#i think part of the sentiment comes from people thinking romance coding inherently means the two characters are written as canonically

[zukosdualdao]

i will never understand when people act like zutara shippers are reaching when we say the crystal catacombs scene is intensely romantically coded because like... ignoring literally all other context (which does have other hallmarks of romantic coding, but literally pretend you don't know anything about the show or scene for a second)... what would you think happened in this picture?

would it .... would it maybe be an interrupted almost-kiss

[vampirologist]

🔥i don’t go here but give me an unpopular buffy opinion please >:)))

SAT THIS IS SO FUNNY. like yeah talk about buffy kir you’re the buffy bitch on my dashboard ! well I feel I just spout my unpopular buffy opinions (especially regarding angel and spike) pretty regularly unprompted. trying to think of something that I haven’t addressed. especially something angel related as that’s my brand 😭

okay so there’s been some talk I’ve seen on here that says that buffy and spike’s relationship together is queer or lesbian coded. however I really either disagree or think that buffy having a relationship with ANY vampire is inherently queer by their standards. basically spike before he was human was a lovelorn poet during the victorian england era who only had his mother as a female figure in his life who accepted him. as a vampire, he was in love with his sire drusilla, who he was with for over a century before they broke up in the show. the introduction of spike and drusilla as this loving vampiric couple who retained some sense of humanity breaks the previously established vampire lore of the show of them as these despicable creatures. I believe this romantic notion spike has always had and his relationship with drusilla is what causes a lot of people to say that his later relationship with buffy is queercoded as spike is presented as a rebel type of figure but is still sentimental. he and buffy’s relationship comes out of him being obsessed with her and she is depressed and feels alienated from those around her. thus she partakes in aggressive sex with spike that she keeps a secret and feels ashamed of, it could be categorized as a form of self harm for her to be able to feel something by having a relationship with someone she shouldn’t and he is able to match her sexual prowess (it has been established that some human men in the show have had sex with buffy and are impressed by her due to the increased strength and stamina she has- she inherently has more power when she has sex with humans due to her slayer abilities) and is part of her world.

HOWEVER. angel is a character who is constantly called feminine both derogatorily and complimentarily (both tend to happen regarding him being presented as fashion savvy) and multiple times characters assume he’s gay. in fact spike himself regularly calls angel a “ponce” or “poof” which are literally akin to saying faggot. angel in contrast to spike, represses his vampirism and feels not quite human but not quite demon/vampire due to being an ensouled vampire (which spike is a soulless vampire in the aforementioned relationship he had with buffy but he later gets a soul as a means of redemption after he sexually assaults her which actually repairs their relationship). sure angel’s existence and arc are allegorical of addiction, but there are very much aspects of angel that COULD be interpreted through a gay lens. so I’m like. if you’re going to say that about spike and buffy it’s also applicable to angel and buffy but they want to gloss over it due to how sappy their romance is and they don’t like angel (or they do but not buffy and angel as a couple). angel and buffy are presented as thee forbidden romance as he is a vampire and she’s a vampire slayer. this dynamic is further complicated due to angel’s curse of whenever he has a moment of true happiness, he loses his soul as his existence is meant to be suffering for his past (he’s cursed with a soul after killing a romani girl). buffy and angel are these two individuals unlike anyone else in the world and are drawn together because of it and try to seek “normalcy” within each other but they will never get normalcy. they aren’t “normal” and will never be “normal” no matter how much they try. in fact, there’s an episode of angel where he gets turned human after fighting a demon but he gets it and the day reversed (which he spends with buffy eating and having sex and being domestic, doing what they could not otherwise do) as it stunts both of their development and purposes in the world (fighting evil, and it was said that buffy would die younger in this timeline with human angel). he does lose his soul after he and buffy have sex and they are sleeping in bed together, content and at ease with each other and the world. he does get his soul back but this event affects his relationship with buffy and his future relationships. he’s afraid of intimacy and getting close to others due to his past and current struggles, along with the possibility he could lose himself again. both buffy and angel’s shows attribute sex to what could cause angel to lose his soul, but it’s important to note that he did not lose his soul after cumming or during the act of sex itself. it was afterwards where they were cuddled together asleep and he suddenly wakes up, feeling something is off. yet he and other characters attribute sex=angel goes evil. he has multiple failed relationships because of different factors, like what I described with buffy, a relationship with an old flame that’s pretty similar to the dynamic of buffy and spike, external factors influencing the show because of misogyny towards one of the main actresses that practically dissolves the relationship that the show was setting up between them. later in his show he is able to have sex without losing his soul as he comes to realize through the help of a friend and acquaintance that true happiness in a relationship is extremely rare. seeing angel’s curse and his fear of intimacy through a gay lens seems interesting to me!

this got soooo long. YOU ASKED FOR IT SAT!!! admittedly, I haven’t delved too much into the queercoded argument of spike and buffy but I feel this is the gist or at least how I interpret it lol

[jonghyyn]

iyo when you write non-straight characters should you specify their sexuality/gender? I mean I'm personally a very 'not into labels at all' person for my own sexuality but support ppl who do find comfort in labels. but when I write I also tend to go toward the 'he just loves who he loves !!!' that sounded stupid but idk how to explain it.. so... like I was wondering why you feel strongly about explicitly stating someone's queerness instead of it being implied (at least u come off as that sorta)

i do definitely feel like that so!! i happen to have a lot of feelings about this so get ready for a Long Ramble. this is a precaution before ive even started typing i just know im gonna write a lot

i think before we start saying anything, we’ve got to acknowledge the difference between people who say that they dont like labels, and writing characters who Don’t Like Labels™. pointing out the problems of the latter is not a condemnation of the former. if someone rly doesnt feel like labeling their sexuality or gender, thats totally alright. the difference between these two is the person is a nuanced, multifaceted human being who may have lots of personal reasons for feeling that way, while the second is a fictional character that is Created and informed by cultural views of the creator. a person is not “created” by one single author and characters arent like…real living agents that have their Own Free Will, they are what their creators make of them. anyway i just feel like this is a rly important distinction that gets lost often!! i’m also more willing to look favorably on someone who self describes that way writing characters based on their own experiences, bc this perspective is inherently different from a straight person writing these sorts of characters. but moving on. 

whats also important to understand, beyond writing characters, is how being openly not straight is shunned. queer people are not allowed to Exist as openly queer and they have not been allowed historically. even these days among people who consider themselves progressive, you’ll often hear that “its alright if someone is gay but do they have to shove it in my face all the time.” this attitude isnt somehow formed in vacuum, but created in a society that treats been openly queer as a taboo. we aren’t allowed to be open about our sexualities the way straight people are. we can’t acknowledge that we’re queer lest someone tells us to Stop Shoving It In Their Face (not missing the irony as we’re surrounded by 400 billboards of hetero couples everywhere). i dont wan’t to delve into other aspects of discrimination and get too off track here, i just want to focus on how being Openly queer is treated as a taboo, particularly among people who still want to call themselves ‘accepting.’ the only way society allows queer people to exist is if they never remind anyone, Ever that they are not straight.

this is Integral to understanding why the i Don’t Like Labels characters are so frustrating. the unwillingness to Explicitly talk about queer people carries over quite handily to media. the same faux progressive people that demand queer people never talk about being queer bc its Too Much Information, will praise queer coded characters that hint at their sexuality but never confirm it. the reason these characters are written is not to genuinely explore why someone might feel uncomfortable with applying labels to themselves, but to appease people who will accept queerness as long as they never have to acknowledge it. this way, u can court queer people interested in representation And people who might like the story but will be uncomfortable with explicit queerness. its an attempt for writers to cash in on peoples desires for interesting queer characters without ever actually fully committing to representing them. you dont get to claim to support queer people if ur also out there providing comfort for peoples homophobia. you cant have a foot in both doors. 

describing queer experiences without calling them queer means that youre okay with this story as long as u dont acknowledge it as something Explicitly not straight and like…why?? why is it suddenly not okay when u take that bundle of experiences and use the word that theyre defining?? theres Weight behind using words like bi, gay, lesbian and if u reject them are u Really okay with lgbtq people? or are you okay with them Despite the fact that theyre lgbtq and not because you take into account theyre lgbtq. acceptance is not tolerating people Despite something, its acknowledging it and validating it as an okay thing to be. especially when it is something that historically Not been validated as okay. dismantling structural systems of queerphobia does not go about by ignoring queerphobia…shit this doesnt just fade away by chance, it takes active work. and part of this active work is Acknowledging Peoples Queerness As Something that is okay Out In The Open. the You in this isnt directed at you anon, just people who have these sentiments. 

throwing vague statements like ‘they just love who they love’ Also creates this level of ambiguity. you might say “well why do u need the certainty when ur describing what is at the very least, something obviously very not straight” and to that i say youd be fucking surprised at how goddamn hard straight people will try to erase the queerness out of a character. like i’m going to use a game called life is strange as a example. i’ll give some background: in the game, the main character max can romance both chloe and warren. note that max is not one of those blank state wholly customisable bioware-esque player characters, she has a personality outside of the choices u make. anyway, the conclusion that is Logically drawn from this is that she is most likely bisexual. or at the very least in some way, not straight. and Yet i have seen discussions that say “she doesnt have a set sexuality it just depends on the playthrough so shes not rly a Queer Character.” even more than that, ive seen people that saw “well even in the chloe one shes not necessarily gay or bi maybe shes just Making an Exception for chloe bc their relationship transcends sexuality” and like ??? Why??? why cant she just be bi?? even when given a queer romance, why do u try and interpret it in a way that sets her up as straight?? ive seen people say “its not a romance its just something that Transcends Words” as if this is… mutually exclusive from being a romance. like… Why doesnt this happen when hetero relationships are depicted?? ive literally never seen someone say “u know, maybe hes not attracted to women and just Making an Exception so hes not straight” why dont u see people try to erase the romance aspect out of hetero romances by claiming their relationship is “Beyond Words.” this treatment is 1000% only ever afforded to queer characters. this attempt to play off romance as not rly romantic is only done to queer characters, even if its done subconsciously. people will Refuse to accept a character is queer as fuck if you dodge around it, because heteronormativity is so ingrained in every interaction that even obviously queer characters get filtered through this lens. the problem with this isnt necessarily apparent until u look at it within historical context, where queer people are repeatedly not allowed to be openly queer. these arent isolated incidents, but manifestations of the idea that queer people shouldnt ever be open about their sexuality. youve got to tackle the discomfort that people have with words like gay/lesbian/bi/etc

i think this particular character trope wouldnt bother me so much if it wasnt like… the only narrative ever present. time and time again, i have to see characters proclaim that they dont like labels while never once even hearing people breathe the word bisexual. if it existed alongside characters who were explicitly queer it would be less frustrating But its literally one of the few ways (semi positive attempts at least) queer characters are ever portrayed. this is particularly true for bisexual characters lmao like… yes…theres people who dont like labels…but theres also millions of bi people that just wanna see a fucking bi character Talk about being bi and all we ever get is a vague “i dont like labels” (that is often never explored further than that and treated as a throwaway line anyway). is creating characters who say that a genuine attempt to characterize someones struggles with labels or is it just a way to avoid saying the word Bisexual.

same with queer romance in media. its only ever Okay if u just hint at it- see dumbledore being gay. see- the korrasami thing (though i dont fault the writers for this bc they pushed hard for what they got, its issues with the network). why are queer people relegated to drawn out stares that May imply something while straight characters are allowed to get into explicit relationships. when u create ambiguous characters that May be interpreted as straight (even if youve really gotta stretch) ur prefer to maintain the negative “neutral” of the heteronormative status quo and allow homophobes to live with their views unchallenged more than u care about addressing queerness in characters. 

 its not a coincidence that we dont do this to straight romance or straight characters. this is particularly important for queer kids!! its good to see queer characters out there being openly queer. while me and u can often pick up on queer themes and narratives, a 8 year old is not going to get that. especially when theyve been conditioned to see straight romance as the only feasible choice. they wont realize the character youre writing is gay or bi or whatever Because they havent been exposed to the connotations we associate w certain phrases. its so important for queer kids to see queer characters Owning that theyre queer. its especially importantly to normalize words like gay or bi or pan. being gay is often Extremely hypersexualized (which is why so many people will tell u they dont care what u do in the bedroom bc they can only picture queerness is a sexual context) so when u Dont treat these words as things only adults can say, u help get rid of the stigma surrounding them. u help remove the idea that being queer is inappropriate for kids to hear about and that the only possible aspect to being queer is sexual. 

anyway this has been Quite the Ramble but the point is that yes, we need to write more characters who are absolutely explicit about their sexuality and move away from the expectation that queer people need to create euphemisms to comfort homophobes desires to never hear about queerness.