#and these characters aren’t textually trans

[starbuck]

not to moralize fiction (and i mean that unironically) but, as a trans person, when a character has a distinct birth name and chosen name and people opt to call them their birth name, i DO take notice of that and that it’s generally cis people who do it.

again, this isn’t me actually making any sort of moral judgement, i just think it’s interesting how chosen names are more likely to be inherently respected as sacred by trans people due to our real life experiences.

[tenmyoujump]

some characters just have such trans vibes that you forget they aren’t actually. textually transgender

[oceanmonsters]

“Interacting with every single piece of media through a shipping lens is detrimental to your consumption and understanding of said media” and “Gay relationships in media are still so rare and limited that often imagining relationships that aren’t textual is the only way of getting to see the kind of story you want to see” and “If you shove together every single two white male characters that vaguely interact in any media then you care more about something being arbitrarily gay for probably fetishistic reasons over actually caring about compelling storylines/romances” and “Oftentimes strong potential for romantic bonds between characters of the same gender ARE overlooked by writers in favour of less compelling straight ones because characters are very unlikely to be allowed to be put in a same-gender relationship unless specifically conceived to be A Gay Character” and “Often relationships in media, yes even straight ones, are deliberately placed and fundamental to the plot of the story and ignoring them for the purposes of a relationship you like better can detract from the story” and “Gay people wanting to see gay people in the media they watch is literally not inherently a problem and isn’t “ruining media” or “destroying platonic relationships” or whatever argument literal homophobes use to try and stop gay characters/storylines existing” and “Good relationships involving characters of colour, although marginally better represented than gay relationships, are still very rare and overlooking these for the sake of inserting a white person instead is racist and this also goes for disabled characters and trans characters who are far, far less represented” are all opinions that can and absolutely should coexist, actually.

[perlukafarinn]

I posted two polls yesterday, asking who is your favorite potential love interest for Dean besides Cas and vice versa. I’ve tallied the votes for both polls and reblogged them with the results and some commentary but I thought it’d be nice to gather them in one post, plus some extra thoughts from me below the cut.

Potential love interests for Dean:

Benny (116). And yes, correct.

Cassie (77). Also correct. A few of you pointed out that Dean should have gone to her in season six instead of Lisa and are you wrong?

Victor (34). Tbh I wasn’t expecting Victor in the top three but I am very happy with all of you!

No one (28). Very Cas coded of you, very sexy.

Crowley (25). This is the one I feel like the character in question would be the most upset about. Only number 5??

Bela (13). I’d also like to interject that demon!Dean/demon!Bela should have happened.

Lee (8). Good for him, I guess.

Jo (5). I don’t know if I’m surprised by Jo’s ranking or not.

Donna (4). This one had a lot of support when her first episode aired, if I remember correctly.

Tessa (3). Good for her, I guess.

The rest got either one or two votes. With two we’ve got: Aaron (surprised he didn’t get more), Anna, Ash, Cain (very disappointed he didn’t get more), Deacon, Garth, Ketch (uhhh), Rhonda Hurley.

One vote: Balthazar, Daphne (lowkey feel like the two people who picked them read the question wrong), Donnie, Lisa (I also don’t know whether to be surprised by this ranking or not. On the one hand she’s Dean’s longest running textual love interest. On the other, they kinda forgot to give her a personality beyond ‘love interest’ and ‘mother’), Lydia (????), Me (lmao), Michael, Mick (also ???), Robin, Ronald (ngl I had to look him up), Sam (😶), Sarah Blake (this voter did admit they might be projecting) The Impala if it turned into a guy (this one might have the most canon support), That one hot desk officer from season 1 you know the one I mean (I don’t).

Potential love interests for Cas:

No one (33). I was expecting this option to be high up but not number one! Quite a few people specified he should be a single parent but what I really appreciate are the few of you who wrote dissertations in the tags on why this makes sense for Cas’ character.

Meg (26). Correct and very sexy.

Mick (25). I’ve seen like one episode with Mick so idgi but good for him!

Balthazar (6). Thought he’d get way more votes?? Idk might be my bias speaking.

Sam (6). Love the one of you who specified that Cas should not like him back.

Luca (4). Okay so there is a canon character named Luca who is a priest but I’m pretty sure y’all mean the Luca from In the Shadow of your Wings by ao3 user Enochian Things, who is also a priest (esp since a couple of you did say he’s not a canon character) and who actually meets Cas.

Benny (3). It should be noted that two out of three of you wanted to include Dean in this ship.

Crowley (3). Just as with Dean’s list, he’d be very insulted by placing so low.

Hannah (3). Hannah got three votes, two specifying in a male vessel and one just specifying “trans”.

Kelly (3). Makes sense, as she is the mother of his child and they have a friendly relationship. Also makes sense this didn’t get more votes since they have no chemistry and she is a republican.

These all got two votes: Djinn queen, Me, Pastor Sexy.

And now, a special category of those with one vote from people I’m pretty sure read the question wrong: Cassie, Lisa, Ash, Victor.

Another special category of Dean alternates who got one vote but don’t count because they’re still Dean: AU Dean, Amnesia Dean, Dean Smith.

And the rest all got one vote: Dabb-era OC, Hypothetical guy from centuries ago (from one of those times Cas’ mind got wiped), Jesus Christ (asdjifsdkl), Miguel from The Love Story of the Runner-Up by ao3 user Margo_Kim, Sergei (???), That angel dude who wanted him for his hands (okay who and what episode).

Okay so what jumped out to me immediately was “no one” topping Cas’ list (it placed pretty high on Dean’s list but Benny, Cassie and Victor still beat that option handily). 

A lot of people straight up did not like the thought of Cas with someone else (very Dean coded of them) but a lot of others just couldn’t picture it. Which I think can be attributed to none of Cas’ relationships with others being all that developed on the show, besides with Jack which is obviously not romantic. Tbh there aren’t a lot of deeply developed relationships on Supernatural that don’t include Sam or Dean (and lbr, mostly Dean).

People were also explaining their choices a lot more in the Cas poll. Idk what that means but I just thought it was interesting. There also wasn’t a consensus on Cas’ sexuality; while Meg and other female characters got votes a lot of other voters said they see him as gay and can’t picture him with a woman.

Most delightfully surprising result: Cassie taking second place! Honestly, it’s what she deserves. And Victor in third! The taste! 

Most expected result: Benny winning the Dean poll in a landslide.

Most surprising low placement: Balthazar only getting six votes in Cas’ poll. I thought this ship was more popular but that’s probably my bias speaking since I happen to like it.

Funniest vote: Those three of you who wanna shoot your shot with Dean/Cas. Go for it, I’m rooting for you!

Favorite specification on a vote: “Meg in a deeply lavender marriage way”

[thedreadvampy]

The thing is, without wanting to once again embroil myself in this discourse (because I absolutely was in the wrong last time, no argument there), there is a reason that I can be quite bearish about hcing Jarchivist as white and cis and it's not because I want to take away representation or because I think being white and cis makes him More Relateable but it's about how I read the themes of the character and the overarching podcast

the thing is to me like a major theme of the series is Jonny reflecting on the experience of obliviousness, trauma and denial from his (Jonny, the author's) perspective as a white cis man with an Oxford education and how that's informed his perception and sensitivity to other people's experiences.

and I kind of feel like that's coming through explicitly in recent stories like 185 or 187 but also back throughout the podcast. that a major thread is the ability to ignore things until they're happening to you. and particularly with Jon's character like. his whole deal is that he's spent his life consciously embracing denial and closing his eyes because if he refuses to see it, it can't hurt him. and to me that is part of a broader and increasingly explicit theme about the privilege of choosing what to see, and about the blind spots of things outside your own experience. like to me a primary theme of TMA is the intersection of power, oppression and trauma and the...messiness of it, and I think Jon often represents hegemonic privilege (he's allowed to pass untouched through horrors unless he actively chooses to interrogate and challenge them; he has access to information but not necessarily to understanding; he can and does choose not to see people's suffering until it's pointed out to him (not just in the apocalypse but throughout, with the Archive staff etc)

like. I don't think this reading is exclusive to a Jon who's white, I have implied that in the past and I think that's a shitty take. Jon can absolutely play that role and be Asian at the same time and that brings a different texture to the story.

but it is a different texture and I think I resent the idea that a character can only be white as default or as a reaction to a prevalence of hcs of colour. like I think Jon is white because I think Jon being white has a significant impact on the reading of a story which to me is vastly about power, privilege and marginalisation.

it's significant to me to think of Jon as white in direct reference to the fact that he's canonically queer, had a difficult childhood and has PTSD and mental and physical health issues. whether you read him as white or not has a significant impact on what the story says about the intersections of power and disempowerment, and to me it's an engaging reflection of the tension of Jon's power and powerlessness as an Avatar of the Eye.

and like as someone rightly pointed out during the last barney over this - being a person of colour doesn't mean your life is Just Oppression And Pain. that isn't what I'm trying to pull out here. but the experience of privilege is different if you're seen as white to if you aren't and that makes a text about privilege and systemic traumas read differently. not worse or better. but different.

idk if this makes any sense. and the thing is it may be a totally shitty read of the text. but it is a significant aspect of my reading of the text and I find it? Odd? That in fandom that is treated as a non-negotiable. like that an analysis of the text with the supposition that Jon is white is a shallow reading. not just a different one.

like I see a lot of people treating Jon being white as a non-canonical, bad reading of the text and nobody has justified that to me at all beyond saying 'I am a person of colour and Jon being a person of colour is important to me' and that's a completely reasonable way to feel imo! like there are some really good and interesting readings of the text with that in mind! I think I've often come across as dismissive of that and I don't mean to.

My reading here doesn't have more grounding than yours bc Jon doesn't canonically have a race and Jon being Asian adds a lot. but it also takes away. it's a different text with different reads on power, obliviousness, guilt and trauma. like. I think because I've been quite bullish about it, I've left a lot of people hurt and feeling like I'm saying This Is The Right Reading, and that's a thing I feel really shitty about. because that's come from a very defensive place but that doesn't excuse it, it's a Bad Take.

but like. for me the Jon Being White thing fits into the nexus of a character not necessarily being an endorsement. like if you read Jon as white then to me that changes the read on things like him being promoted ahead of Sasha, on the assumptions he makes about other characters, on his responses to the police and authority, on how he responds to instability - like they're not textually there or not there but interpratively it makes a big difference whether he's benefiting from, assimilating into or operating despite hegemonic power structures.

and the reason I'm focusing on race here isn't because race is the Big Privilege Decider but because when it comes to hegemonic privilege, Jon's race is probably the most open to interpretation; he could be bi or gay but he's definitely mlm; we know he's ace or ace spectrum; he could be trans or nb but we know that he's percieved as a man by strangers and by close friends; we can make educated guesses about his class and social background from cues like his accent, backstory and education; we know about at least some of his physical disabilities and visible scarring, and about at least some of his neurodivergence and trauma. We've spent nearly 190 episodes in this guy's head - we have cues to go on for a lot of stuff. But his ethnicity is absolutely up for interpretation and to me that's interesting.

I favour white Jon as an interpretation because I think Jonny has written a lot of this podcast as a meditation on complicity and the complexity of power and that's interesting to me when I interpret Jon as white. because with that reading the podcast becomes very much about white guilt and the destructive responses we make to guilt, to having the power to change and destroy lives and the power to ignore it, and the struggle of benefiting from a system - even needing a system - that's built on the blood and pain of millions of other people. like, the fact that Jon may Literally Die without the Eye feeding and without the apocalypse fear machine, and has to at every stage make the decision to work to destroy it and live with empathy for those trapped in it anyway, has some resonance for me with the machinery of white supremacy. and patriarchy. and hegemonic power in general. and I think the degree to which Jon the Human Person was raised profiting from those systems informs the interpretation of how Jon the Eye Monster responds to a supernatural version

and like I'm just gonna say it. I think Jon's arc of Dealing With Cops is vastly different if he's white vs if he's Asian. like I can't pretend to be speaking from a place of personal experience but most of my British Asian friends expect their treatment by the police to be coloured by Islamophobia and an assumption of foreignness. and I'm not saying that's Every British Asian Person or that I really know what I'm talking about but it seems to me that the story of a white man who initially trusts the system being hunted by police who brutalise and threaten him carries a different meaning to the same story about a dark-skinned Asian man. like again. not necessarily a better one but a different one.

idk this is a long musing. I'm interested in having a conversation about this and like I said last time - if you think I'm being shitty I do want to be told and to explore why within the limits of your comfort with taking about it. I'm not trying to say This Is So I'm just wanting to get my own head straight.

[heraldofzaun]

This is a post I’ve been thinking about making for quite some time, especially due to looking at how my own personal depiction of Viktor differs from what seems to be the general fandom interpretation - especially after the LoR cards released and gave us a few canonical acolytes.

I won’t beat around the bush here: this is going to be about why I personally believe that associating the Glorious Evolution specifically with headcanons about Viktor or his acolytes being trans, or Viktor performing gender-affirming surgeries, or things in a similar vein is a poor decision, and why I don’t include this interpretation in my writings. This isn’t meant to discourage people from writing Viktor or his acolytes as trans, of course - my Viktor is agender, although he’s not aware of it, and it would be absurd to say that his followers have to be cis - but I think it’s important to look at the implications that come from writing Viktor as explicitly someone who helps people relieve and manage their dysphoria through his work with the GE.

Firstly, no matter how you spin it: Viktor’s idea of the Glorious Evolution has always been painted in a negative light. I’ve done my work to portray it as idealistically as possible, but at the end of the day his goals have always been about removing (at the very least, negative) emotions from himself, as well as mechanizing himself and others.

“Desiring both to revolutionize his field and to eliminate the jealous human emotions which festered inside him, he engineered parts to replace and improve his own body... He saw himself as the patron and pioneer of Valoran's future, a future in which man would renounce his flesh in favor of superior hextech augmentations.” (Original lore.)

“He saw human involvement in any part of a process as a grossly inefficient aberration - a view that put him at odds with a great many of his fellow students and professors, who saw the very things Viktor sought to remove as the source of human ingenuity and creativity.” (New lore.)

“Jayce reported the incident [of Viktor creating a device that allowed someone to “effectively control” another person]  to the college masters, and Viktor was censured for violating basic human dignity - though, in his eyes, his work would have saved many lives. He was expelled from the college, and retreated to his old laboratory in Zaun, disgusted by the narrow-minded perceptions of Piltover's inhabitants. Alone in the depths, Viktor sank into a deep depression, enduring a traumatic period of introspection for many weeks. He wrestled with the ethical dilemma he now faced, finding that, once again, human emotion and weakness had stood in his way. He had been trying to help, to enhance people beyond their natural capabilities to avoid error and save lives. Revelation came when he realized that he too had succumbed to such emotions, allowing his naive belief that good intentions could overcome ingrained prejudice to blind him to human failings. Viktor knew he could not expect others to follow where he did not go first, so, in secret, he operated on himself to remove those parts of his flesh and psyche that relied upon or were inhibited by emotion.” (New lore.)

This, when combined with how Viktor has also always been intended as a more villainous character - his visual design language, voice lines, and how he leans into the “evil Russian scientist” stereotype all confirm that - mean that from an out-of-universe standpoint, we’re meant to see his ideas as wrong and misguided. Multiple other champions have lines specifically about how he’s wrong - Ekko calls him “everything wrong with Zaun”, Camille (who is morally grey at best, and a cold-blooded killer at worst) calls his work “quaint”, implying that it doesn’t go far enough for her liking, and Heimerdinger makes the point that without humans, no one will be left to appreciate Viktor’s work. It doesn’t matter if Viktor has good intentions - the narrative tells us time and time again that his path leads to a very dark place, especially in new lore where he’s comfortable with violating free will for the sake of preventing death.

It seems obvious to me that a character who auto-amputates as a way to cope with overwhelming emotions, who decides that emotions themselves are a burden, who is repeatedly described as having an obsession with the Glorious Evolution regardless of lore, who is described as who you go to when you’re desperate in new lore... is clearly someone whose surgeries (at least of himself, where they are implied to be unnecessary - again, auto-amputation) and end goals are supposed to be read as a violation of human nature and dignity. Here we pivot to talking about trans issues in specific.

I’m of the firm belief that it’s not a good idea to associate gender-affirming surgeries, HRT, or any other thing used for transitioning with a character whose surgeries are supposed to be read as a violation of the human form. This plays directly into the anti-trans idea that transitioning is, well, a violation of the human form. It is not a good idea to write the man who cuts off his own limbs to poorly cope with his emotions as a patron of trans rights. It’s drawing a direct parallel between Viktor’s auto-amputations, which we are supposed to read as not only a very bad thing and the product of obsession, but arguably self-harm, with life-saving medical care.

(There’s also the issue that some people seem to assume that transhumanism is, in any way, inherently related to being trans - but that’s a whole other topic that I don’t feel very qualified to write on. I consider myself someone interested in transhumanist concepts, when applied appropriately (i.e. not ending up in eugenicist territory), but I am far from an expert on transhumanist thought. I think it’s enough to say that no, they’re not related. They’re just two things with the same prefix. Please don’t confuse the two.)

In my opinion, Viktor should not be seen as someone whose work is a direct benefit to trans individuals. (Again, not to say that Viktor can’t have followers who are trans. But please, please consider before making him the person that they go to for help with transitioning. The man doesn’t even have a medical degree, and his canonical work is described as being all about function over form. He’s not the surgeon you want.) I don’t think that Viktor’s gender identity, whatever it may be, should be associated with his obsession with the Glorious Evolution - or at the least, it shouldn’t be portrayed as a positive association. (In the sense of Viktor using the GE/his own surgeries as a positive affirmation of his gender... I’m struggling to precisely define this at the moment, apologies.) The GE is, textually, an unhealthy coping mechanism.

(There’s maybe something to be said for a Viktor who has disassociated himself so far from humanity that he no longer considers gender applicable to himself... but please, be careful if you write this. I’m speaking as someone who’s agender: I’m tired of my identity being used as shorthand for someone or something becoming or being nonhuman. I’m tired of people treating Blitzcrank being reskinned as a they/them pronoun user as something revolutionary, if they themselves don’t use those pronouns or aren’t nonbinary. I’m not going to pretend that I’m the arbiter of what people can and can’t write, but I’m tired of seeing myself - as an autistic and agender person - represented solely by unfeeling aliens and machines and whatever else, and being told that it’s good, actually, because any representation is good representation. I’d like for people to be more mindful in what they write and promote, but I think that this is becoming a tangent.)

I guess it comes time for me to defend my own depiction, then, since as I’ve mentioned above I do write Viktor as agender. I admit that I want to see aspects of myself in the characters that I like, but I also strive to be aware of the implications that these aspects may have. My Viktor’s gender identity has absolutely nothing to do with his idea of the Glorious Evolution - he has no dysphoria that he attempts to relieve through his surgeries, he does not see roboticization as a way to move past the gender binary... he doesn’t even realize that he’s not a cis man, because he hasn’t had the time or tools to introspect on that aspect of himself. (He’d be rather confused if you told him that people generally tend to feel as if they’re a certain gender - he’s just... himself.) I’ve written him in this way to try to make it clear that he has always felt this way about himself - that the GE has nothing to do with it - and that it has no influence on his actions as the Machine Herald.

There isn’t really a good way to wrap this up. Again, I am not saying that Viktor or his acolytes shouldn’t be written as trans, nor trying to stop people from writing that - only that their transness shouldn’t be directly associated with his idea of the Glorious Evolution. I think that we need to be mindful of what kinds of tropes that our depictions can fall into, and in this case a non-mindful depiction of Viktor as trans can seen as equating being trans to what’s easily read as self-harm/a violation of human nature. I doubt that anyone genuinely intends this association, but it can be made regardless, and so I prefer to keep the two concepts wholly separate in my depiction.

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for reading. I’m willing to answer any questions that arise from this.

[uppercase-disgrace]

I don't think TMA is actively transphobic, but it does make me sad that there aren't any places in it where being trans is a source of joy. Like, it's pretty clear textually that transphobia is like. A bad thing and is seen as bad by the characters? (Not that all the characters need to be perfect for it to be a good show)

But there's nothing in the text that shows being trans as a good thing. None of the characters are trans, being trans is never mentioned like something that's good. Like obviously it's a horror tragedy, it's not going to focus on a positive, but it makes me sad that the only time transness is mentioned is when something bad happens to a character because of it.

[vivaciousarcanist]

god i hate how my wants in transgender representation are just 1.) for there to be at least one explicitly trans main character or protagonist who 2.) textually addresses being trans in a manner that cannot be ignored or argued without serious misreading of the work and that 3.) their story isn’t predominantly focused on their transition/them being trans and a sizable amount of transgender rep fails to meet this criteria this like imma reblog this in a bit with a few examples of trans rep and see what meets this criteria and what doesn't(spoilers, only ONE thing on netflix passes afaik) elaboration under cut

1.) by main character i’m meaning characters that is in the core cast and passes the sexy lamp test (if you can replace the character with the sexy lamp from a christmas story without changing the plot at all the work fails) EDIT: the character's existence must not be a spoiler 2.)  the character must address being trans in a way that is explicit and undeniable, word of god confirmation doesn’t count EDIT: the character being trans can't be a spoiler 3.)  their story isn’t solely focused on the character being trans and isn't pushed along solely by the character being trans, not that it can’t have that as a key component, but that it’s not their entire narrative EDIT: for character focused works like dating sims their characterization has to extend beyond being trans with them having interesting parts of their character that aren't being trans that are actually explored

[ursie]

Why do you keep calling Shatterstar gnc? He’s always been masculine? Just because he’s Bi doesn’t mean he has to be effeminate you know

Ok so I’ve gone back and fourth on how seriously I was gonna answer this so I’m sorry this took a bit to answer anyway here we go : I’m sorry if this makes no sense I’m tired

First off it’s important to remember in media what’s considered masculine and what’s not so while a lot of Star may be considered either or what’s important to remember is when him being a warrior, fighter/ect is being emphasized that’s them playing up traditional masculine characteristics and his presentation or softer moments is them playing up “feminine” characteristics (obv this is stupid but it’s also undeniably how people write characters 99% of the time)

Second off there is textual evidence he is at least viewed as gnc in universe in X Force-many comments were made about his makeup, hair (also I remember the pigtails) and general demeanor. Was it done in a ala homophobia way? Absolutely is it still canon? Yes (also so much worse now that it’s retroactively canonically homophobic as he’s literally Bi and definitely had a known thing w Julio at the time-so..way to teach him micro aggressions guys)

Now post x force in xfi he is drawn and written as far more traditionally masc, in appearance and presentation- even his body type seemed to change-as in x force he was described as acrobatic and fast, avoiding hits when he could in xfi he’s made into a brick house that just. Tanks hits-far more direct-even his fighting is made out to be more traditionally masculine

Now this could be broken down to character development (which we did not see and it’s important to note I can’t stress how ooc xfi Star is) but really it just reads as more homophobia as not only is Star aware enough of homophobia and gender roles to adapt to a more accepted persona (because the x force taught him homophobia) but also the writers at the time when he was canonically Bi went out of their way to adapt his character to both fit and avoid different stereotypes-he’s allowed to be a walking slutty Bi stereotype (which is literally so ooc) but can no longer be gnc-he’s allowed to be slutty and hit on women despite his relationship w Julio but he’s not allowed to present as anything less than “macho” in summary Star was just made palatable in all of the worst ways to straight audiences-they stereotypes they love were forced and the ones that make them uncomfortable were dropped

Later on we’re back to getting glimpses of less than traditionally “masc” only a warrior Star w him cooking for Julio and buying him a sweater in new mutants (which are not actually feminine traits but are presented as feminine/gay traits in media even lampshaded by what’s his name asking of his boyfriend bought his sweater to Julio (which he did-also another micro aggression marvel forces me to witness))

(There was that super racist x force run I didn’t read that came out around here-Star was back to being a super warrior macho macho man idk it was bad and the art was racist ignore it )

The slightly less masc Star is dropped in the Shatterstar solo where his character is p much completely retconned but also another more traditionally masc Star is pushed again w the crux of his problems w Julio being “they don’t fight enough”, the emphasizing of him still being a warrior despite how the crux of his character was trying to define himself out of that role assigned to him, there are definitely homophobic connotations to what’s her name (yes he’s Bi him having an ex who’s a girl isn’t the issue it’s the entire plot that is), and even weirder connotations with the use of his slave name/dead name as his go to name-he has only ever referred to himself as Shatterstar-that’s his name-other people either call him Shatterstar or Star-giving him a “traditionally masculine” name is certainly. A choice. There are a lot of problematic elements to the solo to unpack but the rest don’t really have to w the homophobia and forced gender roles Star seems to consistently face

Then in (new) xfi he’s gone something happened he’s on Mojoworld again he has long hair again (king) but his outfit is a wrestling one and his “masculinity” is once again emphasized with his being forced into being a warrior again just to like. Be on the island being tasked w immediately fighting Terry (I actually liked this scene but there were some choices about to consider especially about how the rest of the mutants still seem to view him)-and now we’re here where we’re right back to where we started w long hair, just left Mojoworld, definitely a warrior you can’t forget it Star. Only this time his identity isn’t up for interpretation or debate.

So long story short while Star may not be consistently gnc it was noticeable enough that once he was openly Bi they immediately started pushing for a more masculine Star and you can see the difference in characters as xforce Star and xfi Star might as well be different people. Stars ambiguous gender non conformity was enough that Marvel seems set on “fixing it” and writers are constantly walking a line in making sure he’s “not like those other gays” despite the fact that apparently he used to be. There is def canon evidence for a more gnc/less traditionally masc Star. No one is saying (but me) that he should be a Femme Bi dude they’re just saying they see him as gnc and like. Yeah he was🤷‍♀️

Also narratively him being Trans makes wayyy more sense also his people are machine made why do they even have different sexes or genders let alone follow the earths idea of it like he’s an alien., why would he care about the our perception of the sexes or gender- main point is he should be Nb and intersex but that’s another conversation

Anyway Star gnc king

Also yes just because he’s Bi doesn’t make him effeminate-he’s effeminate-not because of his sexuality - it is not his gender presentation despite how much it undoubtedly influenced it. People aren’t calling Star gnc because he’s Bi they’re calling him gnc because he used to look like this

[ladyfl4me]

Hi! I've caught the trending page of Tumblr and heard that there's now an ace character, and I want to start listening to the podcast! I don't really know much about how d&d works, but is there a certain podcast that starts the campaign with the ace character? If so, do you know what podcast that starts in? Sorry if that sounds weird, but everyone's been talking about how accurate the ace rep. it is and I want to check it out! :)

Yeah, no problem! Sorry that this got a little long. Any of the thoughts I have on this are mine and mine alone, and are not blanket statements about the character’s asexuality; other people have different readings and rationales of what’s happened so far, and that is okay!

So I’m assuming the character you’ve heard about is Fitzroy Maplecourt. He is one of the player characters of The Adventure Zone: Graduation, the most recent season of the podcast The Adventure Zone. Griffin McElroy, the guy who plays Fitzroy, said in this recent behind-the-scenes special episode (TTAZZ 2020) that he always intended to play Fitzroy as an asexual character. I got so hype while listening that I wrote a transcript of his answer, which you can find here. It can be crosschecked against the official transcript, which will eventually be uploaded here. Very minor spoilers for one element of Fitzroy’s background, but nothing too revealing. 

Basically, Griffin put a hell of a lot of care and attention into his answer, which is really unexpected for a cishet white dude. He’s done his research. He acknowledged asexuality as a spectrum and as something that’s different from aromanticism. He also explained wanting to avoid aphobic stereotypes while making Fitzroy, such as the “too busy with the Real World to think about sex” stereotype or the “being asexual means there MUST be something wrong with you” stereotype (not direct quotes, that’s me paraphrasing). That’s mostly what people are excited about, and for good reason, because that’s a lot more compassion and nuance than we usually get in media.

However, to answer your question about accurate representation, the word “asexual” or a scene in the text confirming Fitzroy as asexual has not happened yet. I think Griffin plays him as an asexual character who’s just minding his own business, though, which I personally think it’s great. Like. That’s me. I’m minding my own business, living my ace life. It’s not something that’s right on one’s sleeve at all times. Starting off knowing that Fitzroy is ace, though, is a great context to have if you’re starting from TAZ Grad episode 1. Fitzroy being ace from the get-go makes a lot of the ace-projecting readings I had of lines - like a line somewhere about “missing the vibe between us” - feel like a more canonical acknowledgement. 

If you’re the kind of person who would prefer a textual acknowledgement of asexuality you can point a finger at, though - like, a “ctrl-f” search for "asexual” in the transcript sort of thing - there aren’t many options. There is subtext, like I said, but nothing direct beyond the offscreen TTAZZ. Fitzroy’s type of asexuality is a little fuzzier, too, and hasn’t been confirmed. As you can see in the transcript, Griffin obviously wrote and played him as asexual, and Travis secondhand-quoted Griffin saying, “Y’know, I don’t think… I don’t think Fitzroy really feels that,” during planning for a recent character-driven episode. This quote could go a couple ways:

Option one: this could be just a blanket acknowledgement of Fitzroy being asexual, with the “that” being sexual attraction. Not feeling sexual attraction is the textbook definition of being ace. This leaves him open to be anywhere on the ace spectrum, from sex-repulsed to sex-indifferent to sex-favorable. 

Option two: “that” could be read as the desire to have sex, which is completely different and points at a more sex-repulsed asexual reading. A lot of people have taken that, too, claiming he’s “not interested” in sex or stuff along those lines. A valid but by no means exclusive reading, re option one and the actual words that Griffin said in reference to Fitzroy.

Until we get more details, maybe in a canon text portrayal, I think it’s kind of up in the air. TAZ tends to be good about getting in-text confirmation, though; in another TTAZZ commentary episode for TAZ Amnesty, the player character Aubrey Little was confirmed as bisexual and Puerto Rican, and we got a scene in the actual podcast that confirmed her as bisexual. (She literally said “I’m bisexual” to another character. In one of the funniest exchanges in that entire arc of Amnesty. They can do it. Still waiting on the Puerto Rican part, though.) So we may get an actual scene in the future where Fitzroy’s asexuality is stated. 

That being said, I know that sexuality and personal preferences are not things that all people discuss openly, so including that scene may not be possible or natural - especially with Fitzroy’s motives/expression/characterization, which you’ll find about if you listen. Writing a realistic scene that gives explicit confirmation is tough, especially in an improv environment like D&D. I personally really, really hope that they give it a shot, though. The McElroys have made characters explicitly gay, bisexual, trans and nonbinary in past seasons of TAZ, and Travis has a whole armada of LGBTQ+ characters in the TAZ Grad universe. It’s possible. They can do it. Griffin’s dialogue/other roleplaying choices, though, do portray him in an asexual-coded way, and that may be all we get.

All I can really say is that things are looking up for ace representation, and the way that Griffin McElroy is coming at this character is really heartwarming to see. If you decide to listen to TAZ: Graduation, I really hope you enjoy it, and maybe consider listening to the other two seasons too! I wouldn’t be too worried about d&d going into this - the most basic explanation is, you got dice with numbers on them, sometimes players roll them, and a high roll means something good will usually happen to their character while a low one means something bad will happen. TAZ can be found on any podcast-streaming website like Spotify, Stitcher or Apple Podcasts, as well as on YouTube and the Maximum Fun Network website.

[sagemoderocklee]

not to like bring attention back to the weird ask from last night but i don’t like to assume that someone is straight shipping because as a bisexual i find it incredibly frustrating the conversation around m/f ships as if bisexuality doesn’t exist or is somehow less than being gay. i don’t know who this anon is or how they view gaara or tenten (i’m assuming tenten based on the anon prior to that ask about having something against ppl who ship gaara with women). like maybe the anon does see these characters as bisexual. i see tenten as bisexual but i only ship her with neji. doesn’t mean she’s straight in my mind, and someone assuming i’m straight for shipping her and neji or making rude comments to me would piss me off. so i don’t wanna assume.

now with all that being said, i see gaara as gay not bisexual. i think there’s a lot of intersection in experiences ofc but being gay and being bi aren’t the same, and the textual evidence just doesn’t support gaara being attracted to women at all. 🤷🏻‍♀️ if someone sees him as bi that’s fine—more power to bisexuality in shipping/fandom, and it not being treated as “gay lite” or less fucking evolved or what the fuck ever than pansexuality—but i don’t and i don’t want to see content of gaara with women at all because it feels wrong to me. there are times when a ship with two ppl who’ve never interacted is like totally innocuous to me, there are even times where i’m like “oh that’s good!”, and then there are times where i just cannot fathom the leaps in logic to get character a and character b together. that’s how i see ships with gaara and just about everyone besides lee and—hate to say it—naruto. but this is especially how i see it with him and the female characters. so while my reaction to the anon with the gaara/tenten ask was like to balk at the suggestion and be kinda off the cuff with my response, it wasn’t in any way suggesting assumptions about the anon and how they ship gaara. i don’t know. i can’t know from an anonymous ask with just a few words. and the follow up ask wasn’t asking about him being straight but him being shipped with women.

anyways i’m mostly responding to this because i want to emphasize that bisexuality isn’t a lesser option, and to bring attention to assuming straightness or cisness when presented with an m/f ship, because as a bisexual and nonbinary person i am actually kind of tired of those sorts of comments. it’s alienating, biphobic, and transphobic because straight trans ppl aren’t less a part of the lgbt community eighter. and pls understand i’m not saying you were trying to be like that. i’m just using this moment to point this out because i am tired.

[undeadburritoproductions]

Your favorite depressed roommates are BACK, just in time for Halloween!

Catch up on seasons 1 and 2.

NOTE! The character of Pat is a woman now and forevermore and actress Chris Cherry recently came out as a trans woman.

How does this affect Sam and Pat Are Depressed, where her character Pat for two seasons was canonically, textually male? We’ll let Chris speak for herself:

Q: I really like the web series Sam and Pat are Depressed and want to show it to people. Can I still do that, even though you look like a boy in it?

A: First of all, I’m glad you like Sam and Pat are Depressed! We’re really proud of it. Second, feel free to share it, but it would be good to add a disclaimer that I’m an out trans woman now and that’s not how I present anymore. I’m more than willing to acknowledge my past as long as it’s acknowledged within the context of my present and future.

Q: Is Pat a girl now?

A: The episodes exist as they are and we certainly aren’t gonna George Lucas them so that Pat’s gender expression matches my current one. So I guess that means that the Pat that exists in those episodes is a boy because that’s what the text says and the text is the text and death of the author and all that. However, [as] we make more episodes, Pat will be a girl in those. If that makes your head hurt, well, it makes my head hurt, too. 

Some BTS from our remote shoot, where Bri/Sam were still in NY while Chris/Pat were in LA!

[pochapal]

I feel the response to my ask was "disingenuous as fuck". Your original post was mad that the writers lost their jobs & blamed the fandom for not continuing to pay money for writing that many viewed as genuinely trans/bi/black-phobic. I don't think they deserved death threats or hate, but criticisms are valid. I don't get why you defend them and act like a fanbase of mostly lgbt+ who are probably hurting for money during the pandemic should be throwing money at writers that treat them like shit.

over a thousand members of the fandom WERE still paying money to the patreon is the thing though. i’m not arguing with you about what exactly kind of harm homestuck^2 did because i don’t know what exactly you want me to say? i’m not qualified to talk about the issues homestuck has with race but writing kind of spotty queer rep is in no way comparable to material anti-lgbt harm being inflicted on real people, nor did hs^2 at any point textually encourage violence against said marginalised groups. 

but there were people who were still willing to financially support the team and the wider fandom harassment campaign directly led to these people no longer being able to donate money. also no one was being forced to donate to the patreon? the people who donated did so because they wanted to and because they were in a financial position where they could do so.

i defend the writers because they really aren’t these malicious actors bent on inflicting abuse on poor helpless lgbt fans like they’re made out to be. to be specific the writers who were pushed out of the team before now were all marginalised and were reviled for the apparent crime of representing their perspectives in line with homestuck’s narrative (thinking here specifically about the backlash towards pesterquest roxy and literally anyone who had any creative input on the direction of vriska’s character). the only evidence of those people treating the fans like shit is when they defended themselves and got mad about the literal online dogpiling they faced. if i was being 24/7 hounded by entitled fans i’d probably call them some rude things too! these were people doing a job that was comfortably financially supported that they had to walk away from for their own wellbeing. they did not owe the fans anything and even if they did they still had a large number of fans that supported their work and now it’s all gone because of a moral crusade by people who never liked post-canon homestuck and never intended to. that’s pretty much why i’m mad at the fandom.

[basketballandtextbooks]

Marjorine (cont)

The following is a response to the idea that Butters’ dislike of dressing as a woman and his ongoing sexism towards women can still be read as a canon basis for Marjorine as a trans woman. This reading of the text interprets Butters’ resentment and mistreatment of women as an attempt to over-compensate for the fact that he secretly wants to become a woman. There was a specific mention that Butters behavior towards women can be excused with this explanation. This reading also perceives Butters’ discomfort crossdressing as Marjorine as another over-compensating moment.

I will now explain why I dislike that reading of Marjorine and why I haven’t mentioned it my previous explanations of why I believe Butters to be a cis individual within the canon universe of South Park.

I've considered the over-compensating transphobe trope for Butters before and while it isn't without merit, there are a few reasons I'm not a fan of it.

1. It is ultimately a harmful trope. I don't like perpetuating the idea that all homophobes / transphobes are just secretly a part of the lgbt community and just won't admit it so they lash out at people. While there are real people in real life who embody this trope, there are also real people in real life who are both homosexual and a pedophile. Just because those real people exist, doesn't mean I want to perpetuate that harmful stereotype through the use of a tired cliche. And there are other characters in the show that are more explicitly showing signs of this cliche trope (Cartman, Stephen) in ways that can't really be read alternatively. So since Butters' actions can be read alternatively, I choose to do so to limit the number of times I perpetuate this trope. 

2. Within the episode in question, Butters doesn't seem uncomfortable in an over-compensating way. He just has a misogynistic view of women. While his overall misogyny through seasons upon seasons could be read as him being bitter towards them for having what he doesn't, there really isn't any one scene that supports that. When he pissed on Wendy's door, it was because Cartman called her a liar. When he started the mens rights movement, it was because he'd been dumped. This moments of misogyny would be easier to read in alternative ways if he didn't have clear motivations at the time. If he did it for no reason, under-explored reasons, or mysterious reasons, I would be more inclined to give this reading of the text more merit. But he has motivations, they are explored, and they fit within the canon characterizations that have been established for how Butters responds to situations. In short his behavior is clearly explained and IC, so there's very little need for a gap filling hc because there is no gap to fill.

3. I actually do support trans Butters headcanons. I support trans headcanons for all of the cast. If people aren't going to write meaningful trans characters into the canon story, fuck them, we'll add our own and write them better. That established, I don't think there's much canon basis for trans Butters. The same basis could easily be used for Craig or Clyde(whom I would also support trans hcs for). My issue with Marjorine isn't that she is a trans headcanon that empowers the voices of some people, my issue is that rather than her being that trans icon, she's frequently just a fetishist bastardization of that. She's not a woman because of any particular character scene, she's a woman because "butters has feminine tastes and feminine boys aren't real so he must be trans". She's a woman because "omg it would be so cute if kenny molested marjorine because he's a perv and she's so cute". She's a woman because "well obviously Butters would be the girl, he's the uke!". I still support people who headcanon Marjorine as a trans version of Butters, even when they have that headcanon for the absolute worst and most fetishy of reasons. But she, as a concept, makes me personally uncomfortable because I don't enjoy one of the most popular 'trans icons' of the fandom being nothing more than an ooc fetishized trope. If trans headcanons involving other characters, who actually have more textual basis for being trans, were more popular I probably wouldn't feel this way so strongly. Additionally if there was less fetishization of her character I would feel less uncomfortable. If she was written/drawn remotely similar to Butters’ actual canonical personality, I would feel more comfortable in the knowledge that it was just fans of a character wanting their favorite character as representation. As it is, when I see Marjorine, she is very infrequently depicted as anything but a shallow trope of a fetish and I just want better things for the trans community when it comes to representation.

In short, it's not an invalid reading of Marjorine's character but I dislike it for ethical reasons.

Also as a minor addition to what was written above, the idea that Butters' misogyny would be 'entirely excused' because she's a struggling trans woman... I do not accept that premise. No one gets a pass for treating other people with cruelty. The idea that she is entirely justified for treating other people with a disgusting level of derision purely because of her identity... that is not okay. Eric has an extremely traumatic backstory, that doesn't mean we excuse his sexism, racism, bigotry, and genocide attempts.

In short, overcompensation is not an acceptable reason to treat women like objects.

[incarnateirony]

Yikes. Been seeing some misinformation about the Vito Russo test pass around, so lemme drop a few points. The test is... basic. Very basic. But these are the explicit points. The following must be true. Collectively. There’s no “or.”:

The film contains a character that is identifiably lesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or transgender.

That character must not be solely or predominantly defined by their sexual orientation or gender identity. I.E. they are made up of the same sort of unique character traits commonly used to differentiate straight characters from one another.

The LGBTQ character must be tied into the plot in such a way that their removal would have a significant effect. Meaning they are not there to simply provide colorful commentary, paint urban authenticity, or (perhaps most commonly) set up a punchline. The character should “matter.”

All three are required to pass the vito russo test. (Source: GLAAD)

Please be mindful to not accidentally cause harm to the VRT by not checking it out. 

As per the 2014 article,

Less than half (7) of the 17 major studio films GLAAD counted LGBTQ characters in managed to pass the Vito Russo Test this year, compared to 6 out of 14 inclusive films released in 2012. Clearly there is a lot of room for improvement in Hollywood film. With this annual report, GLAAD will continue to track the industry’s progress.

That is to say, even inclusive films suck at passing this test most of the time. They tend to get, say, point 3, but in trying to shove forward quick slapped together representation miss 2. Or so on. Whereas big cinema tends to, say, miss part 3, and also fail.

For example, Castiel actually passes this test -- he’s identifiably genderqueer (his gender is not tied to sex and he has even changed his sex, and as a genderless/sexless species it’s quite literally impossible to be cis even while properly claiming a body as his own rather than a vessel, because his assigned gender is “none”/”agender” which doesn’t even happen with human problematic gender assignment -- if the basic data of this is textualized as a fact of life, whether or not the show ELI5s gender theory to everybody, it is what it is, and is identifiable. Enby/trans umbrella people don’t have a magic bar to have to explain it every time any more than people have to explain homosexuality every time even if they’ve got a dick in someone). He’s unremovable and complex. 

But on the other hand, it *still* suffers from standard-fare LGBTQ issues like Othering, eg, making them the magical thing to communicate it with a veil of acceptability. Be that villainizing homoeroticism via vampires, or sanitizing content in fear of homoeroticism setting off people that don’t want to see it so making homoromantic potentials aren’t “tainted” by sex in the eyes of the resistant viewer (eg heavenly romance). The romanticization angle leads to problems also in relationship-rep visibility and handling, but doesn’t, say, undercut his gender presentation which innately leaves the base test-passing in tact.

So Vito Russo is far from the only bar for quality rep, but an incredibly important one that’s easy to keep in mind.

Also mandatory plug that people should be banned from talking about the Vito Russo test with any kind of authoratative voice until they read or watch The Celluloid Closet, which was his. It’s not just fancy words, Vito Russo was a real person guys.