#i've been re-evaluating my long-conflicting feelings on the concept of coming out

[hatosaur]

it's pretty implied that ellie never came out to joel in the proper sense. she lets him assume that she's into men, gives him the false satisfaction of "seeing" her "crush" on jesse, does not correct him. she's fairly confident in being gay in public for others to see and having others close to her know; so why not correct him? why dodge the topic?

was it out of fear? could it be that she never broached the topic despite being close to him in the early years because of the possibility of his reaction being negative? that she was afraid that out of all things that could force them apart (further apart after they split), him reacting badly to her being gay would be the worst?

what about at the dance? would she have been as wound up as she was if the moment hadn't been an encounter with a vicious homophobe? maybe she would've still snapped without this context, but why is she immediately on the defensive against joel after he sticks up for her?

what about the porch scene? why did she refute his question of dina being her girlfriend so insecurely, looking away, nervously and quietly stumbling over words? why isn't she mean about it? why doesn't she get defensive at the question? why did she lash out again when he expressed acceptance?

i think these scenes revolving around her queerness indicate it as such; that ellie never told joel for fear of a response, that she lets him think what he wants because that's the easiest way for it to be. then, when she's ready to face off against a homophobe, because that's the way things are, that's what she can expect, and joel defends her, she lashes out.

it's such a clear juxtaposition of support and hatred between joel and seth, and being faced with joel's acceptance is too much, makes her turn to the anger she'd been holding onto and reinforce what she thinks is true -- that she doesn't need him. and in the fallout, as her regret dawns on her, so too does the realization; he was protecting her, like always, without hesitation, over this thing she was always afraid he wouldn't accept her for.

in the porch scene, joel chooses his words wisely, and asks if dina is her girlfriend -- not "so you're gay?" or "why did you never tell me?" or "how long has this been a thing?" -- with such a casuality that it seems to throw her off. it's like ellie can hardly get the words out. she refutes the idea, fumbles for each following part of her response, is tense. she wasn't prepared for the question.

and when he finally asserts his support for her, in as explicit terms as he can, you can see ellie become emotional, touched for a moment but overcome, before she launches into the defensive again, exactly like at the dance scene -- meeting his kindness with hostility as a way to cope with her emotions.

and then, in response to her basically saying her life doesn't matter, he affirms that it does.

so he's now affirmed two things that ellie has doubted: that he accepts her being a lesbian, and that her life matters. a conflation of the two, in ellie's mind, may have come after; and after that, her olive branch.

and yeah, him affirming these things for her is fully in the context of his overwhelming parental love for her and her complex feelings about being the cure, but within a queer subtext, it means more. it's such a familiar thing to slink around loved ones and hide being gay/queer for fear of any type of response, and lying by omission in conversation just to keep that state of peace, of normalcy. ellie, with all her brutishness and bravery, falls into it like anyone else, because even while mad at him, she valued that response from him.

a lot of people seem to think that the approach to ellie's queerness is nonchalant, that it's just some unrelated thing about her, but i think that it holds more weight in the narrative that what is explicitly spelled out. it's subtle but it was a deliberate choice to place her queerness at the center of the confrontation. i think that's why ellie's relationship with dina took center stage in the story, and why so much time is devoted to just them -- because her being queer matters to her character, but in a way that perhaps only a queer person can see, analyze, and appreciate (without being blatant enough to anger certain other fans).

[imunbreakabledude]

continuing the topic of your post about the meaning of zionism and how it's used, i was wondering how you deal with that when it comes to artists and supporting them? usually, when news about an artist or celebrity comes out about them being a terrible person, you stop supporting them and their art, like it's happened with jk, for example. but when it comes to this ive been having trouble deciding what to do and is not that black or white either, because while there's people who have said terrible racist things and supported genocide all the way, like amy schumer, i've seen people having an equal disgusted reaction towards artist that maybe only posted or liked a post saying they want peace for israel or something of the sorts, even people who did it after oct 7th, and calling them zionist. so, at this point i'm confused on where's the line? what are we supposed to do? who do we support? because theres a point where you would run out of stuff to consume if you ban everything with a 'zionist' in it.

apologies that I'm gonna write something long with a ton of caveats and nuance but if you follow me you probably already know that lol

one thing i HAVE to say first, which is not meant to sound upset at you, anon, or your question - Just upset at this general trend in the world which is related to your question. I think people esp in online fan spaces put way too much focus on celebrities' "views" on this (in other words, what they do or don't post about it, because that's the main way people know their "views") in a way that is more about social dynamics and feeling good for stanning "good" celebrities (or vice versa)... in a way that really trivializes everything... it was especially bad back in oct/nov and I havent seen as much now, maybe because I almost never venture to twitter anymore and tumblr is less extreme about it, or maybe because most celebrities have already been "tallied" for one "side" or the other now so there's less talk about it. it's not that people shouldn't be aware of important issues like that and care when celebrities express abhorrent views any more than they would care when anyone else does - but some of the way it unfolds in online spaces - like long threads of "celebrities who are zionists" that contain a range of people who are literally israeli to someone who liked a post that said "i stand with israel" on october 8 - is gross and counterproductive to me.

anyway... your question. my answer, which I'm sure is not shared by a lot of people online who engage in the aforementioned behavior of tallying and listing which celebrities support which things is... drumroll please...

it depends.

also to clarify the connection from my previous post to this... my last post was mainly talking about understanding when it's people you know personally, whether super close or just acquaintances... but people with whom you have a relationship and are shocked to hear them on the "other side" of this zionist/antizionist split, to help illuminate that some people may have different conceptions of what that divide means. so with celebrities, it is obviously very different because you do not know them personally, and you have have little to no context for what kind of person they ACTUALLY are in real life, or the various factors that may influence their views. So I do not think celebrities are owed any different excuses or understanding (or attention) to their stances on these issues... BUT personally, when evaluating how I feel about a celebrity's stance that I nominally disagree with, I give it a similar amount of nuance/leeway I would give anyone else's... though it's limited by the fact that I do not know them personally.

obviously this applies to issues besides israel/palestine but I'll focus on that for now. I would say that the vast majority of people I know, regardless of how much I agree/disagree with the overall stance they've put forward, have said/shared at least one post that I didn't LOVE re: this conflict. Something that felt misleading, or besides the point, or too harsh, or presented a false dichotomy, or was lightly antisemitic or lightly islamophobic, etc. But when it's someone I know, and I'm viewing it in the context of everything else I know about them, knowing that by and large our values do align - I am able to think, "they probably do not mean it in the worst possible way it could be interpreted; we're all taking in a lot of info about this conflict and trying to share things bc we all feel strongly about it," and take it in stride.

but there are some people that I have unfriended/unfollowed over that time... either due to one or two posts just being just too out there and abhorrent, or a slow pattern of it over time. my point is, it's a gut feeling that depends on the context.

DISCLAIMER BEFORE FOLLOWING SECTION - i am gonna refer to a few examples of specific celebs that i can recall being talked about re: their stances on israel/palestine, and explain why some felt more or less "red flag" to ME - but these are based on WHAT I REMEMBER they said/did, and I may not be aware of additional or worse things they've said since - this is not meant to be a list of "X person is officially (dis)approved by me"

Now, when it comes to celebrities, I think it also depends on context of who they are and what they said did, which may include factors such as:

their age. Example: n0ah schn*pp. I saw a lot of people angry at him openly identifying as a zionist early on in october/november... and, yeah, ok, fair. But also, he's what, 19? while I disagree with the stance he is expressing, I also know that for many people who are raised jewish, there is a lotttt of propaganda about israel and zionism that whitewashes the whole situation, so I am far less inclined to judge a jewish 19 year old for that, let alone pile on (i mean i dont really engage in celeb pile-ons anyway, but, yeah). plus, I can't imagine that getting a bunch of hate from fans in response to that stance is going to help change his mind... it would probably just solidify the stance that "everyone hates jews/zionism for unfair reasons". so, I hope he learns more and maybe changes his stance, the same way I hope all jews who feel that way about zionism do. but I don't think this is nearly as abhorrent (on its own) as some other celeb behavior, like amy sch*mer's...

their connection to the issue. On one hand, any celebrity (or regular person for that matter) who is Palestinian or has friends/family in Palestine, I am WAY more inclined to understand and forgive if they use stronger language in regards to israel - or even jews. I don't mean that as a blanket "antisemitism is ok from anyone personally connected to palestine" pass, just as ONE JEWISH PERSON PERSONALLY, I have a lot of empathy for that and so I am more inclined to forgive/not take personally some language that I would otherwise consider iffy, because I understand that when people you know and love have been suffering for years and are now being bombed and starved, your emotions are running high. that makes sense!! On the flip side, I know this is less popular to say in online spaces/antizionist spaces, but I also have a sliding scale of increased empathy/forgiveness for people who express support for israel's conduct that I would otherwise vehemently disagree with, based on how connected they are to israel (or if they live there). again, not a blanket "I think anything an israeli person says is automatically ok because they're directly affected"... but what I mean is, again as ONE JEWISH PERSON, I find hand-wringing about how it was "israel's 9/11" and "please express your sorrow to every jewish person you know immediately, they're hurting!" coming from american jews in the US who don't have family in israel to be very frustrating and tone deaf... But I have a little more sympathy for someone like sarah s*lverman, who has a large portion of her family living in israel, or for people who themselves live in israel, to express some degree of belief that the war is "justified" or "necessary"... again, sliding scale. Doesn't mean I agree, or that I think they get NO accountability for what they say, but (especially in the earlier days after oct 7) I was like: I understand that your words are informed by fear for your own/loved ones' safety.

and the main one: WHAT they say or do, how often, do they elaborate/apologize if they misstep, etc. This is probably the most important factor and obvi the most varied. but it's another reason why it's crazy to me that people make those "lists" of "who supports israel" and it ranges from people who shared a damn image saying "I stand with israel" right after oct 7 with people like amy sch*mer who was spouting islamophobic bs and playing the victim in a steady stream of posts that only got worse and worse. and this can evolve over time in response to new info! Personal example: i remember back in october, I saw an online friend expressing anger at something j*lianna m*rgulies had posted/shared. I don't remember exactly, but I felt like it had been slightly misinterpreted and commented, "hey, I think it's referring to ____, although the wording of the post is definitely inflammatory and I don't agree with the tone/implication of it." that was a fine interaction... and I didn't mean it as a defense of her entirely, but of that particular post, which, on its own, I did not view as NECESSARILY indicative of nasty views. but fast forward to thanksgiving or whenever it was when she went on that podcast and went off spouting a bunch of racist, islamophobic (and homophobic??) garbage, from her own mouth - to ME, that made it very clear, "oh you just have really awful views. you just genuinely suck." I'm never going to view anything from her in a charitable light ever again, with that context. and I don't mean this as an example of me "getting it right" (if anything i got it wrong, here) or being the sole arbiter of when to give benefit of the doubt and not... hypothetically, I'm sure if I knew more about her or did more digging, there proabably WERE other examples of her expressing not-great views before that clip, but I share this as an example of working with what you know. because, hot take, I do not think everyone can be expected to know the history of every celebrity and what they've ever said. like, taking in new info when you get it is good, but I don't think it's fair to expect everyone to research "has X person ever said anything about Y" before they follow them online or watch a movie they're in.

Ummm so all that to say - where you personally draw the line of simply acknowledging "I disagree with what this celebrity is saying/supporting" versus "I find this person's views to be so appalling I do not wish to show support for anything they're involved with" is up to you.

While I think the instinct to "not support people who are bad" is for sure a good one, I agree with you that many people treat it as far more black-and-white than it is. It depends what the person has done (or is currently doing). For example, for outright criminals like r*man p*lanski, probably a pretty good argument to avoid any sort of support for them. people who maybe haven't committed a crime but consistently, frequently, PROUDLY express hateful beliefs, like JKR (though tbh seems like she creeps closer to hate crime/stochastic terrorism territory every day) - personally, I think there's a pretty good argument for trying not to support those people, too. Especially in a case like JKR's where it's pretty simple to draw a line - she DOES profit from everything involving HP, but considering the height of its popularity was a while ago... you dont need to un-watch the movies or throw out the books, but like, don't buy new HP stuff and do not defend her or feel the need to append "oh but I love Harry Potter" to discussions of her horrid bigotry.

But then you get into the far murkier territory that encompasses a lot of these "problematic celebrity" examples where it's like - they have expressed bigoted beliefs at least once/a few times... but like, not to the extent where it has become their entire fucking brand... where it's not entirely clear if they were just stupid to say those things a couple times, OR if they believe those things strongly and simply have only gotten CAUGHT saying them publicly a few times... yknow? Or, it's just more general rumors/knowledge of their behavior... that they support political parties/causes you strongly disagree with... or that they are known to be a major asshole to work with - maybe not technically enough to cross into abuse or crime, but like, isn't that still bad?

There is no concrete answer on where to draw the line. It is up to what feels right or wrong to you. Because in many cases "supporting" the person's work has little to no tangible reward to them (ex: if you watch a tv show or movie a celeb was involved with - unless it is 100% a star vehicle, or written/directed/produced all by the one person,... the nitty-gritty performance numbers of it probably are not reflecting on that one person or affecting their compensation all that much. on the other hand, buying a concert ticket for a solo musical artist probably has a more 'direct' impact to their success, but still, it's hard to quantify). imo, the kind of "support" I want to avoid for celebrities that I find gross is any kind of defense/excuse for them. I still rewatch and enjoy BTVS, but when the subject comes up, I will be very honest that based on everything reported about j*ss wh*don, I find him to be a very gross person - maybe not a criminal, but terrible behavior that should be called out, that should not allow him to continue to thrive in the industry. Personally, I think "don't support bad artists" should be less about "never ever engage with any project that involves someone who has a single bad view", and more like, "catch yourself if you feel the urge to defend or excuse certain statements or behaviors solely because they come from a celebrity you admire."

additionally, I would argue that a lot of this "avoid supporting problematic celebs" is less about the celebrities or even ourselves and more about our peers. About not wanting to get called out or told you're doing something wrong by watching a certain movie or listening to a certain song or even saying someone is hot. I am not trying to say "oh everyone's just being trendy when they #cancel people, no one ACTUALLY has principles" - but I do think in online spaces the kernel of principle that BEGINS this process snowballs into the well-intentioned desire to let other people know about Bad Things celebs have done that THEY would've wanted to know before supporting them... which then snowballs into the notion that you MUST instantly disavow EVERY celebrity the INSTANT it's known that they've done something bad... and the idea that celebrities fall into buckets of "problematic" or "unproblematic" when 1) it's a lot more complicated than that and 2) it is simply reality that a lot of "unproblematic" celebrities certainly are "problematic" by some metric in reality, and fans just don't know it yet. because they're strangers!!! they are fucking strangers, not friends. Many of them are RICH strangers. It should be no surprise that we don't agree with everything they do. So it's good to avoid SUPPORTING and EXCUSING terrible behaviors from them... but on the other hand, like you said, if you truly tried to hold yourself to a standard of never engaging with any piece of art or entertainment that had anyone with Bad Views™ involved in it, you would likely be writing off every single mainstream release and a large portion of independent projects, too. and accomplishing nothing.

So my advice is, ask yourself what these actions mean to YOU. what does it mean to you to "support" a person, versus their work, and when does that overlap (intentionally or not) with supporting their beliefs? Where does the line fall for YOU? I don't mean to sound condescending when I say this - because it's something I very much grapple with. But try to notice if you're worried about liking someone/something because your own moral compass feels bad about it, or because you are afraid people would dogpile you online for it. I mean, take care of yourself - there's nothing wrong with wanting to avoid attracting the kinds of people who dogpile over stuff like that - but... I don't think you need to let it into your head, or let it make you believe you don't have your own sense of right and wrong.

(also: it is incredibly normal and expected, especially in some of the murkier cases, that the "line" of when a celebrity becomes "problematic" enough to want to not engage with their work will fall in different places for different people!!! I think another aspect of being a mature, grounded person is also having understanding for your friends if they do not draw a line on same cases where you do, and vice versa.)

if you're able to feel, "I disagree with one of the people who was involved with this TV show, but I enjoy it overall and support many of the other people who made it", that should be plenty enough for you! and anyone who thinks YOU are an abhorrent person for holding that stance... well, it's up to them to decide what they wanna do with THAT feeling, lmao.

So, main takeaway - trust your own gut sense of empathy and morality the same way you would when evaluating someone you personally know that you disagree with on these issues... but also remember: they're celebrities, they're STRANGERS, and how you choose to engage or not engage with their work is up to you.