking this on at the end of the season. This needed TIME. It adds to this idea, too, that John isn't a character, because like? He's gonna have feelings too? Not just Fran. There's more to this than FRAN'S feelings.

I would find it really sad if they did keep the miscarriage plot, tbh, if Fran truly isn't physically attracted to him. I don't want to think of her having to put up with or frankly be traumatized by that, and I don't want to think of John being framed as this source of trauma. Besides, that's Sir Philip's thing. And yeah, him being a Black man also MATTERS, and this is something (I say this as a white woman who doesn't identify as straight these days) I really dislike seeing white viewers just sort of dismiss. This is not just a queer love story. This is an interracial queer love story, and frankly, a love triangle that involves two people of color (who happen to be related... again.... And it is interesting how that's happening again, and it does kind of say something in that these show is like "two love interests of color? MUST BE FROM THE SAME FAMILY!". Like, yeah, Kate and Edwina and Michael and John are related in the books, but those aren't actual full-blown love triangles in the books).

I think I'm just so burned by the way s2 handled Edwina and Kate that the idea of them doing a GOOD job with Michaela, especially with her added layer of her being queer in the world the show constructed, is like... I'm skeptical. And maybe that's unfair. Maybe I shouldn't be skeptical. But in general, the Btons' love interests of color have really been notably sidelined in favor of their lovers' arcs, and it was bigger for Kate than it was for Simon. Hey, Simon got a backstory.... Even if his trauma was ultimately subsumed by Daphne's story after she assaulted him.

But hey, I'm happy to be proven wrong. I really hope I will be.

I'll also say, however--I just really think that people need to understand that we can support the gesture while critiquing the writing and the way it's coming together. There are a lot of people who simply hate that they aren't getting Michael, or that there is queerness on the show at all. A LOT. Some people, however, have valid critiques. Some of them are queer people; some of them are people of color; some are both. Critique isn't JUST coming from straight women who want to see Michael.

And I mean, I've already seen a historical romance author who does identify as bi on her Twitter profile and does write actively queer books get dogged out for critiquing it, so.

[jerzwriter]

You are so fucking disgusting Elsa. Using your bland ass straight white bitch MC to be the MC of the Month for Pride Month.

You’ve gone really low

Good morning, Nonny.

I'd like to say hope you're having a good day, but clearly, you're not.

I was 50/50 on putting this in my "delete because Nonny is a bitter troll who doesn't deserve the attention/exposure they desperately crave" file. But this anon goes beyond the usual "I'm a pathetic human who hates someone on the internet who has zero impact on my life so much because of (insert stupid/insane reason here), so I'm going to be a vile bully and send them anonymous hate because - IDK - I can't find a good therapist? I'm off my meds? I'm just a vile piece of shit?" See, I no longer waste my time or energy on those.

But I decided to answer this because a) you're wrong, and b) you're engaging in bi-erasure - something that happens in the fandom and in real life every day, and I'm not going to pass up a chance to educate your ignorance and address your bigotry.

Casey was picked at random - the same way all MCOTMs and WOTMs are. I grappled with the decision to highlight her bisexuality... because of people like you. In the end, I decided to be true to the character. I've been dealing with people like you my entire life - in my personal life - never mind fandom. So let's educate.

Bisexuality is real - people.

Your ignorance in understanding it doesn't make it any less real. I am proudly bi, but trust me, it feels like a pretty shitty thing to be at times. You're never queer enough for many in the queer community, but you're too queer for those who aren't. There is no real safe space outside of a precious few who get it. And I mean few.

Your straight friends talk shit about you "doing this" to be "cool/get attention" or whatever... and they're "relieved" when you're in a hetero-presenting relationship. Your queer friends are happiest when you're with a same-sex partner, and if you're not, they accuse you of lying about who you are or "hiding." It's awesome. You know, instead of just having friends that are fucking happy if you're happy. People CAN BE and ARE attracted to more than one gender and the feelings/love we have toward both are real, valid and do not have to be explained to anyone.

Anyone who follows my MC (and I don't believe Nonny has) knows that Casey has been presented as bisexual from the day I entered this fandom. If some choose to ignore that, that's on them, not me. The fact that she is half of a pairing that is hetero-presenting does not make her any less bisexual. How ignorant are you?

Her profile clearly states she's bi. I've written about her being an activist for LGBTQ rights and about her reluctance about coming out to her parents (because she doesn't believe she should have to "come out," why is straight the default?). I've introduced her ex-girlfriend, Jessica, in fics and text fics, and discussed Casey's identity at length in numerous asks over the years.

So, yes, her current partner is a man, and he ends up being the love of her life. GUESS WHAT! THAT HAPPENS TO BI PEOPLE! And, TRUST, we know the privilege that comes with being in a hetero-presenting relationship. I've never once had someone throw something at me or hurl slurs when I've held a male partner's hand in public, but I've had it happen when my partner is a woman. But no one bi is "suddenly straight" because of it! And asking us to parade as hetero just because we're with an opposite-sex partner is pushing us into a closet - and I'm sorry, but fuck you - because no one belongs there.

Last June, I deliberately avoided all pride-related events in the fandom (NOT in real life). I did so because I was coping with the guilt that is tantamount to being bisexual. The "Should I put it out there. I mean, there are others who are more queer, right? I have no right to do this? Their characters are more important than mine, right?" And yeah, I've felt that way in real life, too. THIS is what it's like being bi. I'm out for decades, I'm comfortable and proud of who I am, I counsel younger people in the community that they are valid - and I'm sitting here with tears in my eyes right now because with all of that, THIS SHIT STILL CREEPS IN - largely because of s-bags like this Nonny.

So you know what, I'm not grappling with it anymore. It's pride month, and in real life, I'm celebrating to the fucking max. And you know what - I'm doing it in the fandom too. Casey is going to be as out and fucking proud as I want her to be, and if it makes your ass uncomfortable, well, that's not my fucking problem.

Re-read your ask, Nonny. The only disgusting person in this exchange is you. Do fucking better.

[biracy]

abt your post abt bi women belonging in the wlw community just as much as lesbians : i was reading the replies and youre so right abt how ignorant people are abt what comphet really is. im a lesbian and like yea i think we would experience comphet in the most intense way since were not attracted to men in any level, but comphet isnt only abt that, its a symptom of the patriarchy forcing women to center men in their lives and hell even straight women experience comphet, let alone bi women. people just have thrown around the word comphet so much they dont even know the true meaning

I was actually gonna post abt this soon LMAO so yeah!! I think it's also a misunderstanding of what "heterosexuality" as a dominant social force is to say that lesbians who are not attracted to men can experience "comphet", but bisexual women who are attracted to men cannot experience it. "Heterosexuality" as it is defined by dominant social forces is not only "a relationship between a man and a woman" - it's almost always a relationship between a "masculine" man and a "feminine" woman, and quite often a relationship between a man and a woman that results in monogamous marriage and childbirth. When people write about comphet, they're not talking about how movies and TV and fairy tales and children's books and my parents and my teachers and my religion all came together and told me to want to fuck genderfucky bi guythings. There is a specific kind of man centered in the heterosexuality enforced onto women, and a specific kind of role that a woman is expected to take on in that heterosexuality. I think the idea that bi people (women especially) cannot experience "comphet" overlaps a lot with people who believe that all bisexual people have the capability to become "straight-passing" if they enter different-gender relationships, which is in and of itself based on, in my observances, the belief that "gay/lesbian culture" and "bisexual culture" are completely distinct and that bisexual people are in some way innately less capable of being gender-nonconforming (or as some Tumblr scholars will call it, "visibly queer"). Bisexual people often date each other, we're often trans and/or visibly gender-nonconforming, and that's not something that we can just turn off the minute we enter into a quote unquote "heterosexual relationship." I'm bisexual, I'm nonbinary and id as both a man and a woman (so I take part in all these "sapphic" conversations etc etc u know the drill), I'm weird and kinky and switchy, I'm polyamorous, right now I'm dating a cis butch bi girl and a trans + nonbinary pan guy. At this point in my life I have absolutely no interest in relationships with cishet men, I don't want to get monogamously married, I never want to have children. I have not performed heterosexuality any better than, idk, a "gold star lesbian" has, and I FEEL it, I'm given shit for it, every relative I have pressures me already about boyfriends and grandkids and whatever. I do think there are bisexual people sometimes who do conform more to Straight Society but a) I think there are an equal amount of gay guys and lesbians who conform to Straight Society tbqh and b) it doesn't cover the breadth of bisexual people who do exist and who do feel the pressure to conform to the mainstream, dominant social system of heterosexuality and who CANNOT conform to it any more than you, anon, probably can. So yeah TL;DR bi girls can definitely experience "comphet" lmao and people are probably gonna hate that I said that

[practically-an-x-man]

Queer oc asks! Rae and Robin because how could I not choose the X-Men ocs 🏳️‍🌈

3. How did your oc discover themself? Did something cause them to question, or did they always know?

7. Is there something that could cause your oc to question their identity? What?

- question for the writer

16. Did you ever change an oc's identity when they were already established? Why?

Thank you so much bestie!!

Pride Themed OC Ask Game

3. How did your oc discover themself? Did something cause them to question, or did they always know?

Rae: I wouldn't say she's had a full discovery or realization, she's just kind of aware that it's simmering in the back of her mind. She realized in her mid-teens that she would get the same crushes on boys as she did girls, and that it probably meant she was bi, though she never really acted on the crushes she had on women throughout her life.

Ironically, I feel like it's once she's comfortable with Warren that she's actually able to talk about those feelings and work through them a little more, since she feels safe talking to him (and was worried telling her sisters would mean rumors would get spread through her family, so she kept it to herself at first).

Robin: She realized it pretty late - she'd had crushes on both her male and female castmates in theatre for years, and she thought that was just what everyone experienced. Theatre kids are affectionate! She was used to greeting her friends with hugs and kisses, platonic cuddles in between shows, aggrandized compliments about how hot everyone looks in their costumes... she just thought it was part of theatre culture. Finally she remarked on it to one of her non-theatre friends, and she was like "Yeah... I don't find women attractive dude, I think you're just bi"

(For the record, they're both absolutely bi4bi relationships, even if they're not 100% aware of it at first)

7. Is there something that could cause your oc to question their identity? What?

Rae: No, because as I said before it's more of a background sort of awareness for her. She realized she was attracted to men and women, went "huh, I must be bi", and that was pretty much the end of that. She's pretty secure in herself.

Robin: Settling down with Peter has given her a few brief flashes of insecurity towards her bisexuality - it's a straight-passing relationship, she's marrying a man, and it's made her a little uncertain at times. But she's worked through it: she loves Peter to no end, she loves the family they have, but that doesn't mean she can't come home from the operahouse and say "man, Diana looked amazing in her dress today, you should have seen her"

16. Did you ever change an oc's identity when they were already established? Why?

Not after I've begun publishing their fics, since at that point I'm pretty tuned-in to who they are as a character, but I've definitely made some edits in between getting the initial idea and putting it down on the page. Sometimes it's to include a little more diversity, sometimes it's because a character's story would be better told with a certain queer element behind it, sometimes it's because the original OC idea felt flat or boring and needed an overall revamp, or sometimes it's just for fun.

The very first idea for Jasper began with them as a cis woman, but their story works so much better with them being genderfluid, since it adds a lot more depth and dimension to their backstory and their relationship with Kyle.

Originally Nikoletta wasn't meant to be on the aroace spectrum, but it adds a lot more to her relationship with Abner to be able to say "this relationship isn't purely romantic, neither is it purely platonic, they're just two people who want to be close to one another"

There are others since the characters go through a lot of editing before I'm ready to start laying down their stories, but those are just two examples.

[lover-of-mine]

i sent a message just now about agreeing with your recent post and just wanna add!! there’s obviously a lot of biphobia going around too and perhaps hate for gfs/love for tommy also stems from that. if buck is with a woman he “passes” for straight so that’s how people will see him, but if buck is with a guy he’s “officially and visibly queer”. i’m a bi woman and i get that “straight passing” thing a lot in my real life and ooooh boy it’s annoying

I mean, as a bi person myself, I would love to hear the words "I'm bisexual", but yeah, implying that Buck needs to have sex with a guy so that he counts as bisexual is definitely weird. Like, you can write Buck reaching that conclusion without giving Buck another meaningless relationship. But it is a complicated balance tho, when dealing with media, you don't really have a character like Buck being openly queer on a network show anywhere else, so I understand the desire to make it so his queerness is undeniable, but I also want Buck to stop making the same mistakes and we have nothing to make us believe he wouldn't just because this time the person on the other side is a man.

[greasyfatdyke]

i have a genuine question, no harm or ill will intended.

if youre attracted to men (your bio says transmascs) why do you consider yourself a lesbian/dyke?

yeah oc, i had a feeling someone would ask at some point. i hold the opinion that all trans ppl hold the magical ability to be a part of most queer communities and use most labels because ultimately gender is a fuck. specifically in regards to myself being a dyke and also loving other transmascs, for me i consider transmascs and transmen to be a part of the lesbian community because, historically, we always have been. in the same way many people we today call transwomen and transfemmes founded the gay movement, many people we would today call transmen and transmascs founded the lesbian movement. i think this allows transfemmes to lay claim to the label of gay no matter their attractions and transmascs to lay claim to the label of lesbian no matter their attractions.

this belief is doubly so for trans people who date other trans people, because, depending on how much you or your partner pass, society may deem you a dyke or a faggot or straight based on their own assumptions, and that can change day to day, person to person. i appear to most people as a woman, and many of the people i have been romantically or sexually involved with have also been perceived as women as well, either because they were non-passing transmen or passing transwomen. to an outsiders perspective that is a lesbian relationship. we're not going to be able to "um actually, we're transmascs" or "actually this is a straight relationship because i'm a transmasc and she's a transfemme" our way out of being called dykes on the bus.

if society is going to call me a dyke, and transmascs have historically been considered dykes, then i'm going to call myself a dyke. so far many of the transmascs in my life have felt the same. i also don't consider myself a man, and many of the transmascs i've had in my life have also not considered themselves men or not considered themselves only men. if i was dating someone who was not comfortable with me calling our relationship a lesbian relationship i, of course, wouldn't. but, i wouldn't date someone if they said i couldn't identify as a dyke and date them.

[anxietycheesecake]

Gay sex jokes can be funny, tasteful and valid rep. But when it's all a show really delivers, there's definitely teasing of the only potential mlm couple (that nobody forced them to put in there; people shipping something they know is just a fun dynamic that won't go anywhere isn't that) and then going all "oh, but it's deeper than sexual™" and "I don't know if we're teasing it" is definitely... queerbait adjacent.

There are homophobes who are super comfortable watching this show to this day. They have an homophobic explanation for every single joke or hint we've enjoyed. It doesn't make it an homophobic show, of fucking course not, but it hasn't alienated the homophobic audience as much as you think. It probably will happen in season 4, but not yet.

Baiting the only mlm relationship when the only rep as for today are casual jokes is queerbait-adjacent. Going on unrelated weirdly sexual tangents when asked genuine questions about something even the press has read as text should leave a taste in your mouth, especially when compared to stuff that's been said before season 3 was a thing (and I'm willing to bet they're barely aware asexuality/demisexuality is a thing, if they've heard of it at all, so don't come for me). This doesn't feel like a "wait and see" type of answer, but ok, let's wait and see.

And if by the end of the show nandermo goes fully unaddressed (NOT CANON; the bar is as low as ADDRESSING it, I'll be ok with however it goes from there), I'm sorry, but I won't be as uwu about it as you are being.

I'm glad you feel seen and validated and like you're getting the rep you want, but when you consider how little risks the network is truly taking by doing stuff this way and how they'll definitely keep doing it in the future if they can get away with it... I mean, it's kind of insulting? I wouldn't give it a pass. I think it 100% would set a very unfortunate precedent.

(I know people are going to say "oh, but there's a lesbian couple in this other show, they're super ok with that". Cool. I promise you a board of guys with ties sat around a table to study every possible ramification of putting those lesbians in that drama or whatever. But you know what I want? More sitcoms with wild concepts and queer relationships. More sitcoms with queer relationships in general. If they can get away with baiting the only gay ship and still get praised for queer rep for jokes about how horny everybody is, expect most shows to handle it exactly like that. One is ok, sure, but there will be more and it'll get boring very quickly.)

I can't believe I have to say this, but don't fucking harrass the creators. Express your negativity about a product you consumed in general terms like a normal person and act in consequence.

Anyway, I love this show and where it's heading, not so much how it's being handled in the month and year of our lord June, 2022. Hope to come back and cringe at this someday lmao

[birches-and-hawks]

Alright I promised you guys a post about pride month so here it is, but its not going to be a lighthearted one.

So lets discuss LGBT people in Hungary right now

I've already talked about the oppression of queer people in Hungary but they took it a step further. You know the blatant homophobia in Russia? Yeah they're bringing that here so let's talk about it.

So far the government:

- made it illegal for unmarried couples to adopt, and because same-sex marriage is illegal, this prevents same-sex couples from adopting

- "a family is with a man and a woman"

- burnt a children's book about inclusivity that featured 1 story about a same-sex couple

- made it illegal for trans people to change their name or their sex on official government documents in the middle of the pandemic because they thought they are being sneaky about it

And let's see what's happening now:

- people on facebook campaigning for straight pride

- the Hungarian government is trying to pass a bill that would ban LGBT themed educational programs and public service advertisements

The tiktok that I attached above talks about it more in detail, here's the transcript:

"Hungarian government launches Russian-style attack on freedom of speech and children's rights. The Hungarian ruling party, Fidesz, introduced an amendment that would severely restrict freedom of speech and children's rights by banning LGBTQI- themed educational programs and public service advertisements. Out of Hungarian LGBTQI people, 42% have thought about su*cide and 30% have attempted it. This new amendment - which eerily mimics the Russian propaganda law would further poison public opinion.

Following in Russian footsteps, Fidesz has introduced a propaganda law unheard of in other European countries. They would ban the 'portrayal and promotion of homosexuality and trans identities' in schools and in public service advertisements for persons under 18.

This step endangers the mental health of LGBTQI youth by making it harder for them to receive preventive education and affirmative support in due time. They have a right to an education which helps them develop into healthy, fully rounded people, which means they should receive relevant and comprehensive information about their sexuality and family life.

The European Court of Human Rights has emphasised that legislations like this only strengthen prejudice and homophobia which is incompatible with democratic values. If the bill passes children will be even more vulnerable to bullying, even though the situation is already grave: according to a survey from 2020, half of the responding teachers experienced prejudice towards LGBTQI people among their students. The government trying to ban exactly those informative sensitivity trainings that could help fight these prejudices.

According to a study conducted by Háttér Society in 2017, more than half of LGBTQI youth have felt unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation, and 37% because of their gender expression. Nearly two-thirds of LGBTQI students were verbally harassed for their sexual orientation and more than half for their sexual expression. Lastly 13% of LGBTQI students were subject to physical abuse at school because of their sexual orientation and 10% because of their gender identity or gender expression, they were hit, kicked or wounded with some object.

Out of Hungarian LGBTQI people, 42% have thought about su*cide and 30% have attempted it. Research by ILGA-Europe has also shown that LGBTQI youth commit suicide mostly because they find their situation hopeless, the exclusion and harassment they experience within the family, in education, or in their peer or religious community is considered unbearable. The Hungarian state is now planning to intensify the suffering of LGBTQI youth, following in the footsteps of those autocratic states which the government has an increasingly friendly relationship with. We call on the government to withdraw the amendment and the opposition not to vote on the bill in this form"

I don't want to take away your joy and I'm not telling you to stop enjoying pride month, I'm just saying that if you are in a country where you can freely celebrate pride month appreciate it, because it is a privilege, a privilege that we don't have here. So if you are from a country like that, speak up on this, talk about it, do something with your privilege.

[astramachina]

Loki spoilers under the cut, along with some opinions in regards to Sylvie and the approach to LGBT+ rep the show has taken.

Now, for starters, we're still one episode from finishing the season and things may be clarified then, but thus far I'm more than a little disappointed regarding some things that I, granted, psyched myself up for and probably shouldn't have.

First: the absolute delight I felt at seeing Loki's sex listed as Fluid on his official TVA file. It's brief, it's in passing, and while performing a preferred gender does not make one cis, the little spiel about "have you ever met a woman variant of us" just sits wrong with me for many a reason. This remark indicates that we're still going off a binary: male Lokis and one Loki who is female, Sylvie, whom the writers and showrunners continue to insist that she is not a Loki despite being a variant. At no point is our variant's gender addressed in the actual story however, which means that every pair of eyes casually watching can assume he is a cisgender male because there is nothing to say otherwise beside a brief glimpse during the title sequence.

Now, we still don't know Sylvie's nexus event. I've seen theories about it relating to her being a "good" Loki (by playing to save Asgard), but there is an overwhelming sense that her crime against the Sacred Timeline has to do with her being "born a girl". And while I understand the "girlboss" commentary they're trying to convey - if this IS her nexus event - as an afab who is now genderfluid, I find the idea disheartening.

They could have done something amazing with Loki's gender identity, they did it with his sexuality ("a bit of both"), but I wholly understand that this isn't what the story is about. I wish it was. I wish we could have characters express who they are without making a big deal out of it, with said character's agency, but I'll let that slide. It's that clear marker of "Sylvie is different from us because she's a cis woman and we're all male" when at least our variant is meant to be genderfluid that really makes me sigh. Disappointed but not surprised.

Second: Loki's bisexuality. My genderfluid bisexual ass got called biphobic because I called Loki and Sylvie's interactions 'comphet'. First of all, I genuinely enjoy them as a romantic couple. I ship them. I also enjoy them as chaotic siblings. I just enjoy their interactions and their relationship, whatever kind of relationship it may be. Now, it is EXTREMELY important to note that a bisexual man being involved with a woman makes him no less bisexual, and vice versa. And I respect that? I've dated both men and women before and I've never been any less bi for it.

My issue here ties back to my previous point about visibility. As powerful as "a bit of both" was, to me as a queer person, it is so easily written off by the casual viewer. By what I've experienced through canon storytelling, Loki and Sylvie do not come off as romantically interested in each other. There is love, but it is a love devoid of fragile and toxic masculinity. It feels like a love divorced from the expected heteroromantic norms, and this is coming from someone who writes romance and has studied the tropes and imagery related to it for years. And I feel like we need to explore this kind of relationship, especially in regards to a character like Loki who is literally just learning how to be a functional person. Hell, even Sylvie mentions how new she is to the concept of friends. I view this as a genuine friendship, and frankly I'm tired of the militant approach a lot of people are taking by stating "either you ship them or you're biphobic".

I'm not very good at organizing my personal feelings into words so bear with me here.

When I said they're 'comphet', it's because the average viewer, queer but mostly straight, can look at them and go "oh yeah they're a couple". Versus, say, Loki and Mobius who have shared an equal if not slightly more profound bond (namely due to the length of their relationship) and people will cry out "just friends, stop trying to make it more".

Do you see my point?

I'm not erasing Loki's bisexuality. I wouldn't dream of it. But I wanted to see it explored by forcing viewers to go "oh he's queer" rather than having them comfortably sit back and ignore it. I'm tired of me voicing who I am only for people to sit back and treat me as if I were some Wish brand woman who vacillates between straight and lesbian.

Again, this show isn't about the presence of queerness (although, how can it not be when we're witnessing Loki change into someone who loves and accepts himself) in the universe, but the individuals behind the show made queerness important. They chose to. By listing him as genderfluid. By having him say he's had both princesses and princes. So far it's felt like I was offered a nice comfy rug to stand on six hours into my eight hour shift working the cash register, was allowed to touch and feel its cushioned surface, but it was never actually given to me to use.

I love Loki with all my heart and soul. It has brought me so much unspeakable joy and laughter, it's made me cry, it's sparked my desire to create. This show has made me care for every single one of its characters, and their journey, and I am forever grateful for that. But that does not mean that, as a queer person, I should not criticize it's approach to queerness. It's a tiny step, but we have so much more to go.

And also - Disney, you promised he would have both female and male love interests on this show. So unless you're giving me a second season where our more stabilized Loki variant DOES tap a little bit of both (or any other mixture of gender identities) we're gonna have to have a serious talk about how you fucking market your shit

Anyway. So yeah.

Give Mobius a fucking jet ski.

[thesarosperiod]

dear GOD please infodump about the Gay™️ in The Great Gatsby, I'm begging you!

okay! here we go! buckle in ladies, gents, and distinguished entities, we’re going for a ride. (below the cut because it’s Long)

So, there are basically two lines of reasoning when it comes to gay subtext in The Great Gatsby: the historical context and the book itself. I want to establish that I haven’t cited that many sources for the history section (I usually would) because this part of queer history was very hidden and thus it’s very hard to find record of it. If anyone finds information that affects the validity of my theories, please let me know, and I’ll be happy to edit this post to make it more factual. All text excerpts are taken from The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. (Also- this is your obligatory warning that this post discusses sexual content, so if that makes you uncomfortable, feel free to click away now.)

We’ll start with the history, more specifically a practice called “dropping hairpins.” Dropping hairpins essentially refers to signals that gay people, especially gay men, would use to “drop” hints about their sexual orientation. The point of these hidden phrases or signals would be to show other gay men that you were gay without outright admitting it, so that if the man you were talking to was actually straight, you wouldn’t be found out. These signals were mostly known only to gay men, so there was no risk of being outed unnecessarily. With this in mind, I’d like to take a look at the scene where Nick and another man are in an elevator.

There’s obviously some build-up in the chapter previous to this moment, but Nick and Mr. McKee get in an elevator together. Mr. McKee, who Nick describes earlier in the chapter as “a pale feminine man,” asks Nick out to lunch with him, and then touches the lever for the elevator. In case you’ve never seen a lever in an old-fashioned elevator, it’s a round metal piece with a switch sticking out, sort of like this:

So… yeah. You can figure out the implications on your own. Additionally, there’s absolutely no reason why Mr. McKee would be touching the elevator lever. The elevator boy would be the one controlling the elevator at all times. The only reason for Mr. McKee to touch the lever would be to send some sort of sign. And it appears that he does- when we look at the text, some sort of understanding seems to pass between Nick and McKee after he touches the lever, since this is when Nick agrees to go to lunch with the McKees sometime.

After this exchange in the elevator comes the scene where Nick is next to McKee in his bedroom, with McKee on the bed, mostly undressed, and slurring his words as he talks. Given the signals that seem to have been exchanged between Nick and McKee in the last scene, I think it’s pretty clear what’s happening here. One could argue that Nick was helping McKee into bed, since they were both drunk in this scene, but there’s been no implications that McKee was so drunk he’d need assistance from a stranger- no descriptions of him as very intoxicated, or statements that he was stumbling or swaying on his feet. All of these details lead me to infer that Fitzgerald was implying some sort of sexual encounter between Nick and McKee. Also, bear in mind that this book was written in the 20s. No author would have been able to be straightforward about sexual content, especially not between people of the same gender. There’s a lot of reading between the lines that has to happen here.

Now, for my second line of reasoning: the language that Nick uses to describe different characters. In my observation, Fitzgerald tends to pick a distinctive feature for each main character and describe it in great detail, generally glossing over most of the other aspects of the character’s appearance. I’m not citing sections of text for this because it would take much too long, but (in my opinion), some of these features go as follows:

Daisy’s voice (and sometimes, her face)

Tom’s build

Jordan’s posture

Gatsby’s smile

The Great Gatsby is a book full of descriptions. Anything that Fitzgerald puts into the story has a very real reason to be there. I’d like to draw your attention to Nick’s initial description of various main characters in the story.

First, we’ll look at some of the women.

Daisy: 

Jordan:

Myrtle:

And now, we’ll look at some of the men.

Tom:

Wilson:

Gatsby:

There are definitely a lot more examples I could pull here, but I think that this establishes the trend well enough. There’s a discrepancy between how Nick describes men and women in this book: he describes Tom’s body in vivid detail, spends an entire paragraph detailing the warmth and beauty of Gatsby’s smile, and even calls Wilson “handsome.” On the other hand, women don’t get this same treatment. Although he dates Jordan, the nicest thing Nick has to say about her appearance throughout the majority of the book is that he “liked looking at her,” and he describes Myrtle as not being beautiful at all. The woman he describes the most favorably is Daisy, and she’s his cousin. And because of this, Nick displays a lack of interest in women that is pretty constant throughout the book. I also want to reiterate that this book was written a century ago. The fact that Nick dated Jordan doesn’t really prove anything in my opinion (although if you personally interpret Nick as bi, that’s valid!) because I interpret his language as portraying a disinterest in their relationship, and in most women in general.

(anyway, i could go into even more detail here, but this post is getting absurdly long. sorry it took me so long to answer your ask! i hope the length makes up for it. also i bet most of you never thought you’d see me use proper capitalization- i did it to make the post easier to understand.)

[asynca]

I love your work and I was so happy to find that to had a Tumblr. I don't know if you're the right person to ask, but I really respect how intelligent you are and I'm hoping you can help. I'm a bisexual woman who is in a long term relationship with a man. I love him dearly. But because I'm in a passing relationship, I'm starting to feel the hate from my fellow queers, who are passively shaming me for who I fell in love with. What should I do? I never got treated like this dating women.

I completely understand. I had exactly the same thing happen to me. Gay women mistakenly think that dating a man magically makes you heterosexual, forgetting of course that men don’t magically cure you of your love for women and other genders, and that all that sleeping with a man makes you is sleeping with a man. 

The ‘passing privilege’ is something I specifically want to address. 

We all have passing privilege. All of us have different levels of passing privilege. Every single one of you will pass at some point in your lives, ranging from either just online to every situation you’re in. For most people, when you walk down the street, people assume you’re cishet. When you interact with someone new they ask you about your ‘husband’ or ‘boyfriend’ (and if you have one!) and any children. People assume you are straight. ‘Passing privilege’ is not something exclusive to bisexual folks, and just because there are a few more situations they can pass in, and a few more obstacles they avoid, doesn’t mean they don’t face most of the discrimination like gay folks do. 

FURTHERMORE, bisexuals may sometimes avoid some of the obstacles gay people face when they date someone that appears to make them look like a cishet couple, but in avoiding those, they face something incredibly isolating that we all understand: being invisible, and feeling like no one understands. 

When I was dating a (lovely) man in my mid-twenties, every time someone would say something homophobic, I felt it. Every time someone would assume I was with a man, even though I was actually with a man, I noticed. Every time the government debated gay marriage and gay rights I intimately felt all that stuff because you know what? I’m still queer. I still love women. That part of me didn’t magically disappear. My boyfriend didn’t understand, either, because he was like, “At least that doesn’t affect you anymore!” Yeah, babe. It actually DOES affect me. I’m not straight. 

Worse: my mother acted like I was ‘cured’ when I was dating him. She was so overjoyed, and that broke my fucking heart because nothing had changed about me. I was the same. She just didn’t like the bisexual truth about me. So the idea that I get to have my parents acceptance and love is false, because that’s not what I had. I had conditional acceptance, and believe me, it hurt. Because it wasn’t for all of me. 

On top of that, every time I dated a guy, my lesbian friends would essentially excommunicate me. They’d stop inviting me out for ‘girl drinks’. They’d talk about me behind my back. They’d all have fun without me and the message was clear: you’re not welcome here anymore. Nothing about me had changed at all, nothing: but by dating a man, somehow I was suddenly ‘impure’ and unwelcome in ‘pure’ lesbian spaces. It was disgusting. I even had a lesbian call me a “sperm recepticle” once, which is not only biphobic, but transphobic to the fucking max. 

Bisexual folks face many (all, if they’re dating someone of the same gender!) of the same obstacles gay folks face with the addition of straight people and gay people dismissing them. 

So: don’t let anyone tell you you’re not queer. Don’t let them passively excommunicate you: CALL them on it. Tell them nothing has changed. You’re still attracted to women, and sleeping with a man doesn’t change that one bit. Don’t let them discriminate against you without (gently, or not gently, if necessary!) calling them on it. 

You’re just as queer as they are. You’re just a different sort of queer. You’re not a lesser queer. You’re not an ‘impure’ queer. You’re a different flavour of queer and the rainbow needs all colours