#it’s only really other queer people that make comments specifically about my bisexual rather than generally my queerness | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bthump · 3 years

Note

I wanted to touch on the whole gutsca thing with someone (I know zero people in this fandom so you're my lucky pick!). Am I alone in feeling like their first time together came out of no where? My meta with Guts is that he was not at all comfortable with sex at that time of his life (this instance being his first time [outside of the rape he experienced as a child]). His choice of words too, "here I go", translated to me like someone only doing what they felt was expected of them rather than something he was yearning for. He clearly wasn't even ready given how rough he was and how he regressed and attacked her. This moment seemed very forced and almost rang to me like Kentaro's declaration of "no homo though". I would be curious to know how Kentaro felt about homosexuality (bisexuality, etc) and if he ever addressed the ever blatant gay tension and romantic-non-platonic-love blossoming between Guts and Griffith pre-eclipse. I do get the sense that this may be a case of severe queer baiting or perhaps a PSA against gay love altogether ("falling for a man will literally destroy you and send you and everyone you love to hell" type of message); but I'm a very jaded person so I hope to be proven wrong. Sigh, my point being Gutsca seems pretty dang forced and empty of true development. I buy them more as besties than anything romantic. Especially since both he and Casca are actually in love with Griffith (what a fucking triangle!). Does anyone in fandom have any opinions on the sad possibility of this whole beautiful and ultimately tragic love between Griffith and Guts actually being a fucked up anti-gay PSA? Are there any interviews with Kentaro shooting this theory down so I can stop being sad and bitter about it? What are your thoughts?

Thanks for sending this, I'm definitely down to talk about it! I hope you connect with more people in the fandom but don’t worry about sending random asks even if you do lol.

Anyway you’re definitely not alone. I have a lot of thoughts on Guts and Casca's hook up, and they're all pretty much "it feels really forced and not particularly romantic but I think you can argue that that's deliberate" lol. For instance I discuss in a lot of detail here how various aspects of the scene indicate that Guts and Casca having sex is shown to be a case of both of them rebounding from Griffith and sort of giving to each other what they were unable or failed to give to him.

And I talk a lot about how Judeau essentially orchestrates it all and what that suggests about Guts and Casca's relationship here.

And lol sorry for all the links but also this post is about how their relationship feels one-sided to an extent and is used to illuminate a lot of Guts' flaws, using Judeau as a comparison point.

Oh shit and also one more lol, here's a comparison between the sex scene and Griffith's with Charlotte that suggests that both start as ways for the dudes to repress their feelings.

(Don't feel obligated to read all those posts if you don't want, you should get the gist of what I'm saying w/ those descriptions.)

But yeah basically I do think that Guts and Casca getting together felt forced and awkward. At best it might be intended to be seen that way, as two friends hooking up awkwardly in an emotionally intense moment but probably doomed to failure because neither of them are ready for a relationship with the other, or particularly interested in one deep down, once they finished "licking wounds." At worst it’s just bad writing lol. But again like I think there are good arguments for the former.

I also totally agree that their relationship has a strong vibe of doing what's expected. Like for real, at least to me both Guts and Casca read so easily as gay and repressed lol. Casca talks about her feelings for Griffith in terms of “he was a boy she was a girl can I make it any more obvious”

and I can’t help but see it as Casca like, wow I have strong feelings towards Griffith, he’s a man and I’m a woman, so clearly these feelings must be romantic, there’s no other option. Then when she has sex with Guts she keeps contextualizing it essentially as repayment for Guts saving her, like she owes him. “I too want a wound I can say you gave me.” “Not just being given to... maybe I can give something as well.” Which just doesn’t make her desire for him look all that genuine lol.

And then you have Guts. The way he tells Casca that from the start only her touch was okay with him after he has sex with her, referencing the scene when he wakes up with her on top of him and starts to panic before realizing she’s a woman, is soooo suggestive of repression to me. Like, first off because it’s incorrect, he was also okay with Griffith going in for a face-grab after winning a duel Guts had been projecting his rape trauma all over, which seems like a pretty conspicuous omission. And secondly because the reason he was okay with Casca’s touch specifically is solely because she’s a woman, not because she’s special or because they have a magic romantic connection - it’s because she’s not a man. To me that just screams that Guts was open to sex with Casca because she’s the only woman he knows, and he’s afraid of the idea of physical intimacy with men, regardless of what he might actually want deep down.

So yeah that’s basically how I feel about Guts and Casca’s relationship, strong agree with you.

When it comes to Miura’s intent, I can tell you that Miura was asked about the subtext in an interview once, back in 2000, and he responded with something along the lines of ‘two men can have passionate feelings for each other without it being romantic.’ The interview is here, but this is a paraphrase the translator mentioned in the comments.

Other than that I’ve never seen him address it directly, but on the flipside he has cited several textually gay stories as inspiration (off the top of my head: Kaze to Ki no Uta, Devilman, Guin Saga, mangaka Moto Hagio in general), and he has straightforwardly said that the (magical intersex) central character of his other work, Duranki, was intended to have romances with both male and female love interests. Also people tell me there are strong griffguts vibes with the main, presumably canon or intended-to-be-canon ship there. So there’s that lol.

As for the no homo aspect and the potential homophobia in the griffguts subtext... I can’t deny I’ve also considered the idea that it’s a deliberate anti-gay PSA (though I haven’t seen anyone else address the idea as far as I remember, and I’ve only briefly mentioned it offhandedly). Like, Guts and Griffith’s relationship turns bad because they’re both too invested in each other, maybe the barely-subtextual desire is meant to look like a sinister twisting of pure platonic feelings that ruins everything, if Griffith hadn’t loved him the Eclipse never would have happened, etc.

But honestly I don’t think that reading holds up compared to a much more positive reading of their feelings, in which it’s their failure to understand them and act on them, thanks largely to formative childhood trauma and self-hatred, that leads to tragedy.

I don’t know what Miura intended, and there certainly are aspects of the story that are homophobic regardless of his intent, even if my best-faith reading is entirely correct, like the only textual gay attraction being pedophiles and over the top heretic orgies lol, or yk, Guts and Griffith both assaulting the same woman while looking at/thinking about the other in a very sexually charged way.

But the reading of their relationship where it’s positive and good for both of them, even including sexual desire, and only gets fucked up because they both incorrectly think their feelings are unrequited is legitimately so weirdly strong, much stronger than a reading where the sexual nature of their feelings is what fucks everything up, so I’m pretty happy just rolling with that take.

And as much as Casca can be seen and may very well be intended as a no homo, it’s also very easy for me to read her relationships with both as less of a hopeful opportunity for positive heterosexual romance and more of a “here’s how repressing your feelings thru attempts at heterosexuality fucks you up” PSA lol. Griffith and Charlotte too, for that matter. It’s definitely a stretch to think that’s intended, but whether it’s intended or not it’s an easy sell for me and I’m fine with not really worrying too much about possible authorial intent there.

Finally, I also want to link this post that goes pretty thoroughly into why I interpret griffguts as very positive rather than as a cautionary tale or predatory gay lust etc

And also have this shorter post about Femto on the same subject too, why not

Oh and maybe this thing where I split hairs about Guts’ lust for Griffith and desire for revenge to make a point that the homoeroticism isn’t necessarily being equated with violence by the narrative lol

#ask #a #b #anonymous #theme: repression #theme: homoeroticism #interviews #ship: griffguts #ship: gtsca #theme: homophobia #theme: heteronormativity

43 notes · View notes

dgcatanisiri · 3 years

Text

Tried to make a brief summary of the issues of Mass Effect Andromeda’s handling of queer men and how it relates to why we’re (broad use here) upset with the Legendary Edition failing to provide better representation than the originals, and it kinda turned in to what amounts to an open letter for BioWare.

So, what the heck, here it is.

A little personal background. I spent my high school life completely in the closet. After graduating, I had a new computer and the opportunity to play a new game. The game chosen was BioWare’s Jade Empire. Still a fairly recent release, and I was a big fan of Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic, also by BioWare. So, being a young gay man, still uncomfortable and uncertain of who I was, I was very excited when I got to play this game that would allow me to play a gay romance, a romance that featured two men. I burned through two playthroughs of the game within less than a week, enjoying that rush of acknowledgement that yes, gay guys could be the hero. It was a massive affirmation for me at the time, something that said that my sexuality was not going to prevent me from being the hero, which legitimately was a message that I felt like most media was giving me to that point, because gay men barely appeared in anything other than guest roles for an episode or two on a TV show, but certainly not in video games. That game, that experience... I’ve said for years that it had cemented me as a BioWare fan for life.

If I say that now, it is a statement with a few caveats.

The history of the failure of Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 to provide any male/male romances is well documented. I was excited, very eager to romance Kaidan Alenko in Mass Effect 3. But even then, I noticed that there were things that were lacking in the romance. It was noticeable, for instance, that the basic dialogue between male Shepard and female Shepard was unchanged, if either was starting a new romance with Kaidan. The thing that always felt... WRONG about that was that if I’d had the option to begin a romance with him in the first game, I would have. Yet there’s not even a bit of dialogue that even references that inability, no comment of “I didn’t think you were available,” or anything of the sort, nothing to say that, say, Shepard was interested in Kaidan at the time, but didn’t believe he’d be receptive, didn’t want to damage their friendship, something of the sort. There was even a cut in the romance scene, where female Shepard will sit in Kaidan’s lap before being lifted up and carried to the bed, but with male Shepard and Kaidan, just fades to black. And then in the Citadel DLC, while all the other pairings walked in to the casino arm in arm, male Shepard and Kaidan are leaving plenty of room between them. There’s also the absence of any cuddling as they return to the Normandy.

To say nothing of the lack of Steve Cortez during the story segments of Citadel – he is not part of the big team entrance to the apartment, just spontaneously appears in the lounge room. He doesn’t participate in the briefings, and he is not a casino date, despite being part of the assembled team. Cortez also suffers from the fact that his romance spends so much time on how he needs to move on from the death of his husband, Shepard can come across as predatory towards him, trying to push him out of his grief and his pants. Due to the lateness of his arrival in the story, in game three, as opposed to game one or two, there is significantly less time to establish him as a person – beyond his past as a pilot and the death of his husband, we gain almost no concept of his personality or personal history.

I bring all of this up to help set the stage of what was expected when Mass Effect Andromeda was nearing release. Mass Effect had been full of problems of representation of queer men specifically (not that they were perfect on the count of female/female relationships either, because there’s plenty to talk about there, but as I’m not a lesbian or bisexual woman, I don’t feel comfortable talking about their experiences for them). While there were flaws, Dragon Age, what is often considered Mass Effect’s sister franchise, HAD managed to provide male/male romances in every iteration of that franchise.

In fact, considering that Dragon Age’s most recent installment, Dragon Age Inquisition, had been put out with a lot of fanfare about the first gay male companion, who was considered rather popular in the fandom, and the game itself receiving the Game of the Year award that year, indicating that, if there was any risk in the business sense of providing representation of queer men, it was negligible at most in the bottom line of that game, the attitude of a lot of gay men in the lead up to Andromeda’s release was some variation of “okay, Mass Effect has been flawed, but BioWare’s learned from their past mistakes, and they’re coming off the heels of a hugely successful game that had a gay character whose gayness was front and center in his storyline... We can expect that things will be fine, and we don’t have to worry.” That was the dominant attitude I found in a lot of my queer-oriented spaces.

But we started getting uncomfortable as the developers remained cagey about romance options in Andromeda – there were Twitter responses to “we’re concerned about Mass Effect’s history of gay representation, we would like to know about the options” that came out as “we checked and yep! They’re there!” These responses came across as flippant and even tone-deaf – the reason that the question was being asked was because of prior failures to be included, and not simply a desire to get all the details before launch.

As the trailers started coming out, the questions continued from the fans, and the response from the developers... continued to be uncomfortable. When asked directly for a listing of romances prior to release, the response was that the developers wanted players to learn as they played, that “the fun is in experiencing it!” This was a specific response when it was learned that the romance options could be flirted with regardless of orientation, but they would shut it down. Despite the fact that the trailers DID include content from certain romances – specifically, the male Ryder/Cora and male Ryder/Peebee romances.

This was uncomfortable for a lot of queer players like myself because it spoke to a lack of consideration of what it is like to be queer. In many places, it is a serious question of safety to even put yourself out there to find a partner, to flirt with someone openly unless you are already certain that there is a chance for a positive response. There are places where a queer person flirting with the wrong person can get them harassed, assaulted, even killed for doing so. Even in the safety of a virtual construct of video games, these are honed instincts that queer people have developed. And no matter how many times we would say this to the developers, no one seemed to understand. Likewise, the fact that the trailers felt free to show off heterosexual romances, but not queer ones felt... questionable.

Then, finally, firm details started coming out, and... There were problems. Early data-mining said that there was an even split of romances between orientations. But there was a bit of discomfort around the reveal that the gay characters, Suvi and Gil, were limited to the ship, rather than being companions who would accompany Ryder on missions. There is a history of companions being given more involved storylines and involvement than secondary characters. It also didn’t help the disappointment from queer people who’d been eager for Cora or Liam as romances, who were firmly established as straight (Cora herself had a popular lesbian following).

That discomfort increased when it came out further that, ACTUALLY, Jaal would not be available for Male Ryder. This caused a lot of upset. Now it was a case where there was NO M/M squadmate romance option. This on top of the group of fans who were uncomfortable with the idea that, in a sci-fi series, gay men couldn’t romance an alien, while this had become a staple of the series, considering Liara, the character from a species described as equivalent to Star Trek green-skinned Orion girls, had been available for straight men and lesbian/bi women from ME1, and straight women got in on the act with Garrus and Thane in ME2, on top of straight men also getting Tali.

This got worse when the achievement listing for the game was released and there was an achievement for “romancing three different characters.” Meaning that it was absolutely impossible for a gay man to play the game and get this achievement without playing a sexuality other than his own.

This is why I led with my experience with Jade Empire, why it was so affirming to me. Because to hear all this, ten years later, to see what had been so affirming to me a decade prior be functionally dismissed, be shown to take a secondary position at best... It hurt.

And the game proper did not help that feeling at all.

So first we meet Gil Brodie. Engineer of the Tempest. One of the first things we learn about him is that he has a close friendship with a woman named Jill. And then he immediately tells us that one) she is a fertility specialist, and two) she “says [he’s] part of the problem” because he won’t have kids the natural way. This is immediately setting off red flags to me – I can think of plenty of my friendships where we give one another grief for various things, but I would never think of introducing any of them to someone else with that fact. So my reflexive thought in this situation is “what kind of a friend is this really?”

And then, as the game goes on... This is the only thing that Gil’s conversations involve, the prospect of having kids. We do not learn much more about him, just have him talking about considering the idea. The lock-in for his romance requires Ryder to meet Jill, who Gil again says that she will talk his ear off about his “civic duty” to reproduce, a fact that makes those earlier red flags wave higher and more furiously, because who DOES that to a total stranger? And this is passed off as being “charming.” This leads to the culmination of the romance, where Gil says that Jill has decided she wants to get pregnant and she wants Gil to be the dad.

There’s... A LOT going on here, so let me work through this. First, one of the few things Gil says as a bit of establishing his character is that he is impulsive, that he joined the Andromeda Initiative, the journey from the Milky Way galaxy to the Andromeda galaxy without really thinking through what it would mean, that it was a one-way journey with no way to back out once he’d gotten there. So this is already saying to me that this is not a person who really SHOULD be a parent, at least at this point in his life.

We also get a couple of emails from him in-game that paint him as putting in thirty-six hour workdays into the engines on the Tempest, that he cares about and puts a lot of time into those engines. So when I think about him as a father, I see him having to give up something he’s deeply passionate about to do it, because the Tempest is certainly no place to raise a child – they can’t exactly put a playpen in the cargo hold, for example.

This would be one of the first things that I would think of as a discussion element, but... it’s not there. All that we get is a couple of casual comments about how Gil should know that bringing a child into the world is a big thing, something that shouldn’t be done lightly. But this is framed as Ryder questioning Gil’s fitness to be a parent at all, rather than questioning if he’s thinking this through and having considered this enough to be ready to take on this responsibility, or if it’s even something that he even wants.

Because that’s the other big thing here – this is not Gil’s idea. This is not something that he makes clear is his desire. No, it’s Jill who has decided that she wants to get pregnant and use Gil’s sperm. For all that he matters in this whole thing, he might as well be a turkey baster. He’s basically an accessory in his own story, because he goes in to this with all the passion of a math equation: “The Andromeda Initiative is a colonization effort. Therefore, the idea is to have babies. Therefore, I should find some way to reproduce.” This isn’t him having a passion or desire to have kids, just it being “something you do.”

This is, genuinely, a failure to understand the character who was being written. Gil’s writing reeks of having been written by someone who does not know what they are talking about. There is an element to the gay experience that is not innate but learned. When we realize that having children is not a thing that will just happen, that if we want this to happen, it will require a lot of additional steps, there are many who will simply say “this isn’t for me, this is more work than I’m willing to put in to for this.”

Now, Gil could have been someone who had decided it was worth it, but that butts up against the idea of him being impulsive, that he doesn’t think things through. There is no time given to focusing on the reason he decides this is the right choice for him, to the point that many players felt that this was not Gil’s decision but something that Jill was pushing, that she expected him to jump on her command. Because we have so little of Gil, as a character and an individual, but plenty of him talking up her, this “friendship” feels toxic to many.

Just about everyone I have ever spoken with about Gil is deeply uncomfortable that literally, the only way that he will not have a child at this point is if a romanced Ryder stops him – if I am playing a game where I don’t romance him, I actively just stop interacting with him at a certain point so that this never comes up, because this does not come across as happy. It comes across as forcing a gay man into a heteronormative experience to satisfy some traditional idea of “man and woman, raising kids.”

And, as the cherry on top, if you do tell Gil that you’re not comfortable having kids – a very real thing, whether gay or straight – then, unlike other romances, Gil and Ryder do not share a kiss at the finale of the game. And, during the last conversations on Meridian, the only thing Gil even brings up is Jill being pregnant, whether or not it’s his child.

This is what “representation of gay men” amounted to in Mass Effect Andromeda. A homophobic story that was about a gay experience written by someone who is not a part of this community and does not know or understand the experience personally, going through the motions of development when really, all that is cared about is the end result. To say that most of the gay men I know who have played this game find this homophobic is to undersell the point.

It doesn’t help that, of all the Tempest romances, Gil also clocks in with the least amount of romance exclusive material – a few flirts, the romance lock in and scene, and being able to stop Gil from having kids. Other than that, his friendship and his romance are virtually identical.

Speaking of, the romance scene consists of a make out session that fades to black, before coming back in with Ryder and Gil, shot from about shoulders up, briefly wrapping up their conversation that preceded the fade to black. This is noteworthy when the heterosexual romances between Ryder and their human love interests, as well as Peebee and Jaal, the former having a similar body model to naked human women, just blue, and Jaal, who is naked at other points in the game, have much more involved romance scenes – Cora’s in specific received special attention.

All of this, individually, may have just been reflective of time crunch and other external pressures – we all understand the realities of game development, that for all the ambitions that go in, when the deadlines are nearing, something has to give. But taken collectively... The kindest question is to ask why all of the “give” happened in regards to the gay man?

The end result with Gil honestly feels like he was written in response to the bad faith arguments that had come up in the period after the name for the game was revealed and it was made clear that the game would follow a colonization effort. There were a contingent of people who said that “there shouldn’t be gay people coming along, a colonization effort needs to reproduce.” This is a bad faith argument from homophobes, trying to justify why they don’t want gay people in “their” games. In answering their question, the question they only “ask” in order to explain why they don’t want to have gay people in the game without saying that, it comes across as catering the gay content for a heterosexual audience. It should go without saying that this is a bad position to take.

So, that’s Gil. What about Reyes? Well, Reyes himself is bound to a single planet, which, again, points to a minimizing of how much content he will even get, since his content can only be accessed on this single planet. Likewise, Reyes, as a character, is someone who falls in to several old, tired tropes with regards to bisexual men – he is a shady, untrustworthy character, in this instance literally a criminal, meant to be evocative of the “dashing rogue” archetype. This is a characterization that has often been BioWare’s go-to with regards to bisexual men, because we see this archetype drawn on in Jade Empire’s Sky, Dragon Age Origins’ Zevran, Dragon Age 2’s Anders, and even elements exist in Dragon Age Inquisition’s Dorian (even if he is a gay man). It’s a well that BioWare has frequently tapped when it comes to a romance option for queer men, to the point that it starts to feel like BioWare in general believes that this IS what queer men are.

There’s also the questionable portrayal of Reyes that leads to a description of the trope “the depraved bisexual,” an explicitly bisexual character who uses sex and sexuality as a manipulative tool, that they treat others as simply there to be their toys. Over in Dragon Age Inquisition, one of the romance options was specifically NOT made bisexual in order to avoid this trope, but Reyes himself seems to be a candidate for that trope all the same.

All this, and, again, the romance options for gay men were unequal to those for everyone else. This prompted the campaign #MakeJaalBi – Jaal was, notably, the character initially assumed to be the bisexual male companion, and on release, his romance was heterosexual exclusive. But datamining revealed that there was code for him to be romanced by male Ryder. Indeed, on release, it was noteworthy that Jaal could not even be flirted with by male Ryder. Liam had a distinct turndown for male Ryder, a couple of them, depending on when Ryder flirts with him. Jaal had no such turndown.

And this worked. BioWare released the patch for Andromeda that gave Jaal a bisexual romance. However, this was the only change that Mass Effect Andromeda received in regards to the issues of the romances before support for the game ended. While it was seen as an improvement, it was also questioned why this was the only change, when... Well, I spent the better part of two pages outlining the problems of Gil’s portrayal.

(I feel I would be remiss to not mention there was also a character, Hainley Abrams, who would, upon interacting with her, proceed to deadname herself to Ryder, as if that is the only way to establish that a transgender person is trans. This was also changed in a patch after the trans community complained, and, in conjunction with the above, led more than a few people to wonder if the Andromeda script had been looked over by any queer sensitivity readers, given the earlier issues with Gil. This does go out of the scope of everything else in this discussion, but it is worth mentioning.)

When Mac Walters says players will talk about how Shepard is each of theirs, that every individual player approaches Shepard as being “their” Shepard, he isn’t wrong. He says the characters, and the relationships we have with the characters is the heart and soul of the series, he isn’t wrong. And yet... When I play the trilogy, my heart and soul are being torn apart, because I do not get to see myself in the trilogy. I am not there in this story, at least for two thirds of the way. And in that third that I am there, I feel like I am cared about less than my counterparts who are heterosexual.

The idea that “making” characters available for same sex romance changes them is like saying that there is some inherent difference in a person because of their sexualities. While it’s true that the experiences of queer people does offer different perspectives on matters, it does not fundamentally alter the person, the individual that we are. It does not change our heart and soul. Restoring the bisexuality of characters like Jack, Jacob, Ashley, Thane, or Tali is not changing who they are. Making Kaidan bisexual in ME3 did not change who he was, and restoring a romance between him and male Shepard in ME1 would not change him either.

Every game has some cut content surrounding queer content specifically, and a great deal of that content is specifically for gay players like myself. I said at the beginning that I once thought of myself as a BioWare fan for life, but that now comes with caveats. The caveats are pretty simple – while the games produced by BioWare once felt affirming, now they feel like they’re only grudgingly allowing me to be there. That if I must be there, I should just take the scraps I’m given and be content with that, rather than being treated as an equal.

I like to think that this is not the message that the people at BioWare wish to impart to their players. I like to believe BioWare’s statements of wanting to be an inclusive and welcoming environment for their players, regardless of gender, race, sexuality, orientation, whatever identity and label one chooses. But based on the experience of the last four games, of the Legendary Edition perpetuating the homophobia of over a decade ago... I have a hard time believing that.

BioWare games once made me feel like I was equal to the straight heroes across my media. Unfortunately, I don’t feel that way about their games anymore. Not when, after having the opportunity to restore the bisexuality of Kaidan – of multiple characters, really – in the Legendary Edition, I am still being told that offering representation for people like me is something that only comes grudgingly.

And if that’s what I see now... What does it say about what the future of the franchise will offer? If every game in this series involves fighting for content that, in particular, heterosexual players will see offered as the rule, what motivates me to want to continue to be invested and involved in this franchise?

#bioware critical #dg rants #another angry queer rant #make mass effect inclusive #make mele inclusive #makemeleinclusive

36 notes · View notes

defilerwyrm · 3 years

Note

For the ask meme: burning bright, anything about the parts at the table with the Nein. You write their banter so well!

FIC SPOILERS BELOW!

Burning Bright on AO3

The entire dinner scene hit me like a bolt of lightning while I was working on this fic. It started with Beau’s outburst, and then Veth’s willful denial and subsequent fit, and I built the two scenes around that.

Diving into particulars….

“Uhm,” he said, intelligently, but quickly recovered and flashed his friends a smile. “It is most impressive. Certainly a step up from a tiny hut.”

A direct reference to the name of the spell. Originally it was Leomund’s tiny hut. I have no clue why in 5e Wizards decided to 86 the attribution names on so many spells like Otiluke’s resilient sphere and Tasha’s hideous laughter. Things like that always made me curious about the (what I assume were) PCs the spells were named after. I had thought maybe it was because the characters who diegetically invented them were specific to one setting, but in that case I don’t know why Bigby’s hand is still Bigby’s but Evard’s black tentacles are no longer Evard’s. I don’t like it. As an aside, Widowgast’s Nascent Nein-Sided Tower is, mechanically speaking, Mordenkainen’s Magnificent Mansion. Anyway. Moving on!

It was delectable that Caleb wanted to impress him.

This boy hungry and not just for soup

Flustered, Essek tried to fend them off, but it was Caleb that did him in. It was always Caleb. The human took a large roll from his own plate, broke it in half, and offered one of these parts to Essek, who tried his best not to choke.

“You need to keep your strength up, ja?” Caleb implored him quietly.

The steady hand that accepted was a point of pride because it very much wanted to quake. The Kryn weren’t bread people, but...did he have any idea what this gesture would mean in Rosohna? Any inkling at all?

This is another one of those places where I delight in playing to cultural differences. What I’d had in mind for what that gesture—breaking food into two pieces and offering half to someone—WOULD mean in Rosohna was a bit nebulous, as I like to keep the reader guessing a bit and let their imagination fill in the blanks; but my rough idea was that it’s a courting gesture that signifies “I can and will provide for you, even if it means less for me.” An expression of selfless caregiving and an offer of partnership. Not wholly unlike a bird bringing food to a prospective mate.

And actually it’s a little bit funny coming from Caleb, who has fuck-all to his name but his name, when Essek is a rich bitch who answers directly to the Bright Queen.

Not that he was about to say it out loud, but he was a quick convert to this whole bread thing. To say that it won him over would be an understatement. That seemed to be a recurring theme here.

I imagine if I’d grown up never really eating bread and was introduced to it in adulthood I’d be like “Where have you BEEN all my life?!” But also: the bread is friendship, the bread is the Mighty Nein, the bread is communion in the spirit of sharing rather than politics and appearances and power plays—things he thought he was fine without until they were foisted upon him.

Somewhere in the course of the multiple conversations going on at one time, Jester got an Idea, as she was prone to doing. He became increasingly aware of her talking about kissing, of all things, and this culminated in her shouting above the din, cheeks flushed purple though he hadn’t seen her touch any wine: “I have an idea you guys! Why don’t we all go around and say how many people we’ve kissed?”

Jester is the most wonderfully convenient deus ex machina if you ever need to insert an awkward or embarrassing conversation among the Mighty Nein, because this is exactly the sort of shit she would do.

Jester leaped up and slammed her hands onto the table. “Caduceus you’ve never been kissed?! That’s so sad!”

The firbolg was unfazed. He merely shrugged and said, “It hasn’t come up and I haven’t gone looking. Not something I’ve ever thought about, really.”

Jester’s tail lashed back and forth behind her like an overstimulated cat. “Do you want me to kiss you?”

Fjord went a bit wild-eyed at this. Caduceus smiled gently and said, “No thank you.”

Three things about this part:

1) Jester’s tail doesn’t get NEARLY enough mention in fic! If I’m playing (or writing) a character with a tail you can be damn sure you’re gonna know what it’s doing! Makes me wanna play a tabaxi tbqh.

2) Cad’s “No thank you” is the sum total of his sexuality, lol. Jester was raised in a pretty highly sexualized setting, didn’t really get out much before she fled Nicodranas, and can be pretty naïve, so she doesn’t really get the whole aroace thing; but it never crosses Cad’s mind that this would be “abnormal“ or ”sad” in any way—it causes him no distress, as it shouldn’t. This is yet another “Same planet, different worlds” moment.

3) Fjord is physically restraining himself from yelling “JESTER WHAT THE FUCK” lmao

Veth kept picking at it. “So you’re um. You know. Into the fellas?”

Beau snorted. “I could’a told you that months ago.”

“Yeah you could’a!” Veth pouted with a self-conscious curl to her shoulders.

I saw a comment on Tiktok that said Veth was being borderline homophobic, but that wasn’t my intent! It’s just that she inherited a certain blind spot for male queerness from her player, and as hard as she’d been trying to encourage Caleb to hook back up with his female ex, it never occurred to her that he had a male ex, too—and given that they’ve been so close for so long, she’s feeling pretty self-conscious about the fact that she never figured out that Caleb is bisexual in all that time, as well as kind of upset that no one—Caleb especially—told her. She’s having a moment of “Why didn’t I know this? Did you think it was going to change things between us? Did I make you feel unsafe?” And also a little bit of “Okay well, now I have to get him to hook up with TWO people AT ONCE because my boy deserves threesomes 😤”

Jester went goggle-eyed at him. “You’ve only been with one person?” she exclaimed. “But you’re like a hundred years old! And very handsome. I would have thought you’d get like, all the ladies.”

Ladies. Right.

Veth might not be the only one with a certain blind spot.

Beau gave her a funny look, snorting. “I dunno, he seems like the kinda guy who turns down those offers left and right.”

..…But Beau’s got his number, for more than one reason. She’s got super gaydar, for one, and has him pegged as the type who’s very choosy about his partners (also mind you, this was before demi!Essek was canonized by WoG, so I was still rolling with my hc that Essek got around when he felt like it).

The uproar was instantaneous. Everyone—almost everyone—started talking or shouting at once. Beau’s voice rang out among the din with, “HOLY SHIT ESSEK FUCKS.” Strangely pleased with himself, he downed the rest of his wine in one gulp and spent the next few minutes fending off increasingly prying, personal questions until the Nein grew bored with his lack of answers and someone changed the subject.

There it is, the line that spawned two entire scenes!

He was not a war mage, but he was experienced and wily, and he was damned good at what he did, and as long as there was breath left in his body, the Mighty Nein would not fall here.

Joke’s on me, motherfucker literally has the War Caster feat -_-

But like in my defense, that’s just what it’s called in the book. The feat just means that you have either the training or experience to cast well during a fight, which I see as not necessarily the same thing as a war mage, which was my way of saying an arcane caster who is a soldier.

Veth stared at her blankly as if willing herself not to understand. “Caleb? With who?”

She breathed steadily. “...Essek. Caleb and Essek.”

Beside her, Jester squealed and brought her fists to her face.

Veth was less enthused. “WHAT.”

Beau’s mental commentary here is dead on. Veth still doesn’t really trust Essek at this point and has been pretty vocal about that…despite being the one to declare him part of the Mighty Nein? Eh, she’s allowed to have complicated feelings on the guy, all things considered. But I find it kind of comical and very Veth (and very Sam) for her to be all full of zest for trying to get Caleb back together with the frigging Volstrucker who is actively working for his abuser and worst enemy but balk at him hooking up with Essek.

Jester “explained” in a delighted yell: “Caleb and Essek are gonna fuuuuuuck!”

I don’t know, is this too unsubtle to call foreshadowing? The line flowed naturally in the dialogue, but it’s also letting the reader know exactly what they’re in for next, lol.

“...He’s going to break that little elf twink, you know,” Veth said, sounding distant. Seemed she was having some difficulty processing. Not too surprising, considering how adamant she was about wanting their wizard to hook back up with his old flame, the fucking Volstrucker. “We’ve all seen his dick.”

This was 100% taken from Sam’s little throwaway line “It’s above-average” but it turned out to serve two purposes other than reminding the reader that all of these people have seen Caleb naked:

1) It’s yet another thing Veth thinks she understands about him but doesn’t. Caleb’s a top like Dalmatians are purple and if you disagree then I respect your right to be incorrect ;)

2) That said, it is, in fact, foreshadowing for the sequel, in which Essek experiences a great deal of frustration. (I haven’t touched the damn thing in weeks, feels like; I’ve been too busy with work, being exhausted from work, and being in a tizzy about my upcoming surgery.)

Fjord blurted out, “I’ll join you.”

Poor Fjord has had such an uncomfortable night!

Hoo boy that was a lot. Thanks for the ask, this was really fun!! And sorry it took so long; I work Saturday nights and things got really busy for a bit there.

#shadowgast #ask box games #before long my song is dying #critical role #plz how do i fandom

10 notes · View notes

stuckinapatriarchalbullshitland · 4 years

Text

Camren Timeline (Tittle edited)

Hello, dear Anon.

I’m gonna answer your questions in order.

1) 2012-2016. This is the timeline that I’m gonna explain just because so you can go check based on the concerts, interviews, etc. Compared to the first years, the timeline from 2017 to today is much simpler because they’ve broken up very few times. This one here that I’m gonna explain (2012-2016), is based on what I know and also my theories. You can, as usual, disagree with me.

In January 2017, Camila talked about the evolution of her music during Lena Dunham’s Women of the Hour podcast, by explaining how she created her life story through the songs she wrote. Starting precisely from the age of 15, when she had her first kiss. She practically and inadvertently exposed the lie she has always been forced to tell regarding the famous first kiss she had when she was ‘17’. [The entire podcast has been removed, unfortunately. But you can go listen to the audio posted by 5HxCC News on Youtube, called ‘CAMILA CABELLO TALK FIRST KISS ON PODCAST’.]

According to the calculations, the kiss must have occurred between December 20, 2012, that is when X-Factor ended, and January 17, 2013, that is when they signed the contract with Syco/Epic in Los Angeles. My guess? It happened that same New Year’s Eve when the Cabellos spent it over at the Jaureguis.

Throughout 2013 until the beginning of April 2014, L and C had a strange relationship. They were friends, but they behaved and did things you wouldn’t do with a friend. Doesn’t that ring a bell? Oh, hello ‘Like Friends Do’!

2014: Become official in early April and broke up in late November. Small parenthesis. They were both 17 years old in April 2014. Oh, hello to you too ‘Used to This’!

2015: From the end of December 2014/the very first days of January 2015, to the beginning of April. From mid-July to mid-October. From the beginning of November to almost mid-December, they did a continuous on-again, off-again that lasted throughout 2016.

2016: from almost mid-January to mid-February. From early March to early April. From mid-May to early June. This makes me laugh. Only the first few days of August, then from mid-August to the end of August, and again, in hops the first days of September, and from after those hops, until almost the end of September. From early October to almost mid-October (broke up only for a few days), and then until mid-November. And lastly, only a few days in mid-December.

2) Camila suffers from one of the variants of OCD since she was 8, and despite seeing a therapist since 2013, her OCD was diagnosed at the end of 2015. C also suffers from anxiety, panic attacks, mood disorders, and depression (all linked to her OCD). These are things that we’ve been able to witness with our own eyes on more than one occasion. She’s always tried to bottle everything up and not show herself ‘weak’ in front of people, in front of us fans. The last thing she wanted was to let people know how much she was really struggling, and therefore, she always tried to disguise it as best she could. Many times, even using her humor as a shield. Picture certain events like a time bomb. Picture her depression as a progression ready to explode:

March 2015, mild. October, November, December 2015, and January 2016, medium. From June to August 2016, high, + explosion in early September, which consequently led to the permanent presence of mama Sinu.

Everything has been derived and therefore worsened by: 1) The rhythms that have always been crazy. 2) Having to deal with many people every day. 3) Having grown up in the spotlight and being constantly observed. 4) Labels that told them what to do (through management) even when they just had to breathe. 5) The expectations and the pressure they’d put on her for being chosen as the chosen one. 6) Having her relationship secretly because they’d rather pass her off as a killer rather than queer/bisexual/gay or in any case associate her romantically with a girl. 7) All the hatred constantly received.

And the list goes on… Anxiety consumed her life for a long time. Now comes and goes.

3) Yes, of course Laurinah were there for her. As were Ashlee, Normani, Ally, Hoko, Michel'Le, Lauren (Fuller), Roger, and a few other crew members who were with them on the tour. As were her family, Jenny, Sandra, Marielle, Mariana, Brooke, Megan, Tica, Rebecca, Guido, Steven, Javi, and her other Miami friends.

Guys, Camila is a private person. The fact that she’s private, however, doesn’t mean that at the time or now, she doesn’t have other friends. It wasn’t just Lauren, Dinah, and Ashlee. And as for 5H, of course Mani and Ally were there for her too, contrary to what they want us to believe. Just think about it. And don’t think that only Dinah was their captain. Who was the one who went to Taylor’s ‘1989 Tour’ concert with Camila? Who was the one who went with them to the famous 1975 concert in Los Angeles on April 16, 2014? Who was the one who tried to protect them from the paparazzi in London in 2015? And instead, who was the one who always helped them lie during interviews? Who was the one who could never manage to control her expressions at first glance in questions that caught them off guard?

Ally and Mani were captains as much as Dinah. There are billions of interviews that prove it. In their own way, they always helped and teased them. Think of the video where Ally fakes a laugh as Lauren loudly slaps C’s ass, who screams “Lauren!” Think about the performances of specific songs. One, for example, is ‘They Don’t Know About Us’, and Norminah always teased them especially during that song. Think about when fans asked Ally if Camren was real and she ran away, laughing and not answering. Think of Mani during the ‘BOSS or TOSS’ game. There are millions of other examples.

4) 3 times. But, as we saw with Dinah in that 2017 video, they may have given her intravenous therapies when she needed it. It’s common, especially for overworked artists.

Oh and, guys. I saw that the audio of the uncut interview with Hitz FM station that the girls did in Malaysia on July 6, 2016, which was released on August 5, has returned to spread. I don’t know why it’s back to spreading now since I heard it already, if I’m not mistaken, in 2017, and saved it a couple of years ago. But anyway, that’s not the point. The point is, I saw that they wrote what Camila says, and it’s wrong. Listen to the audio even at full volume if you want, but C doesn’t say ‘False’. This is what happens:

I (Interviewer): “This one an interesting one. Are Camila and Lauren dating?”

L: “No”

C: “Ugh, Jesus Christ”

I: “Yeah, I know” at the same time as what he says, C laughs awkwardly as a result of her comment “It comes down on Google 'cause people are googling it!”

L: “No! It’s amazing how people continue to do that”

I don’t know if whoever wrote that heard wrong or what. If it’s one of those “which name do you hear, Yanny or Laurel?” cases, you know? But I just wanted to point this out to you. That’s all.

Okay. Love u, guys. Stay safe, please. With love, Faby.

___

I decided to post this twice because I want to add this to a masterpost (Once I figure out how to do that)

But for real, this timeline is insane. I knew about a lot of those stuff except the last one about that interview. insane.

#submission #anon #ask #camren timeline #F #f anon

91 notes · View notes

nomattertheoceans · 4 years

Note

I feel like I picked up on most of the racist tropes in Maas’ books but I’d love to hear your thoughts on the homophobia in them

Hi Non!! Thanks for the ask :)

Just an fyi if people didn’t see it, Anon is referring to my tags on this post about death of the author and the importance of criticizing media without taking into account the creator’s intent.

So yeah, regarding Maas. There’s a lot of ways in which I find her writing homophobic, I’ll divide them in different categories to try and make it clearer because my mind works in twisted ways x)

You should also know that I haven’t read Crescent City past the first few chapters so I can’t talk about this book (what I heard isn’t great regarding this issue but I haven’t read it so I won’t comment on it)

(this got long so I’m gonna use a read more)

worldbuilding

I think her worldbuilding tends to reflect a homophobia that she might not be aware of. Her entire world is built on heteronormative ... norms (lmao sorry I don’t have a better word I haven’t slept in more than 20 hours) that don’t leave any space for queer people to thrive in.

Throne of Glass actually got the less awful bit on this one, we’re shown that Hasar’s girlfriend Renia would become Empress if Hasar was crowned, and Aelin’s uncle was openly gay, so I guess compared to ACOTAR it’s better.

ACOTAR gets the worst of this: The fae society is painfully mysoginistic and by extend, homophobic. Mor is basically sold into marriage at sixteen, to a man, without regards of how she feels about it, because women are considered a breeding stock. The Illyrian women are viewed in the same light. Even Feyre is expected to be making heirs when she’s about to marry Tamlin. Yes, all these examples are painted as bad things in the books, but it doesn’t take away the fact that there are also considered normal within the society we are presented with. When the entire world is built around cishet dynamics (whether good or bad), it shows us that queer relationships are not the norm here, they’re outsiders from their own society (btw considering women as ‘baby makers’ is also transphobic but I’m not gonna open that can of worms).

The mating bond in itself is the biggest heteronormative concept in her books. As Rhys explains it in ACOMAF, it is literally intended for couples to make the strongest babies. It doesn’t care about love between partners, its primary goal is to perpetuate the species. It’s a natural instinct that we’re shown is basically impossible (or at least very difficult) to fight against. We’re shown that the woman has to make the man a meal to “seal the deal”, we’re shown that men become extremely violent towards other men they consider a threat when they’re influenced by the bond (by the way that’s toxic masculinity but it’s not what this post is about).

I believe that Maas didn’t intend for the mating bond to be a possibility between mlm or wlw couples, but that she retconned it in ACOWAR. Which in a sense is good, I’m all for queer soulmates! But the concept she invented here doesn’t have much room for non heteronormative relationships, and it becomes painfully obvious when you try to apply the mating bond logic to wlw/mlm couples. It brings many questions to mind: if it’s intended to make babies, does it mean that the mated mlm couple has one of the men be a trans man? If that’s the case, why didn’t she tell us? Why didn’t she spend more time on telling us their story? If they’re both cis men, then why would they have a mating bond, something specifically designed to help with species continuity by making babies? To me, it’s proof that she didn’t think it through, she thought it was cute to have two men be mates just like our main couple was, and didn’t stop to consider how the mating bond didn’t allow for this to happen organically because it exists in a vaccum of cishet privilege where she didn’t think about the consequences of including it in her books without elaborating on it.

We can also see that queer people aren’t expected to be the norm in that society. Feyre is genuinely surprised when Mor tells her that she likes women, as if it was this groundbreaking thing she never even considered. I’m not going to get into details as to why I hate Mor’s coming out (I love Mor being a wlw but really, really, hate that scene), but the fact that she hasn’t felt comfortable enough to come out in five centuries is very telling of how unaccepting the fae society is of queer people. So yeah, there’s a queer bar where she hangs out but like... that doesn’t mean it’s accepted. One of the main reasons why queer bars started existing in the first place was to become a safe space for people to be themselves, so you know, I kinda take it as another proof of how unopen-minded the fae society actually is.

lack of queer characters

Overall, we don’t have a lot of confirmed queer characters. Off the top of my head, I can think about (of course I might forget some so that might not be 100% accurate, I haven’t read the books in a long while):

TOG: Hasar and Renia, Aedion, Orlon and Darrow

ACOTAR: Mor, Helion, Thesan, Andromache, Nephelle

Note that I’m not counting unnamed characters. I don’t consider “x’s lover” as a developped enough character to count as representation, come on.

Out of all these characters, only two of them are in the main cast of their respective series (Aedion and Mor). The others go from “mentioned” to “secondary character” at best. I’m not saying that all of her characters have to be queer, but out of such a big cast of mains, one in each series seems very little.

construction of these characters

On top of not having many characters that aren’t cishet, the characters we do have aren’t very well handled by the story.

Hasar is repeatedly described as being ugly, despite most of the other characters being described over and over as breathtakingly beautiful.

Aedion compares bisexuality to forced prostitution.

Helion is basically shown as sleeping around with everybody.

Mor’s sexuality is kept so ambiguous that there’s debate as to whether she’s actually bi, or rather a closeted lesbian.

Renia barely talks, Darrow is a jerk. Orlon, Andromache and Nephelle are figures of the past that we never meet

This is a problem mainly because of how small in numbers the queer characters are. The more diverse cast you create, the easiest it gets to avoid hurtful tropes. I wouldn’t mind Helion being a bi man sleeping around all the time if he wasn’t the only bi man in ACOTAR. Nor would I mind Mor’s tragic backstory if we had other wlw characters. By reducing her cast to such little numbers, she’s creating problems in her writing. She’s telling us that bi men sleep around and never settle down, she’s telling us that sapphic women will only get tragic stories and never find love again.

In the end, the combination of a heteronormative worldbuilding and the lack of work put into the queer characters we are given makes it impossible for me to not consider her books homophobic.

To be clear,

I don’t think Maas does this out of malice. I don’t think she’s a homophobe who hates queer people or anything. I also don’t dislike her books. They’re a fun read, and there’s a reason why ACOMAF is one of only two audiobooks I always have on my phone! Hell, I even write fanfic with her characters. But I think it’s important to be critical of her books, particularly in regards to issues such as racism, mysoginy, or homophobia.

To go back to the original post from yesterday, this is why ‘death of the author’ is an important point here. I’m not saying that Maas intended to be homophobic or that she built her world expressedly to exclude queer people. But in the end, that’s what happened, and we can’t brush off the critics of queer people and people of color just by saying “well, the author didn’t mean it that way.”

I do think that she includes queer representation only as an afterthought in her books, and it shows. Mor’s coming out was poorly handled because she didn’t consider the ramifications of it, just like the mating bond suddenly applying to queer relationships. Her societies are based on cishet white upper class America and that leaves little to no place for queer people (and people of color) to thrive in her stories. From what I see, she doesn’t seem interested in consulting with sensitivity readers over these issues, and as long as she doesn’t swallow her pride and listen to the people that are affected by it, she’s not going to get better on these points.

#Anonymous #Asks #anti sjm #I guess?#I don't consider this to be anti it's just a discussion #but I get people not wanting to see negativity so I'll tag it #I'm not dwelling on the racism because that's not what anon asked #and also as a white woman I don't feel like it's my place to dwell on this #there are other bloggers that addressed it much better than I ever could #I hope this post is clear omg I rambled on for so long lmaoooo #I'm always opened to discussion by the way!! as long as you stay civil I'm willing to listen to any point of view #pinned post #sjm critical

117 notes · View notes

komoryriku · 4 years

Text

Queering KH: Part 2

How to Queer this Anime Game? By me, an American nerd lol

Pictured: Dream. Drop. Distance. Sequel. 8)))

What is Queering

I’m so excited to talk about this okay this is literally the only fun thing I get to do as an English major anymore lmao.

“Queering a text” is the academic term for taking a given text and extracting the queer subtext of it, or applying a queer reading to it. It is taking a piece of literature, film, or art and reading into it for the gay coding. It is an especially important tool for reading old literature written during periods of extreme homosexual oppression, wherein the author would be forced to hide hints of homosexuality under layers and layers of superficial text.

Pictured: Sora and Riku battling Ursula as she means to wreck their ship, mirroring the disaster that Sora’s friends Eric and Ariel (lovers) faced at sea.

As a post-structuralist, I am also here to inform you that every text is made up of intertextual influence. This means whether the JK Rowlings of the world intended it or not, their characters may well be queer coded because of the unconscious influence of homoerotic customs in our culture that have permeated the text. It’s why people speculated that Newt Scamander was gay, because he showed little interest in Tina and preferred to focus on his beasts, which is not normative for a male protagonist in straight media. People likewise considered that Merida from Pixar’s Brave might be gay, because she had no interest in dating men and wanted to live a wild lifestyle traditionally associated with masuculinity, things that are pretty in line with lesbian coding. And let me tell you, lgbt claimed Queen Elsa IMMEDIATELY for very good reason. Pretty much everything about her journey, purposefully or not, makes for an strikingly overt gay metaphor. Let it Go is a coming out song for a woman suffocating under normativity all her life, deal with it.

Same, Elsa.

Oh whoops I accidentally pasted this picture of Riku here.

Keep Cultural Distinctions in Mind

Something else important I want to point out is that different cultures are- different lol. They are going to vary. What is queer coding here is not necessarily queer coding in Japan. A man presenting femininely in American media would certainly get him coded as gay. A bishonen in an anime though? Not so much. Men bathing together in Japan is common practice so that would mean nothing gay over there. In America however, you have things like this vine.

In which 2 dudes are chilling as far away as possible from each other in a hot tub to prove they are not gay lol.

So when I say the male members of Organization XIII bathe together, it means literally nothing in a Japanese context.

But let me tell you this: homosexual mlm tend to enjoy bathing with other dudes. Sexual attraction is sexual attraction no matter where you go. So how would you queer code a Japanese character as gay in a hot tub context?

By American logic, if the straight thing to do is sit 5 feet apart in a hot tub, then the inverse, the gay thing to do, would be 2 men sitting very close together in a hot tub. So if I were to code 2 American male characters as gay in a hot tub context, that is what I would do. But if I really wanted to hammer it home, I would ALSO have them blushing so there is no straight explanation for their closeness.

And for a Japanese character, for whom bathing with men might well mean nothing, I’d definitely have them physically blush, so that you know it does NOT just “mean nothing” to him...

Oh look at that. Amano went out of her way to draw Roxas blushing at the concept of bathing with men. So when I say “the members of Orginization XIII bathe together”, you know that means something to Roxas, cuz the coding tells us so. There are indeed certain ways you can depict a shonen being either interested in or at least affected by that idea. You just have to mind those codes telling you what the character really feels, especially when they can’t really say it.

Speaking of blushes, Amano uses them a lot.

They’re a pretty effective tool for hiding gay coding into your characters cuz an anime character might blush for any number of reasons, from being flustered by their crush,

to being flustered because they don’t have a crush.

If you’ve ever translated Japanese media, (I haven’t, but I have friends who do), you know that Japanese is very vague which means you need the whole context to properly understand a scene. It’s a similar situation with queer coding. Consider this scene of Roxas blushing.

If Roxas felt positively about the insinuation that he and Xion are holding hands, how might one code this? Well, if he’s feeling really excited about it in a positive way, you might draw him smiling or expressing flattery on his blushing face. However, Roxas reacts negatively, with a frown on his blushing face. This insinuates he does not like this idea at all, especially since he also shuts it down right away in his dialogue.

But you might say “Well how do we know he isn’t just shy?” to which I say- well we can’t know. That’s the whole point of queer coding in literature. It is to say a character is queer but without actually saying it, to give plausible deniability for safety. It is to suggest a character is queer but without any confirmation. It does not mean that the character isn’t queer, however. It just means it cannot be confirmed by the text alone. However, a bold text that is very determined to have hidden queer characters without any straight explanations, will provide coding that has very little or no straight explanation.

Back to the Roxas and Xion dialogue^. This scene alone cannot confirm or deny anything. As I explained however, the suggestion that Roxas is not straight IS there. Considering the whole context, also, this scene is another piece of “evidence” to add to the pile of suggestions that Roxas isn’t straight. This coupled with the bathing panel, and this panel of him admiring Axel, his male mentor, with deep flattery during his first day of adventuring, all exist.

Roxas does not express negative sentiments in his blushing at men, nor does he say anything dismissive to them. When he blushes at Xion’s comment, however, it is with a negative reaction. Consider also that if the author wanted Roxas to appear straight, she would present them in ways that allude to straightness and NOT in ways that allude to queerness. Roxas would not do suggestively queer things like blush in flattery at Axel calling him special and then dismiss Xion’s suggestion that they are holding hands if he were simply coded as straight. Queering a text sometimes requires a lot of critical thought like this. This is because again, these things are hidden, and sometimes hidden really well so that unsuspecting straight people will not even consider the queer suggestions. This is one of the advantages Nomura has in his favor with Kingdom Hearts: by making it so convoluted, the gay text can be forward, strong, and blatant but remain undetected by straight powers. This keeps the series safe from oppressive scrutiny. Characters like Namine and Xion can exist as literal illustrations of compulsory-heterosexuality. And people will still think Sora and Riku are straight.

Even if I don’t know all the queer codes Japanese culture might specifically have, (and I do not, I do not live in Japan nor have any semblance of what that is like beyond what my friends who have lived there can tell me, and what I can research while sitting in my pajamas in Kentucky lol), there are certain things that are rather universal. Blushing, physical contact, lingering gazes, etc etc. Attraction is attraction and certain body language and other physical symbols will translate and will travel. So that’s the majority of what I will have to focus on.

But I do want you to know that rainbows are still gay in Japan.

Finally I also want to express that cultural intermingling is a thing. We do not live in bubbles, especially with the internet. Our cultures affect each other ALL the time. Although Kingdom Hearts is primarily a Japanese series, it is consciously tailored to appeal to both America and Japan. This is by design given the idea was to marry a Japanese hit like Final Fantasy with an American phenomenon like Disney’s media. This is why they take special care in minding the English translations and dubbing of the KH games (when they are able to do so, mistakes are still very often made and i hate it cuz they’re usually heterosexual-agenda-pushing “mistakes” =~=). The games are so intimately tied to both the Japanese and American cultures they are derived from which is part of why accurate translations are so important. And given what they would mean for queer audiences, what they represent for queer people makes accurate translations even MORE important. Some things get quite lost in translation, and some things are grossly added in translation. We will discuss that down the line...

A brief aside that I implore you to ignore:

On the subject of Roxas not being straight, I have heard of one really fun queer motif in Japanese media which is ”ryoutoutsukai (両刀使い)”, “the two sword fencer”: the dual wielding bisexual. Now- I do not necessarily think this is a means of coding Roxas as bisexual, and beyond that, from what I’ve heard in my research on bisexuality in Japan, certain age groups don’t even believe in bisexuality there. However, a love of more than one gender exists no matter who is willing to acknowledge it or not, and this motif is there. And Promisekeeper and Oblivion do rather fit the bill of representing homosexuality (Oblivion/Soriku) and heteronormativity (Promisekeeper/Sora and his childhood friend Kairi). So- while i don’t think it means anything, this fun idea is there~ I will say, however, that as far as I can tell, Nomura and his staff know exactly what they’re doing with their queer coding and are well connected to it in both cultures. So I mean- if any anime team would know bisexuality exists and how to code it, I firmly believe the KH team would, so. There is some food for thought for you~

Get ready for part 3, I hope you like TWEWY~ B)

#kingdom hearts #kh #soriku #sora kh #roxas #riku kh

71 notes · View notes

yeah-oh-shit · 5 years

Text

Sherlock S5/Dracula Meta

I’ve been thinking about this for a long time. I’ve never written any fan theories or meta before (although I have so many), so please bear with me. I know my theory is going to sound a little out there, but I here it is: I think BBC Dracula is actually Sherlock S5, or else that it is somehow going to lead directly into it without warning.

Warning: this is going to be a long piece. I’m going to break this down as follows, because there are many different pieces of evidence to examine:

TFP, the story and the episode

Gothic Horror, HOB, Dracula

Vision, Timing, 20/20

The Final Problem

The first one is a fan theory I read probably 6-9 months ago that sadly I can’t find anymore (if you know who this person is, please please comment so I can give credit!). Basically this person was talking about how the naming of the episodes typically has some tie to what occurs in the original story by that same name, but how TFP has nothing AT ALL to do with the original story. In the original story, Sherlock goes face to face with Moriarty, and we are all lead to believe that both he and Moriarty die over the Richenbach falls. In all reality, ACD had meant to kill off Sherlock in this story, and stopped writing Sherlock Holmes stories for ten years before bringing him back in “The Empty House,” due to the public outrage and demand for more stories. So, the logic follows that maybe the one thing that they have in common is that they are both pitted as the end to Sherlock Holmes (in the story, he is dead; in the show we are given [force fed] an ending, it's made to seem like the final piece). The author of this theory also pointed out the show runners in this way are comparing ending the series with TFP (no canon Johnlock) to ending the show with Sherlock dead. We are left with a straight-washed version of John and Sherlock, with Mary’s voice controlling the narrative and that narrative being: It Doesn’t Matter Who You Are. The chemistry between John and Sherlock has been more or less completely lost throughout S4, and so we are left with this empty, dead-feeling version of them that doesn’t feel true to the characters we know and love. Even casuals thought S4 sucked.. this is why. They metaphorically killed them/killed the show.

Before S4 aired, Mofftiss had said that if they pulled off what they had planned, it would be the biggest thing in television. Well, what we got in TFP doesn’t really fit that at all, does it? What could they be referring to: A secret sister? Not really that epic. Even if we find out that most of S4 didn’t take place (either EMP theory or some other way of explaining it) that isn’t really a new trope. The audience discovering that they have actually been seeing things that are inside the main character’s head the entire time has been done over and over (Sixth Sense, A Beautiful Mind come to mind off hand). So what could this huge, history making move be? The argument that the meta I read previously made was that the show will come back (from the dead) unexpectedly, with no warning. That it will be a revival and in that revival, we will get canon Johnlock. I can’t remember if OP explicitly theorized that Dracula is actually Sherlock S5, but I think so.

Now, I was with this theory from the beginning.. there is just something that feels possible to me, despite the fact that it sounds far fetched. Dracula seems like a weird, random thing to do when Sherlock, Moftiss’s mutual obsession, isn’t finished. (Also creating an escape room to keep up hype is odd if the show is over, but I digress.) I just don’t believe Moftiss’s constant claims that they couldn’t get everyone together to film S5 because of schedules, that they wanted to take a break, that they don’t know if they will do more (when Moffatt has talked about wanting a 5 season arc before, not to mention John Yorke). And then there’s the fact that we know they have filmed scenes that we have never seen (Niagara Falls anyone?). All this evidence that S5 is definitely coming, combined with the fact that we haven’t heard anything about it but have heard about Dracula, sort of fell into place for me. Despite me being willing to buy into it, this theory still seemed a little far fetched. But wait, there’s more!

Victorian Gothic Literature, HOB, Dracula

A lot of people have been talking about how gay Dracula is going to be, and citing evidence of the connections between Bram Stoker and Oscar Wilde (Dracula was written directly after his trial and Dracula is read as having characteristics of Wilde) as evidence. This, along with the extremely homoerotic last clip of the trailer, certain parts of the text that read as queer coded (I haven’t read Dracula, so I don’t know much but have seen some things floating around that seem v gay to me), and what we know about queer coding in Victorian gothic literature in general, all make a convincing argument. Gatiss actually recently confirmed (more or less) that Dracula will be bisexual in the upcoming series. And while I’m all about gay vampires (I am a huge vampire fan, seriously I love Vampire Diaries and True Blood and was one of “those girls” during the middle school Twilight craze), there is something about Dracula being Moftiss’s first cannon gay show that feels both disappointing and incongruous.

I want to bring up the All Ghost Stories are Gay Stories meta by heimishtheidealhusband. Now, this meta was written in 2015, in anticipation of TAB. Its great and you should definitely check it out if you haven’t/don’t remember it. The part I am most interested in is actually the reading of HOB, which I will get to in a bit. The takeaways from the first bit of the meta are that monsters and ghosts (to a different extent) are representations of queer desire in Victorian gothic literature. I’m summarizing drastically here, but as queer desire was obviously unacceptable in Victorian times, writers would obfuscate it by creating an “other,” a monster or ghost, that represented the queer or “inverted” desire and also demonstrated the fear and horror that society had for homosexuality. So the monster becomes the representation of homosexuality (homosexual acts or desires) that is pursuing the protagonists. Oftentimes, the protagonists were originally obsessed with the monsters or the concept of them, before actually confronting them, but are terrified and frightened when it actually occurs (think Dr. Jeckyll or Frankenstein). This meta also specifically talks about Dracula and vampires as the most queerly coded of the Victorian monsters: “Think about your vampire tropes: Dracula sneaks into your bedroom at night, lusting after your bodily fluids. The victim, meanwhile, is paralyzed with fear, but also excitement. (Oh hi phobic enchantment, I see you there!) The tension mounts until there’s a climactic penetration of fangs into flesh. And lots of sucking. Then think about the fact that the one doing the penetrating and the one being penetrated can be - and often are - both male.”

This all seems to bode great for our queer reading of the new BBC Dracula, yay! Vampires are clearly queer coded, and making it explicit makes sense and seems like a no-brainer. But I think it’s important to point out the ways in which this is also potentially (and likely) problematic. In Victorian times, there weren’t really many other options for portraying homosexuality. This is part of what makes what these writers did so brilliant - they were unable to show these desires as normal and healthy, because it was too dangerous and society didn’t see them that way (hence the use of the word “inverts” for homosexuals). Using the horror genre allowed them much more freedom to explore homosexuality, identity, and societal reactions to it, but also obfuscated the difference between reactions to homosexuality and the thing itself. In some of the stories, like Frankenstein, the monsters are actually misunderstood. Frankenstein’s monster only turns evil after experiencing society’s horrified reaction to it. However, in a modern context, I wonder about the message it sends to remake a Victorian story in a modern time and make the monster queer.

To flush this out a bit, I think it would be helpful to take a look at how Moftiss (and particularly Mark Gatiss) have played with this Victorian monster trope already, in Sherlock. Which brings us to HOB. heimishistheidealhusband points out that ACD’s original story “The Hound of the Baskervilles” would definitely fit into the scope of Victorian gothic literature, and their meta “All Ghost Stories are Gay Stories” does a particularly good job of breaking this episode down with the lens of Victorian gothic literature and queer coding. I am going to quote this reading here, and also also want to touch on the reading of this episode by Rebekah of TJLC Explained.

Here is what heimishtheidealhusband has to say about this episode: “Here’s why BBC Sherlock’s treatment of Hound is particularly beautiful. The creature – the hound – is our queer monster. In ACD’s Hound, the hound was indeed physically altered – he was painted in phosphorous to give him a hellish, glowing appearance. And the hound was actually the one to do the killing. In BBC’s Hound, there’s “the hound” – the monster that everyone is afraid of which is actually imaginary, and “the dog” – the real thing that actually exists. In other words, in this version, the “queer creature” in the horror story has been de-monstered. Homospectrality is being flipped on his head – rather than separating the man from the queer, they’re separating the queer from the monster. Because the dog isn’t inherently evil, it’s just the poison in the air that everyone is breathing that makes them fear it, and see a monster instead of an innocent dog. So in this treatment, if the dog/hound represents queerness, heteronormativity becomes a poisonous element in the air we all breathe.”

This is why it is so important that Hounds is plural (as opposed to the original story “The Hound of the Baskervilles”). They are emphasizing the differentiation between the two dogs, the differentiation between the monster and the queer. Rebakah of TJLC Explained also points out that despite all the conspiracy theories, there is actually no monster inside Baskerville, but rather a rabbit that glows “like a fairy,” (let’s all take a moment to remember the skipping dance and sing-song voice Ben does in this scene, in case it wasn’t obviously queerly coded enough). It’s hard to imagine a less-threatening animal than a glowing bunny.

Mark Gatiss has been very open about his love for horror and the gothic. He has studied the gothic writer M.R. James, and was involved with the BBC documentary about James that explored his “repressed sexuality.” He clearly loves and respects the genre, and is familiar with queer readings of Victorian gothic lit. In HOB, he chose to engage with the genre in a modern context, and to separate the monster from the queer. In doing so, he points out the inaccuracy and harm that coupling queerness with monstrosity generates. With this in mind, the choice to make Dracula feels like a step backwards, especially when you bear in mind that Gatiss has actually said that he isn’t really interested in gothic horror anymore. In an interview with Shadows at the Door in 2017, Gatiss stated: “I used to think nothing could exist without waistcoats and bubbling test tubes and now I’m actually more interested in modern horror; the gothic but in a modern context. I don’t think it has to be about the old and obviously I still love it but it doesn’t have to be about candelabra and castles. You can get the same feeling from modern methods, and in a way that is more frightening.”

All this isn’t to say that gothic horror or vampire stories isn’t still interesting and worthwhile as a concept, or that a canonically queer Dracula wouldn’t/couldn’t be badass. (I for one would love a Vampire Diaries remake wherein Damon’s character is a woman, but I’m off topic..). It doesn’t even mean that there can’t still be something complex or provoking in this representation for a modern audience. But it also feels dangerously close to repeating the queer coded (or even plainly queer) villain that we have all seen a hundred times from horror films and Disney movies. At best, still doesn’t seem particularly new or exciting, and at worst it could reinforce frankly problematic and dangerous stereotypes.

I am now going to analyze the actual trailer for BBC Dracula that was released a few weeks ago, because it is going to help me to illustrate this point. One thing that struck me most when watching it was just how horrific it really is. The 45 second long trailer includes: a fly that crawls into an eye, a bloody fingernail being ripped off, a blood covered hand, something that appears to be being birthed, a scary, old-looking Dracula with a bloody tongue, and bloody flesh that is being carved. There are at least 3 instances of mouths: the fangs at the very beginning, the mouth with bloody tongue, and the frame after the gunshot of a mouth that looks desiccated like a zombie, that only flashes for a split second. All in all, it’s not only scary, it’s quite disgusting. The three bloody or otherwise monstrous mouths that we see relate most strongly to the covert sexual tones of Victorian gothic literature (and also remind me of Moriarty’s oral fixation in TAB). These are some of the most disturbing of the images. While the intro fangs are pretty mild, the clip of Dracula’s frightening face and bloody tongue (which is followed immediately by the bloody flesh being carved) and the decayed mouth are both quite gruesome. If we apply the metaphors that we know from Sherlock, they are making some pretty damning connections. The mouths in-and-of-themselves could be read in a sexual way, but then there is the added fact that the decayed mouth appears directly after a gunshot, which we know has been tied to dicks/gay sex in Sherlock (and generally). The bloody flesh being carved on a table also recalls the food/sex metaphor in Sherlock, specifically reminding me of how disgusting the meal scene is in John’s wedding to Mary. Food and eating can be really disgusting, and this trailer makes a point to show us that. When we connect this back to the sex metaphor again, and give it a queer lens, we are once again being metaphorically told that queer sex is disgusting and horrific.

Whether or not Moftiss are purposefully making these metaphorical statements, they definitely went out of their way to make this variation of Dracula particularly scary, horrifying, and gruesome. It’s always possible that they are just hyping up the goriness in order to get audiences excited. It’s also possible that they are highlighting the disgustingness of Dracula’s monstrosity as a means of engaging with the public perception of homosexuality or that they will complicate the narrative in some other way. But even if we give them the benefit of the doubt here and assume they aren’t trying to paint queerness in a bad light, this highlighting of the disgusting nature of Dracula’s monstrosity doesn’t seem to push forward any kind of unique, modern narrative. We have seen this, this is exactly what Victorian gothic literature is all about. They needed to explore homosexuality through its repression, to make it monstrous, because they lived in a time when there were few alternative ways to explore it (except for maybe the example of our sweet “bohemian” boys - check out this meta from artemisastarte to learn more about bohemianism and queerness in Sherlock Holmes). But in our modern day, is this really that exciting? Is this the kind of queer representation we want and deserve in 2019 (soon to be 2020)? To me, the answer is no, especially in light of the incredible and complex work they have done in Sherlock toward building a queer love story that is normalized, and completely removed from any conflation with monstrosity.

The fact that Dracula is tied so heavily to Sherlock makes this distinction even greater. Gatiss said that they got the idea for Dracula from a still image of Benedict Cumberbatch on the set of Sherlock with his collar up. Supposedly it reminded them of Dracula and the BBC asked them if they wanted to make it. In an interview, when asked about Dracula in relationship to Sherlock, Gatiss called it a “stablemate” of Sherlock Holmes. I’m not really sure how we are supposed to take this, and he doesn’t explain at all (of course), but that would mean that they are in some way similar or connected. I think he doesn’t just mean that they both come from him and Moffatt, as that is rather obvious and was acknowledged in the question itself. Both shows are not only created by Moftiss, but written in the same format, produced by Sue Virtue, and shot at Hartwood Studios. They also really emphasize the connection to Sherlock in the trailer (which isn’t surprising because advertising), and also in the new Netflix description, which states only: “From the makers of ‘Sherlock,’ Claes Bang stars as Dracula in this brand-new miniseries inspired by Bram Stoker’s classic novel.” There isn’t even a background image, only a weird gray distortion on a black background.

Furthermore, there are also elements from Sherlock that point to Dracula, either directly or indirectly. In S4, when John is supposedly texting “E.” He asks “Night Owl?” and the response he gets is “Vampire.” It feels odd and out of place to mention vampires in this offhand way, as we have never really seen anything like this on the show. To be fair, a lot of S4 feels this way, but I believe that it is actually chock-full of symbolic meaning and that almost everything that we see that feels wrong or untrue to the show has a deeper meaning. What, then, is the purpose that this plays? Additionally, in the escape room (Spoiler alert for The Game is Now), there is a television in the first room (Molly’s lab) that is playing what is set to look like British news. In the newsreel at the bottom, they included the announcement that Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffatt are making BBC’s Dracula. Once again, this feels a little throwaway, or could be explained away as advertising (although the escape room is so fast-paced that having any time at all to look at the television, let alone read it, when it wasn’t explicitly part of the puzzles would seem rare). Once again, there is a subliminal connection made between these two shows that I would argue is purposeful.

The decision to make a gothic show that so completely plays on this horror trope, and then to tie it both explicitly and implicitly to the show that they have already done, which has a very different messaging around the gothic as it relates to conceptions of homosexuality, seems odd. In and of itself, a Gothic exploration of queerness is possible, but feels limited by its very nature. Gothic horror through a queer lens is about queerness and otherness being equated to and embodied by monstrosity. Dracula’s trailer seems to clearly be playing up this monstrousness. I want to reiterate that I don’t think making something like Dracula gay couldn’t be cool or interesting for what it is, or that there isn’t a way to engage with the gothic without it being problematic. But in comparison to what they are doing with Sherlock, it feels unimpressive. And in light of HOB, Dracula seems to go directly against the argument that Gatiss makes so beautifully, that queerness is harmless and very distinct from monstrosity, despite what the fog of homophobia might depict. To build up this narrative in Sherlock, then cut into the middle of it with something that is explicitly connected to it but symbolically making an opposite assertion feels counter-intuitive.

Vision, Timing, 20/20

Even with all this evidence, I don’t know that I would really believe they would go through the trouble to do all of this if not for the timing. Dracula is set to come out “soon,” but people have been speculating for this winter. That would make it the end of 2019 or beginning of 2020. Now I’m going to explain a little bit about my reading of HLV, which happens to coincide nicely with The Game is Now, and ultimately this theory as a whole.

Something that caught my eye in HLV is how much glass there is in its first scene. We open on a shot of CAM’s glasses sitting on the table. We are below them, looking up through glass (although we see later that the table is actually wood). Next we get a shot of lady Elizabeth Smallwood, reflected through glass so as to show her in double (which is particularly interesting given that she is repeatedly called Lady Alicia Smallwood, both by CAM in the text that flashes on the screen during his analysis of her later this episode, and in the S4 scene where she leaves Mycroft her card). Next we see the entire interviewing committee through glass walls (it continues but you get the picture). We are introduced to the concept of lenses, looking through them, and at times the distorted image created by them.

CAM owns a newspaper, and he controls people through rumors: it doesn’t matter what the truth is, it matters what people believe (what they see). (This sounds a lot like Mary in S4 to me). So we are introduced again (after TRF) to the concept of fact vs. fiction, truth vs. lie, and this time with the addition of lenses. What lens you view something through matters, has a bearing on how you read something, how clearly you see it (sounds kind of like the fog in HOB). By the end of HLV, we have been removed from the narrative enough, we can’t see completely clearly. We don’t know what has happened during the time between John and Sherlock’s confrontation with Mary and the scene at Christmas. We don’t see if Sherlock and John are on the same page or what Sherlock is planning.

This episode leads into TAB, followed by S4 fuckiness. In S4, there are many things that feel “off” but one of the biggest is that John and Sherlock are distant the entire time. In the beginning we get the indication that John is missing Sherlock, but then we see Sherlock acting as if he is closer to Mary than John, inviting her on cases in his place. She gets inserted between them completely, becomes part of the gang. After Mary’s “death” John blames Sherlock (in a feat of logic that is truly baffling) and we have them at their most distant in TLD. And then, they come back together again in TFP, but the warmth and closeness is missing.

This season makes it clear that Moftiss were writing in all the little things that made their dynamic romantic and their chemistry so clear. They were able to take that out, and they did so with intention. It is if we are seeing the show through a lens: through the lens of straight-washing, the lens or perspective that Mary (John’s wife, the symbol of a straight John Watson, a platonic John and Sherlock) narrates for us so thoroughly at the end of the series. (Also side note, this straight-washed version of the show also fits into the 5 part John Yorke structure with part 4 being the height of the antithesis or the “worst part” - I learned about York from garkgatiss’s meta). The heart of the show is John and Sherlock’s dynamic. This dynamic is clearly intimate and romantic and has been in every iteration of Sherlock Holmes since the original stories, despite never being explicitly canon. S4 really follows through on Moriarty’s promise. The heart of Sherlock Holmes is gone, missing, burned out.

Then we have the escape room [mild spoilers]. The entrance is Doyle’s Opticians; its filled with glasses. (Side note there was definitely a wall displaying glasses that were arranged by color to look like a rainbow). Once again we have the theme of lenses. Being in an optometry office, it’s interesting because the focus is obviously on correct vision. 20/20 vision. Vision is “right” when it’s 2020. (This wasn’t my realization, but someone else went to the escape room as well and wrote about it). So now, we have this idea of being able to see correctly tied to the number 2020. To the YEAR 2020. This is also interesting because one of the signs in Doyle’s Opticians read “You were told but you didn’t listen: coming soon.” Just another indication that we will be getting more (Sherlock) soon.

Now, finally, we come to what I see as some of the most convincing evidence about Sherlock S5 coming in 2020. It has to do with copyright laws.

In England, all of ACD’s stories are in the public domain. However, in the US, this isn’t so. US Copyright laws are different from the UK, so the last of the stories won’t actually enter the public domain until 2023. American copyright duration is 95 years from the date of publication. This is important because the Arthur Conan Doyle Estate is extremely protective of how Sherlock Holmes is portrayed in the media. It turns out that despite the fact that most of the stories are already in the public domain, BBC, CBS, and Warner Brothers have all gotten licenses from the Estate in order to make their shows/films. In 2014, the ACD Estate lost a lawsuit in which they were trying to argue that the characters are “complex” and that any use of the character (at all) was still valid under copyright laws (as not every story had entered the public domain) and therefore in need of a license from them. While some of the later stories are still under copyright, they lost the lawsuit and it was ruled that the character (as written in the earlier stories) is in the public domain. They sued Miramax for its production Mr. Holmes, which portrays an elderly Holmes, arguing that it drew from the later stories and therefore violated copyright. Miramax ended up settling to avoid litigation. The Estate is known for being litigious and basically doing its best to stay gatekeeper, hoard ownership, and generally extort money out of anyone who creates anything having to do with Sherlock Holmes. While the BBC has paid them for licenses before, I’m not sure how this clearly conservative group would feel about making Johnlock canon. Even if its not legally in their power to prevent it from happening, it doesn’t sound like that has stopped them in the past from suing basically anyone that has tried to create Sherlock Holmes material without their consent, and if that material in any way seems to come from the later stories, then they might have a case.

Which brings us to the Three Garridebs. Moftiss have said in the past that this is one of their favorite stories due to it being the story where Holmes shows his depth of feeling for Watson. As stated by Watson himself, “It was worth a wound–it was worth many wounds–to know the depth of loyalty and love which lay behind that cold mask” Generally speaking, the fandom has posited that a Johnlock reveal may happen in a “Three Garridebs” moment. And do you happen to know the story that directly precedes the Three Garridebs? The Sussex Vampire. A story in which Holmes investigates a supposed vampire only to discover a loving mother who is attempting to save her infant child by sucking poison out from his wound. Kind of sounds familiar huh? A perceived monster, who is in fact nothing dangerous at all. Who in this case is the exact opposite of monstrous, is actually loving and gentle (like the real dog that is tellingly tied to sentiment, or Bluebell the glowing rabbit).

Both the Sussex Vampire and the Three Garridebs are part of The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes, the last collection of stories. They were both published in 1924, meaning that both their copyrights run out in 2019. It will really only be possible for Moftiss to use material from the Three Garridebs for a queer storyline starting in 2020. And if we assume that this is their plan all along, that they have even potentially set it up in S4 (looking at you John Watson getting shot by “Eurus”), they have HAD TO WAIT until now. But they won’t need to wait any longer, starting in January.

Oh and by the way, here is an interview Martin gave recently in which he tells a story about how he had to literally give up the Hobbit because he was CONTRACTED to Sherlock S2 and they wouldn’t move filming on that. (Thankfully Peter Jackson moved filming around for him, so we still have him as Bilbo). So I would imagine that if S2 was contracted, and they were planning on making a 5 series show all along, that they are probably contracted for all of it. Which means all those claims that its just too difficult to get everyone together for filming are just another means of throwing us off the trail.

If they have been waiting for this copyright to expire, but also unable to tell us that that is why they are waiting, it also makes sense why they have stretched it out so much. It's even possible that they didn’t realize how horrible the ACD Estate was going to be when they first started filming, and had to adjust/drag it out so that they could finally do what they want to do, what they have been planning for from the beginning.

So there you have it: the ending of The Final Problem, an analysis of HOB, Dracula, and Victorian gothic lit, and finally the symbolism of lenses, correct vision, and copyright issues all leading up to 2020. I think S5 of Sherlock is coming. I’ve been feeling it, sensing something for the last few months. I think we can all feel it. And it might just be sooner than we thought.

---------------------------------

Thank you so much to my love @canonicallybisexualjohnwatson who co-developed this theory with me, edited this, helped me with the links, and was also the one to introduce me to Sherlock/TJLC, subsequently changing my life. i love you b.

#tjlc #johnlock #tjlc is real #bbc sherlock #sherlock meta #bbc dracula #sherlock

106 notes · View notes

possiblyimbiassed · 5 years

Text

John Watson and The Abominable Bride

After reading this brilliant analysis and the following interesting discussion about gay subtext in Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes, also commented by @thepersianslipper, I felt inspired to explore a bit further what Mofftiss might have made of Holmes’ and Watson’s relationship in the episode The Abominable Bride - TAB - of BBC Sherlock. TAB, which is supposed to mainly take place in 1895 (albeit inside Sherlock’s head), seems to be focused on Mofftiss’ take on the Victorian original of their work. In particular I wanted to explore the role of John Watson in this episode, which I suspect is a commentary on ACD himself. I interpret TAB’s Watson as ACD’s alter ego in this context, since he’s (supposedly) the storyteller. What kind of stories did ACD actually write, what did he put in, what did he leave out and what did he leave obvious only to people approaching the story with ‘queer’ glasses?

TAB raises some questions that I think aren’t found - or at least aren’t that very obvious - in the rest of the show. There are similarities, of course, but I think TAB is a rather different display, and not only because the story seems to be re-told from a 19th century perspective. TAB has lines that seem to refer directly to literary criticism of ACD’s work, rather than being meaningful elements of the plot line in Mofftiss’ adaptation. It’s all disguised as Watson talking about his published works in The Strand, which was actually ACD’s own publisher IRL. But I think that’s a bit different from modern John publishing entries on his own blog, which is not Mofftiss’ principal channel of publishing, even if they’ve made it accessible to all viewers who have Internet.

So how is Watson depicted in TAB? For one thing, he starts out clean-shaven by the time he first meets Holmes, but as soon as we see him married, he wears a mustache. Not like the dull, ill-fitting one from TEH, but a ‘virile’, Victorian version which is far more similar to ACD’s own mustache (X).

But in TAB Watson also appears like a man attempting (but failing) to keep up a ‘manly’ facade by trying to lord over the other sex. His treatment of his wife is one example, which gets more contradicted and opposed by Mary the more the episode advances. Watson is rather condescending when she asks him - as opposed to her behaviour in canon - not to leave her behind, and he responds by basically telling her to go back to the kitchen.

MRS WATSON: And am I just to sit here? WATSON: Not at all, my dear. We’ll be hungry later!

Then he runs off with Holmes as usual.

Watson wonders why on earth Mary is trying to be a client. But in ACD’s stories, Watson’s wife has only a role to play as long as she is a client. After that, she’s reduced to some kind of silent support-base for Watson’s relationship with Holmes, who repeatedly encourages her husband to rather spend time with his dear friend Holmes than with her. Not very convincing if you ask me. ;)

An example from FIVE: “My wife was on a visit to her mother’s, and for a few days I was a dweller once more in my old quarters at Baker Street”. (At this point ACD conveniently ‘forgets’ that Mary Morstan is an orphan in the earlier story The Sign of Four (SIGN)). And why would her journey mean that her husband automatically should sleep at 221 B anyway? ;))

Another example from The Naval Treaty (NAVA): “My wife agreed with me that not a moment should be lost in laying the matter before him, and so within an hour of breakfast-time I found myself back once more in the old rooms in Baker Street.” This was supposedly in the month that immediately followed on their wedding. Hmm...

ACD literally wrote Mary out of the story by marrying her with Watson, rather than doing the opposite, which would have seemed more logical to me. Why create a character whose interesting story we’re allowed to know, only to push her out of sight as soon as she marries one of the protagonists? To me this seems almost too wasteful, even with Victorian (sexist) standards of depicting women. Even when Mary is dead and gone, Watson’s ‘wife’ is still referred to every now and then, but without offering her even a name. Which leaves it pretty obvious, in my opinion, that this wife is merely a facade - but apparently important as such.

Mary in both HLV, TAB and TST seems reluctant to accept this role (except when Sherlock reveals her as a facade by projecting her picture on a real, empty facade), but in TLD ghost!Mary encourages John to go and solve crimes together with Sherlock: “make him wear the hat”. In other words, John and Sherlock are allowed to spend most of their lives together, but only as long as the ghost of Watson’s wife still hangs over them as a heterosexual alibi, and as long as the Work can be used as an excuse. This comes directly from Doyle, as far as I can see.

In the case of TAB’s Mrs Hudson, she has very few lines; all she does is serving breakfast or tea, and the literary critic’s perspective is even spelled out by ACD Watson: “Well, within the narrative, that is – broadly speaking – your function“. Which is later, when the character refuses to talk at all, backed up by Holmes: “I fear she’s branched into literary criticism by means of satire. It is a distressing trend in the modern landlady”. And to be honest, I can’t think of many lines from Mrs Hudson in canon, in spite of her being Holmes’ landlady for a very long time. She must certainly have seen a lot of ‘these gentlemen’. :) In the rest of BBC Sherlock she plays a far more important part, to the point that I believe even her more off-hand remarks are actually significant to the story.

Watson’s housemaid in TAB is also treated badly: he rants at her, and when she observes (probably to really rub it in for the audience) that his marriage doesn’t seem to be very happy and fulfilling, and then asks why she is never mentioned in the stories, he orders her out of the room, and then immediately goes running after Holmes.

(Isn’t it interesting, by the way, that the greenish tiles in Watson’s fireplace are so similar to those at modern 221B? ;) This scene is confirmed to happen inside Sherlock’s head, but very similar tiles also appear in the drug den of HLV...)

As for [Molly] Hooper (a John mirror, I believe, created specifically for BBC Sherlock), there’s the morgue scene where her appearance is very similar to Watson’s; the colour scheme, the clothes and even the ACD-style mustache is there.

And that’s exactly when Watson starts talking about a possible ‘secret twin’ in the murder case.

But if Watson and Hooper are metaphorical twins here, one of them is the one who otherwise in the show has made it quite obvious that they’re in love with Sherlock Holmes, while the other one tries (but hopelessly fails) to hide this fact. I also think it’s significant that for the first time in BBC Sherlock, Molly Hooper is recognised as a doctor (a pathologist) in charge of the morgue, rather than any kind of assistant working at a lab. But then Watson ‘outs’ Hooper as a woman, taking his hat off for her while still being dismissive. Is it his own bisexuality he’s dismissing?

Just one more reflection upon Watson and the women in TAB. Lady Carmichael, whose husband Eustace is mocking her and looking down on her, is called Louisa. ACD’s first wife was also named Louisa. They married after knowing each other only for a few months, which is even less than the time between John meeting Mary and their marriage in BBC Sherlock. Louisa died of consumption (chronic tuberculosis) at the age of 49. Watson states in the morgue scene of TAB that Emelia Ricoletti, the ’Abominable Bride’, was already dying from consumption when she committed suicide.

Ghosts are a recurring theme in TAB (as well as in TLD). Holmes makes it clear that they don’t exist - ”save those we make for ourselves” - and that ’the abominable bride’ as a vengeful ghost is created by trickery.

But Watson in TAB is also more superstitious than John ever gives us reason to think he is in the modern show. And according to several sources, ACD was a fervent believer in the spiritual world and life after death (X, X, X).

Speaking of vengeful ghosts, I think one of the names Holmes suggests for this case, before Watson decides to call it “The Abominable Bride”, is quite interesting: The League of Furies. The furies in Greek mythology were vengeful goddesses. One of their explicit purposes was punishing oath breakers and marital infidelity - they were jealousy personified. It’s hard to see the logics in TAB of this cult of women seeking revenge by murder, for crimes that are not actually specified. Or committing suicide merely to prove a point. Vengeance seems more apt in the case of the victims of Charles Augustus Milverton’s blackmail (CHAS), but in TAB the crimes aren’t revealed. All they tell us about Emelia’s husband, for example, is that he “had his way with her”. But since this is all happening inside Sherlock’s mind palace, I think it makes far more sense (as someone has suggested - was it @ebaeschnbliah? @raggedyblue? Sorry for my bad memory) that what we’re actually seeing is Sherlock beating himself over the head with metaphors for emotions. It’s not about the actual women of the show, but rather about the fury of neglected emotions. The vengeful ‘furies’ are over him and John and their mirrors, for having been repressed for such a long time.

Another interesting topic in TAB is the five orange pips that Eustace Carmichael receives, apparently from the women of the cult (who bear pointy hoods like the KKK). Eustace is terrified by the threat and believes that his old sins are coming back to him, while still trying to keep up a brave facade, outwardly blaming his wife for being hysteric. But soon he’s stabbed to death. While the five ‘pips’ also appears as ‘Greenwich pips’ already in TGG (which some brilliant people have pointed out resembles a five-act play, where S5 might be the unresolved final ‘pip’), these real pips are from ACD’s The Five Orange Pips (FIVE).

Doyle’s story is about a rather unpleasant uncle of Holmes’ client, who was a racist and member of the KKK in the States. Following his escape back to Europe after the civil war, the remnants of the Klan seek him out and threaten him with orange pips as a signal, and later kills him. When the client visits Holmes and Watson, the following dialogue occurs, which is exactly the same as the conversation between Louisa Carmichael and Holmes in TAB:

“I have come for advice.” “That is easily got.” “And help.” “That is not always so easy.”

The same threat and killing happens also to the client’s father and eventually to the client himself (who is named John, by the way). Holmes figures out who the culprits are, but by then their sailing ship has already left London. The story ends with Holmes and Watson being reached by the news that parts of the wrecked ship have been found drifting in the Atlantic, but the destiny of the crew is unknown. Un unsolved case by ACD that is still waiting for its solution in Series 5?

Transcripts from Ariane De Vere (X). Screen-caps (partly) from here.

@sarahthecoat @gosherlocked

#BBC Sherlock and ACD Canon #the five orange pips #the league of furies #the abominable bride

101 notes · View notes

ayy-spec · 4 years

Text

Anything to Add?

The final question in this survey was a write-in section for people to leave any additional comments. 113 people responded.

Important/Particularly Interesting Comments

• I hope this goes well for you because you seem nice and if you have any advice for new to the community 15 year olds like me, don't be afraid to share because I'm trying to embrace my sexuality as much as possible but it can be hard when I don't know where to go or turn to to find what I'm supposed to do and where to ask questions and just fully embrass this part of me and it can be hard when I don't even know many if any aspecs so representation is great and it is helpful to hear your experiences and how you handle certain parts, so just keep doing what your doing because it is making a difference [note: 🥺🥺😭]

• i often consider myself more as just aroace rather than aro and ace seperately so i prefer seeing the blue and orange aroace flag over the individual aro and ace flags

• I don't really shorten my identity often with aroace, only when im feeling very romance repulsed and its been a while since I felt romantic attraction. I am a pan-demiromantic asexual. My pan label makes me feel more connected to the lgbt+ community bc it feels like my nonbinary and intersex status doesn't count either. I know I belong in the queer community, but the lgbt+ community is so sexual orientation focused.

• Thank you for having a wide variety of labels to choose from in the options!! I don't see the term aegoromantic very often on things, it feels nice to be known I guess haha

• Thank you for this, i recently started thinking about being in arospec and it was so relieving, all this time i thought something was wrong or maybe i was broken. I'm still trying to learn more about it, and I'm grateful for people willing to teach and help

• didn't realize I hadn't experienced sexual attraction until I finally did and was like "OH, no wonder all my other relationships felt like I was playing pretend"

• I dont often tell people I'm gray aroace. Not because of shame or it not being "as important" (I'm a gay trans dude) but I think because I just feel its a very intimate part of myself, as well as my romanticism and sexuality (in terms of like asexuality) feeling as though it doesn't always need a label. I'm fine just being myself most of the time, a lot of labels can be tricky for myself I think. I'm happy the label exists nonetheless though because Its nice to know I'm not the only one who feels like this.

• I'm queer! But if I'm getting down to the bones of it, I'm pan/ace. Still relearning how to be proud of that, after The Grand Clusterfuck years back.

• even though I would be considered to have an alloromantic orientation, alloace isn't really a term I feel any strong connection or attachment to

• i'd like to add that i do consider myself alloaro and use that label openly but i'd also not consider myself 100% allosexual. i'm questioning my sexuality but even if i do end up feeling more solidly ace-spec i'd still use the alloaro label

• Idk who else does this or if this is interesting enough to write down, but I thought I would! I use Aroace as a label. Other, smaller labels inside that would probably fit me better! Aroace feels too big, like it doesn't *really* define exactly who I am. But at the same time, I prefer using it because more people know what Aroace means (at least compared to myrromantic and myrsexual). I use Aroace so the public can define me. I don't typically use it around my close friends 'cause they already know my idiosyncrasies and where I really am. They already made their own definitions for me, so I don't have to make one for them!

• I'm still figuring myself out, so I leave myself at the blanket terms and hopefully everything'll work out in the end

The rest of the responses are below:

Comments Alerting Me About Typos (that I was then able to resolve)

• There's a typo in your "sexual orientation labels" question, because you have Aroflux listed and not Aceflux, but I didn't want to confuse things so I put Aceflux (which I do use) under Other. I also am polysexual (I flux between polysexual and asexual but I am always aegosexual) but didn't know if I should but it under Other anywhere since it's not an acespec label. I consider my polysexuality tied to me being aego/aceflux though, which is why I mention it here.

• the sexual orientations options are the same of the romantic ones ( for example, there's arovague and arospike in the sexual cathegory)

People Clarifying/Expounding Upon Their Own Identity/Experiences

· to clarify: i'm unsure whether or not i am demi or aceflux; so i use graysexual since both labels technically fall under that as an umbrella term.

• I’m still a confused gorl and I really only know that I don’t like sex it sexual acts but I do like romantic and sensual acts

• Sex/romance repulsed and I have aesthetic attraction

• I'm also animesexual and fictosexual (and romantic I guess but I don't like using the SAM for myself).

• I have never seen most of these labels, haha, I expect one of them is the one I always forget that's for being aro due to past trauma but people always assume it's romantic/sexual trauma so I don't use it and thus have forgotten it...but that's the essay I'm not usually up for writing: was biromantic but then had several awful life events on top of each other and had a complete breakdown and have been aro since. Unclear if it's permanent but it's been 14 years now. [note: I believe this person is thinking of caedromantic]

• I tend to use the word ace more than asexual because it's shorter, but I don't feel more favorably about one than the other.

• i can't tell the difference between platonic vs romantic attraction, and am unsure if people i have "liked" in the past was romantic, platonic, or a fake stemming from peer pressure.

• Also Gender-Neutral/Agender

• I’m gray-aro but identify more with being biromantic even though I know I’m aro-spec. As for sexual orientation, I’m just completely ace xD

• The fact I'm still trying to figure out my gender makes it harder to pinpoint exactly what my orientations are :( but I usually say I'm queer, and if it's safe: Bi Ace, and if I can get more specific: biromantic grey-asexual

• I also use a platonic label (biplatonic). I use it not in a friendship way, but more like in a QPR way.

• Thank you for doing this! My identity on the aro/ace spectrums has shifted a lot over the years and while I’ve just settled on aroace and queer for the most part, this community is so diverse and under appreciated. People who find joy in/identify with micro-identities are valid and deserve representation!

• I'm still figuring out my romantic orientation but it's looking less allo by the day lmao

• My romantic label is very fluid, but in terms of sexual labels, very sex repulsed Asexual

• Content with just Aspec cause it's difficult to pinpoint anything but cool with both asexual/ace and aromantic/aro

• I think of my romantic orientation as halfway between aromantic and homoromantic

• I'm a polyamorous ace, if there'd be a way to include that sometimes that'd be neat :)

• I am still questioning my identity

• I used to identify as 100% ace but now I have no idea other than that I seem to be pan-ace in some way shape or form so my identity is ???people???

• Sex/romance repulsed and I have aesthetic attraction

• to clarify: i'm unsure whether or not i am demi or aceflux; so i use graysexual since both labels technically fall under that as an umbrella term.

Queer Rights

• Trans rights, baybee 🤠🦂

• I just hope a-spec and aro-spec people will experience less negativity and hate this year <3

• Aspec rights!!

• aspec rights, baby

People Being Nice to Me (I appreciated this thank you everyone!!)

· :)

• Have a good day

• Uhhh, cool survey, nice to see a lot of labels.... good job! Nothing I have to add, it was great

• Have fun chief, thank you for your work

• Thank you for creating!

• thanks for the survey! I don't know too many aspec in person so I love participating in things like this about the ace/aro community!

• Thank you for what you’re doing

• just hi :)

• thanks!!

• I really love your blog! Reading your posts always makes me happy :) [note: thank you!]

• Good luck, have a nice day !

• I hope you're having a good day :)

• you're lived and valid af!! have a great day!!!

• Thank you for all your hard work i really appreciate it ☺️

• Drink some water Right Now OP

• Nope, :> hope the best for you.

• Cool survey, 10/10 would survey again.

• 💛

• Have a nice day uwu

• Nope! Have a nice day!

• Thank you for making pride flag edits! They're really nice! [note: thank you!!]

• nope, but this is really cool!!

• ❤️

• Have a good day.

• I think this survey idea is super cool! Definitely a great way to see what sort of aspec people are on tumblr :)

• You are doing the lords work

• Thank you for asking us.

• good luck!

• This is really cute idea :)

• I hope you're having a nice day!

• Good luck in your endevours!

• Thank you for making our community visible!

• Have a good day :3

• Have a good day!!

• Keep doing great stuff!

• Thank you for all the positivity I get from your blog! It's super helpful, keep it up :) [note: thank you!!]

• thanks for doing this. recognition is always nice

• Have fun <3

• Lots of love 💛

• This is a cool project, thanks for doing it and good luck! :)

People Saying They Love Me (and I love you, random a-specs)

· i love you OP!!!!!

• love you, hope you have a great day

An A-Spec Person Being Rude to Other A-Specs

• If you enjoy sex with your romantic partner then you are not asexual

A Person Who Is Not A-Spec Being Rude To A-Specs

• sweetie im sorry that you're so insecure that you feel like you have to make up new identities to feel better about yourself. if you are a lesbian or bisexual please know that you are welcome in the community, but other than that making thousands of microlabels like this makes a huge joke out of what was once an important and respected group. nobody takes us seriously anymore because of this shit. does labelling your identity like this really help you with anything? demisexual and fraysexual and all this are just fancy words for normal human feelings that everyone has. there is no need to microlabel it.

Other

· [variations of “no” (12)]

• not sure that helps lmao but still hope it does. all the best

• Axolotls (or as I like to call them, asexulotls) are amazing and I love them [Note: the man in question]

• Sorry, I can't remember the names of any blogs that do edits

• Ok random but the colors of the aro/ace flag? The blue and orange one? They’re gorgeous.

• I'm not so sure if I should use the aroace flag, I feel comfortable using both aro and ace flags, but I don't like the colors for the aroace flag :c [note: these are in chronological order, it’s a total coincidence that these comments are together]

• Curious to see where the survey goes

• It would be cool if you could also do some aplatonic-spectrum edits!

• there were fully half of the terms on that list that i had never even seen before. like, everything below litho down to no label was entirely new to me. at some point i will look into those! (but not right now, my brain is full enough at the moment)

• actually had to look up the majority of these orientations. Thank you for the opportunity to learn!

• Gonna reblog and follow and hopefully learn a bit more, about others and myself

Note: The only comment that is not listed in order is the first comment, which I put at the top because I found it the most important. It’s so important that kids and teens have space to explore their identity and learn about themselves. The reason I made this blog in the first place was because I was 19 and working on figuring out my gender and sexuality. Now that I’m a bit older and understand things better, I’m so glad that I’m able to help people in this way.

I make it a point to be very openly queer in my life and at work because I need LGBTQ+ people, especially youths, to know that we’re here. I’m lucky that I live somewhere that I can be visibly queer and speak about it openly. We are everywhere, and there’s more of us than you think!

Something that I really like about the comments at the top is that they show how diverse we are, and how people use words differently. Some people feel like they’re more aroace than aromantic and asexual separately, and others consider their romantic and sexual orientations to be completely different things.

I definitely relate to the person who identifies are myrromantic and myrsexual with their friends but just says aroace when speaking with people they don’t know as well. I believe a lot of people use different words depending on who they’re speaking with.

#survey results #aphobia cw

1 note · View note

coeurvrai · 5 years

Text

We return to Wicked Saints with Chapter 23, a chapter that is - unfortunately - a Nadya chapter. We open with, oddly enough, a Book of Saints excerpt rather than something from the Codex of the Divine. In a better book, this would mean something. In a better book, all of these excerpts would’ve meant something.

Svoyatovi Yakov Luzhkov: The founder of the Selortevnsky monastery in Ghelovkhin, a place where clerics were trained in secret to fight in the holy war. When the monastery was destroyed in 1520, Yakov burned with it.

Okay... great? Thanks for that information that was totally necessary and will be relevant to the current chapter, I’m sure.

Again, using dates when you haven’t established a proper timeline is meaningless, because we don’t know how long ago these events were in respect to the present. Sure, it’s a bit more specific than the others because we know that by the events of the start of the book, the war between Kalyazin and Tranavia has been going on for about 100 years, but still, meaningless.

Everyone is still at dinner and Nadya is, surprising to herself, having a pretty good time, all things considered.

The High Prince of Tranavia was a charming boy who enjoyed self-deprecation and complaining. Nadya found herself laughing at his jokes and responding in kind as the evening went on. Żaneta was equally engaging, with biting wit and a keen intelligence that Nadya had not expected from one of the most impressive blood mages of the court.

Well, this is fast becoming a nightmare, she thought as she swirled her spoon through a bowl of borscht. There was soft music playing in the background, airy and light, and the atmosphere of the room didn’t feel nearly as oppressive as when the king had entered.

Nadya is, however, getting along a bit too swimmingly with Serefin for my tastes, considering she’s supposed to have - to put it mildly - a grudge against him for leading an assault on her home and, to Nadya’s knowledge, hurting and killing the people that she supposedly cares about there, including Kostya. She was so afraid of him when he rocked up at the monastery in Chapter 1 and now she’s just totally fine with him and considers him charming and funny.

If Nadya was clever and seriously cared, she’d attempt to talk him about his efforts in the war and in Kalyazin to try to covertly find out what happened after she fled the monastery and if any of the people she’s supposed to love are alive.

Also that description of Żaneta has me side-eyeing and I can’t tell that whether that’s just me and my heightened sensitivity due to how xenophobic and discriminatory Nadya is supposed to be. Like, is she surprised that Żaneta is intelligent and witty because she’s a Tranavian? Is it because she’s a Tranavian and she’s a blood mage? Is it because she’s accomplished? I can’t tell.

Either way, it’s not necessarily an unsurprising implication from Nadya all things considered but the fact that Nadya is supposed to have evolved so much that her views on Tranavians are... let’s say more progressive, the inherent judginess of what she’s saying leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe that’s just my mixed race ass reading too much into it, IDK.

Also this book itself is a bloody nightmare, both literally and figuratively.

“A nightmare that you are making for yourself.” Nadya almost dropped her spoon when Marzenya’s voice rang through the back of her head.

Not now, she pleaded. She couldn’t keep this up and have a goddess pulling her apart for what she had done at the same time. Admonish me all you like later but not here.

“You are treading dangerous ground, child.”

Dangerous ground that she was only making worse. Marzenya required full devotion. Nadya never could have dreamed that would be an issue. Yet here she was, a few days into Tranavia and already full of conflict.

Well, Marzenya is apparently getting through okay, because she’s able to talk directly to Nadya at dinner. This is like, the second or third time. I didn’t really believe you when you said, book, that the connection between Nadya and the gods would be strained and difficult due to the nature of her being in Tranavia, and I still don’t believe you now.

Also, “keep this up”? You’ve been a grand ol’ time apparently at dinner, besides glaring at the king and getting caught by Serefin glaring at the king. I don’t know what the difficulty would be, really, besides paying attention if anyone tries to talk to you. It’s not like it’s taking all your energy to stop yourself from murdering everyone you’re sitting beside with a fork or something.

Also, we’re not going to really unpack that last paragraph because I feel like I’ve commented on it enough and about the bullshit nature of this whole fucking thing as is. I’m just going to happily continue eating my dumplings because dumplings are delicious.

Anyways, the king gets angry at a servant, throws a goblet at the wall, and the servant runs away. A Vulture goes after them and ,ost of the people at the table aren’t exactly thrilled at that.

Ostyia comments to Serefin that the king’s temper is worsening and Serefin tries to temper his discomfort with more alcohol, but his glass is empty. Thank fuck for that. Serefin asks Nadya to call him Serefin instead of “Your Highness” and she just rolls with it.

“Trade places with me,” the one-eyed girl demanded of Serefin.

“You can’t flirt with every girl here, Ostyia,” Serefin said.

“I can and I will,” she replied primly.

He rolled his eyes and—casting another anxious look toward where his father sat—stood up and traded places with the girl.

Ostyia had a glittering eye patch covering her right eye in place of a mask. Her smile was electric, and she shined it Nadya’s way.

For some bloody reason, Nadya refers to her as “the one-eyed girl” despite knowing and using Ostyia’s name the sentence before that and then preceding to use it straight afterwards. Like, that’s not necessary, just use her name again!

Also, I’ve said it several times to @jefflion but Ostyia is quite literally the only one in this book who is explicitly queer so far. ED has gone on and on on her tumblr and her twitter talking about how basically everyone is queer and like how all the main Tranavian characters aren’t straight; that Kacper and Serefin are gonna have a romance in the later books but like??? Bitch, where?!

You can’t say that Nadya and Serefin are queer, when they have not commented on women and men, respectively, the same way they have commented and been explicitly attracted to men and women, respectively.

Look, I am bisexual. If you meet me for even two seconds online and/or at uni, I make it pretty fucking clear that I am attracted to girls too. I will take notice of girls I think are pretty or cute. Not always, but I do do it.

And the fact that there’s no build up for Serefin and Kacper either, even though there should be if she’s intending for them to have some romance in Ruthless Gods and the third book is just... fucking lazy. Like yes, there’s a couple of scenes in the book that you could technically say might have romantic undertones but the point I’m trying to make is the lack of explicit queerness.

At this point, ED is no better than JK Rowling with her whole “Dumbledore is gay!” shtick. Or rather, she’s barely better, but it’s a fucking low bar.

Also, as an aside: earlier, Serefin has Ostyia flirt with Żaneta as a distraction, but we never really get a reaction from Żaneta. ED nominally says that Żaneta is bi, but we don’t get a reaction from Żaneta in the text. For all we know, Żaneta could be uncomfortable with her flirting. Or she could be into it, but we just don’t know!

#sarah reads ws

3 notes · View notes

lacrimosathedark · 5 years

Text

Okay yall, look. I have an issue with members of the Undertale fandom that I want to discuss.

Something that really bothers me is on Undertale videos and such where Chara and/or Frisk is referred to as “he” or “she”, if you make the slightest even non-accusational comment about being disappointed they aren’t referred to properly, someone will jump on you and go “Um actually they can be they or he or she cuz you’re supposed to project on themmm” and it’s just factually incorrect from just these two following points. (quick aside, this is different from the uneducated and often transphobic troglodytes that think “they” is always plural when it has been singular since the 14th century)

One: Chara is referred to as “they” by Asriel, their best friend and adoptive brother. Frisk is referred to as “them” when Papyrus talks to Undyne, as well as Toriel using “them” when they wake up after the fight with Asriel. All stories about the Fallen Human refer to them neutrally as either “they” or “it”. And you can’t use them not really knowing each other as an excuse, because this continues even when characters start using the names “Frisk” and “[whatever the fuck you named Chara]”. These are their canonical pronouns.

Two: This is literally only “projectable” because they are gender-neutral characters, which is ignorant at best and transphobic at worst. That may sound harsh, but tell me, has anyone ever argued that Sora from Kingdom Hearts is a girl because they felt Sora was? Have people argued Lara Croft is a boy just because? You might argue “that’s not fair, those aren’t personalized characters, they have names!” and, okay, then how about this: Final Fantasy IX. The main character can be named anything you want, and the placeholder name is Zidane. I have never seen anyone say Zidane is a girl just because the player feels he is and named him “Lizzie” or something (I mean, he can be Lizzie if you want but it doesn’t make him a girl). And he is about as customizable as Chara, and Frisk is even less customizable. It’s not a tool for projection.

Genderbending is fine (even if it can be a bit cringe, especially when used for the purpose of making a ship specifically straight or gay rather than literally any other reason) and can be really fun and interesting. You wanna write Frisk as a booby murder-girl? Cool. Wanna write Chara as a soft-boy psycho-killer? Awesome. But neither of these characters are canonically male or female, there is no indication that they are meant to be “what you feel”, and they are given pronouns that you don’t choose. It’s more of an issue when those two aren’t the only explicitly they/them using characters. There’s also the Dummy, Mad Dummy (until they become Mad Mew Mew where she becomes she), Napstablook, ghost/pre-body Mettaton, Monster Kid, Gyftrot, and Lesser Dog. These are characters either exclusively referred to as “they”, or also referred to as “it”. There’s also Snowdrake and So Sorry who use all of “they”, “it”, and “he”.

And no one should get up in arms and making stupid “attack helicopter” jokes like dumbass bigots. Let’s remember that this is a game with the biggest romantic couple a bisexual lizard nerd and a badass butch fish lesbian, there’s a cross-dressing male lion npc, Mettaton was gender-neutral before his body, after his body wears dresses and EX is mostly pink and his legs are styled like high-heeled boots, Mad Mew Mew was neutral before her body and then she also had a huge crush on Undyne, and both Papyrus and Alphys go on a date with Frisk. This is not a game that shies away from queerness. Trans-ness isn’t out of the question or even unlikely.

Look, I honestly don’t usually get angry seeing Frisk and Chara referred to as “she” or “he”. I get sad or disappointed, and I’ll either say that or say nothing at all and then move on. But when people see my sadness/disappointment and immediately insist that he/she isn’t wrong, especially when I didn’t say it was, it’s defensive, stupid, and rude, and that is what pisses me off rather than the perceived misgendering of a fictional character. Tbh, you can call Frisk and Chara whatever you want, they’re fictional characters, it’s not the biggest deal, do what you please. But if you use non-canonical pronouns for them, don’t insist it’s canon or you’re correct in doing so. That’s all I ask.

#Undertale #Rant #pronouns #misgendering

4 notes · View notes

l-e-s-b-o-t · 7 years

Text

After over a year I finally got around to updating my coming out story

This page is permanently available here or you can read it below:

Hello to anyone who is taking the time to read this, my name is Becky and I’m queer. This is my very long and complicated story about my journey to self-discovery which has involved many coming outs.

I first began questioning my sexuality in 2012 when I was 15 and I met this girl who I thought was the most beautiful person on the planet. I’d never felt anything like this before and initially, I thought it was some strange intense need to be this girl’s friend. It wasn’t until a couple of months later that I realised I wanted to kiss her rather than just be her friend. Looking back on my childhood it was obvious from the start that I liked girls, I was completely infatuated with Jodie Foster in Busy Malone, Princess Peach and Odette from Swan Princess.

About 6 months after I met this girl, I came out to my best friend as bisexual. Unfortunately, neither of us remember the moment at all, which just shows how much of a non-issue it was between us. Then a couple of months after that, on the 25th February 2013, I came out to the rest of my high school friends. A few of my friends were already out as bisexual so they paved the way for me coming out and so, yet again, it was very much a non-issue. Nobody was surprised at all and nobody in high school ever said anything bad to me about it ever (although I’m not sure how far the news spread to the people outside my friendship group.

After that came sixth-form college, I had an entirely new group of friends and I was (at the time) the only openly gay person in my friendship group. I came out to everyone super casually and nobody cared, the only issue anyone ever had was that I talked about gay shit too much. During my first few months of being at college, I started coming out as a lesbian since all the proper, hardcore, head-over-heels crushes I’d had were on girls and at the time it made sense to identify this way. I was also feeling really lonely being the only gay and so that was when I made this blog. It wasn’t long though until some of my friends started coming out and made me feel less alone.

In February 2014 I came out to my mum, as usual, I came out to her very casually because I didn’t think it would be an issue. She asked me whether a friend of mine was gay and my reply was “no, but I am”. She was speechless. Unfortunately, she didn’t have the best response and said some things I think today she would want to take back. She also told my dad which I didn’t find out about until 6 months later. Initially, my mum said a lot of hurtful things but after a while, she just stopped bringing it up. Flash forward 4 years and now she just awkwardly makes gay jokes and asks me whether I’m dating all of my female friends.

Then in 2015, I went to university, I came out casually to everyone I became friends with knowing that if they responded badly I could just easily stop being friends with them. Everybody I came out to took it well, apart from one girl I met during freshers. We quickly became friends and after a couple of days of hanging out, I decided that now was the time to come out to her. Our friendship lasted a couple of weeks before we both ditched each other for people we got on better with. 6 months later, I found out from the girl she replaced me with that she had told everyone to not be friends with me because I was “weird and gay”. This is the only experience I have ever had with homophobia from people my own age, I was surprised that it happened in university when everyone was supposed to be an adult. I was never bothered by her comments because it’s 100% true that I am weird and gay but guess what? I love being weird and gay! What she said also said more about her than it ever did about me.

During my time at university, I also began to question my sexuality yet again. I struggled for years with the fact that I felt lust for guys. Surprisingly, I was much more reluctant to admit to myself that I liked guys than that I liked girls, which I think says something about the amount of biphobia in society, particularly in the lesbian community. After a year of questioning whether I liked guys or not, I decided to sleep with one of my male friends, which if I’m honest, was not as enlightening as I expected. It wasn’t until nearly a year after that I finally began using the label queer for myself which I was much more comfortable with than labels like bisexual or pansexual which I still don’t feel fit me in the same way that queer does.

After having my first major crush on a guy I finally decided that it was time to re-come-out to my friends and what better way to do it than just casually talking about my new crush. 99% of my friends were completely cool with me liking people of all genders but surprisingly a couple of people had a hard time believing that I’m not a lesbian because I spent so much of my teens talking about girls, girls, girls. It all worked out in the end though because I am finally comfortable with my identity and feel like I am completely myself as a happy queer woman in my 20’s.

If you have any specific questions about my coming out process or about my journey to self-discovery send me an ask or message me because this is very much abridged.

#personal #coming out #my story #me #queer #bisexual #pansexual #lgbt #lgbtq #wlw #lesbian

37 notes · View notes

abdicatedarchive · 3 years

Text

discussion boards || juliette and daisy

𝐖𝐇𝐄𝐍: freshens healthy restaurant // early march 2021.

𝐅𝐄𝐀𝐓𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐆: juliette x daisy.

𝐓𝐑𝐈𝐆𝐆𝐄𝐑𝐒: none.

𝐃𝐄𝐓𝐀𝐈𝐋𝐒: TBD

Sitting at a table, Daisy was somewhat regretting her decision to leave her homework until so late. While she was very close to being done, it was due in class in a few hours and she would really rather just be sitting in her room eating popcorn and watching Bridgerton or some other trashy-yet-addicting Netflix show. She had decided that the best way to get herself through the final push was to eat at the same time (she was extremely food-motivated), thus her working away at her paper while stuffing food in her mouth. Looking up, she saw a classmate looking around, presumably for a place to start. “You can sit here if you want,” she said, taking a sip of her drink. “Unless you chew loudly. We’re humans, not cows.”

Juliette had been very selective about where she went on campus to avoid potentially running into anyone she didn't want to see. That list was extraordinarily long ever since she found out that her ex was here, she was doing her best to avoid all of her friends as well. Best to keep things secret. Sadly, there was no better dining option than to go to freshens, because neither of them usually would be caught dead there. Juliette was a junk food fiend. She saw her classmate, a girl she had noted was very loud, and the first words that came out of the other girl's mouth just affirmed that for Juliette. "Luckily for you, I am a very silent chewer" she said softly with a smile as she sat down across from her. Juliette pulled out her book out of instinct, she was very used to eating alone after last semester when she made so few friends that she had to transfer here. "You finishing up that paper?" Juliette asked as she put the lid on her salad to mix it up.

She thought that she recognized the girl from class. Jules or Jane or something like that. She also thought that she had heard some gossip about her, but she heard so much gossip and did not have the attention span to keep track of who was in what trouble or who was sleeping with who’s girlfriend. “Good. Then you can sit.” Daisy said, taking another sip of her smoothie as the girl took a seat, before asking if she was finishing her paper. “Yeah. It is a stupid paper anyway, but whatever. It will get done.” She eyed the book that Juliette had in her hands. “What are you, a book nerd?” She asked. It did not look like the kind of book that got assigned for class.

"A little bit yeah, this is What we talk about when we talk about love by Raymond Carver" said Juliette as she looked at the dog eared beat up copy in front of her. Juliette opened up the mixed salad and took a bite before talking again. "It's a comfort read, if you've ever seen 2012's Stuck in Love, it's mentioned in there a lot" the girl added, not sure if the fun facts were really going to help her. She also definitely could have left out the release date, but it was natural to her. Juliette knew if Daisy had a problem with that, she would definitely say something.

Listening as the girl rattled off the information on the book she was reading, Daisy just stared at her. Definitely the book nerd type, but in an almost endearing way. Not the ‘I read books, therefore, I am smarter than you’ type. Also the awkward type. Which could mean that she could be the useful type. “Never seen it,” Daisy said, tossing her hair over her shoulder. “Are you the Encyclopedia Brown of books in general, or is it just books about love?”

Juliette smiled and looked down a little before looking back up, the other girl was a good kind of intimidating. "Mostly books about love, and then a healthy blend of queer and feminist lit" said the girl as she took a sip of her water. Being at college meant she could just say whatever she wanted without judgement, and it was a new but captivating feeling. That she could just be herself. Every conversation was a new level of freedom. "Do you read for fun? It's kind of hard when there's so much stuff assigned all the time" she asked.

Daisy nodded. Yep. Definitely the good kind of nerd. The girl was also obviously one of those sweet ones that were still somewhat shocked by whatever freedoms university life allowed them. It was adorable. “Does that include Virginia Woolf, or is that too hipster for you?” She asked, and then shrugged at the girl’s question. “I like reading. I’m in the English literature department, so I’d have picked the wrong department if I didn’t like to read.” Then, she sighed. “I do miss me a good trashy romance novel, though. They never seem to assign them.”

"I enjoy Virginia Woolf from time to time, I try to get a few different view points just for my own education" said Juliette with a little shrug. She was happy to hear that she had met a fellow English major, the more people in her department that she got to know meant that getting help if she needed it later would be more easy access. Juliette laughed at the girl's joke, and began to nod her head at the trashy romance novel comment, "I don't know why they don't. I think that the whole class would pay a lot more attention to their discussion board posts" Juliette replied, another giggle escaping her mouth.

Daisy liked this girl. Or, at the very least she thought she could tolerate her, which in Daisy speak meant she liked her. “I agree. If they gave us interesting reading material, people would be way more likely to read the books instead of just skipping to an online summary.” She did not understand why some people chose to be English majors - you were literally signing up to read tons and tons of books, both boring and entertaining, as an English major. Still, she enjoyed a good, entertaining book. Especially if it was a trashy, entertaining book. “They should assign Bridgerton, and then let us watch the Netflix show as extra credit.”

Juliette had to laugh at the girl's Bridgerton comment, it was right up her alley. She had enjoyed Bridgerton, she had binged it pretty quickly. The only thing it was missing was more gay energy, that always got Juliette really into a show. But she did love a period style piece, "yeah there is so much to unpack with that show from costumes to sex education" she added, "the discussion posts would be wild, I can hardly imagine after what is it the fourth episode or the sixth? whenever the sex montages happened, specifically the one with taylor swift in the background" she rambled, "I feel like that would be a thought provoking essay."

“I agree. I get gay vibes from Benedict and Eloise.” She held up her fork and closed her eyes. “I speak their gayness into existence. Though I am biased because the lady who plays Eloise is super pretty. But then again, I would happily make out with anyone from the cast.” A little off-topic, but Daisy was never one for staying on topic. “Oh, honey, that would be so fun. Take ‘Wildest Dreams’ to a whole new level and a whole new meaning.”

"Oh for sure, potential for asexuality for Eloise as well" said Juliette, wondering where the next seasons would take all the characters. "She is absolutely stunning" she agreed. "The men are something, but I'm much more partial to the ladies in the cast" said Juliette, she was still having trouble naming her sexuality directly. It was a reflex from the before times. "I honestly think that if there is going to be sex on screen that there should be a Taylor Swift mandate." Juliette felt strongly about this, even though it was a joke. It would just add layers every time.

“Yes. I would love Eloise to be asexual homoromantic. It would be the cherry on top. Sadly, this is Netflix we are talking about so I have my doubts.” She crinkled her nose at the thought but digressed at Juliette’s next comment. “Partial to the ladies, eh? I don’t blame you at all. Ladies have a certain…” she outlined an hourglass shape in the air with her hands, “charm to them, don’t they? Sadly, I have a weakness for the weaker sex - males, that is - as well as women.” She sighed dramatically, as though liking men as well was a great flaw in her personality. “What other songs would you want? If you could direct, what are your top three Taylor Swift sex scene songs?”

"Netflix never really ... hits things on the nose. It must be in the contract that they miss the mark" she replied with a shrug. In a perfect world things would be different. She giggled at the hand motions, "a weakness for men? Most of my friends suffer from the same condition. I heard dating men is terminal" she said, playfully frowning before breaking into a smile. She had to think for a second about what Taylor Swift songs would be good for a montage, "Hmmmm, I would say for a good enemies to lovers moment ... I did something bad. Enchanted for those like ... meet cute instant connections. Ooooh, and Afterglow for missed connections or exes" said Juliette, not completely confident in her answers but proud that she could pick something so quickly.

“This is also very true. They should hire very invested college students to do the planning for them. Preferably ones that eat at Freshens and make fun of their poor creative choices.” She shrugged, tossing her hair over her shoulder. “Yes, unfortunately despite my best efforts, I can’t shake the bi in bisexual. Men are just… ugh. There is something about them.” She sighed. “It will definitely be terminal.” She considered Juliette’s song choices and nodded her approval. “I approve. Netflix should definitely hire you to pick their soundtracks.”

A laugh fell from her lips, "I promise to not bi erase you, I will remember your terminal condition known as an affinity for men." Most of Juliette's friends were somewhere on the spectrum of sexuality, Gabrielle being on the far side of that. As straight as they come. She wondered about Jonah sometimes, but she never wanted to pry. "That would be an amazing job, maybe I should change majors and go into media and mass communications" she said, a smile forming on her face as she took a sip of her water. "If you could have a job that had nothing to do with your major and was super niche, what would it be?" she asked.

“I appreciate that. You’re a good egg. I think I am going to keep you,” Daisy said, pointing her fork at Juliette again. “Though I would appreciate you not mentioning my affinity for men in front of menfolk. It tends to go to their… heads.” She smirked. “Maybe you should change majors. It isn’t too late, but I am sure that you are… adequate… at whatever it is you do.” Her question gave Daisy pause. “If I could have a super niche job that had nothing to do with my major… hmmm… maybe someone who makes stage costumes? The really funky ones you see on the West End and Broadway. That would be fun.”

She smiled at the idea of being kept, it wasn't the first time she had heard something like that. One time she was told that someone wanted to pack her up in their pocket and take her everywhere with them. It was a strange compliment, but it was very sweet. "Bold of you to assume I would ever speak to a man" Juliette replied, laughing a little to herself. Jonah was a special exception, and Chase when he was also in his own dorm room. "I'm a journalism major, but I think it stems from a deep need to get out of town that I had in high school? So I'm not sure if it's actually something I want to do" said Juliette. She had a lot of time to change her major, so she was very comfortable where she was at. Jules still needed to adjust to this new college before she could really hunker down, a vague english major was where she was at right now. She listened when the girl was talking about costumes, "Well if you ever want to make that more of a reality, my best friends Gabrielle and Marina both know how to make clothes and costumes. Very talented ladies, they could make pretty much anything. Gabrielle does more contemporary stuff, but she's got the chops for funky costumes, and Marina does more period/fantasy clothing" she explained.

#juliettexdaisy #threads || daisy and juliette #daisy and juliette || 001 #juliette: thread

0 notes

stuckinapatriarchalbullshitland · 4 years

Note

for the f anon. do you have a time line when camren broke up and then made up again? have you got any information on what really happened to camila in 2015/16? did she have a mental brake down? did her anxiety ocd take over? like we know it was bad because her mom was with her everywhere. and she had to be separated from ot4. but privately surely the girls especially lauren and dinah was there for her? how many times was she in hospital. because after every visit the side effects are visible.

I know I took ages to answer this, anon but here’s F answer: (Long ass post coming)

Hello, dear Anon.

I’m gonna answer your questions in order.

2014: Become official in early April and broke up in late November. Small parenthesis. They were both 17 years old in April 2014. Oh, hello to you too ‘Used to This’!

2) Camila suffers from one of the variants of OCD since she was 8, and despite seeing a therapist since 2013, her OCD was diagnosed at the end of 2015. C also suffers from anxiety, panic attacks, mood disorders, and depression (all linked to her OCD). These are things that we’ve been able to witness with our own eyes on more than one occasion. She’s always tried to bottle everything up and not show herself 'weak’ in front of people, in front of us fans. The last thing she wanted was to let people know how much she was really struggling, and therefore, she always tried to disguise it as best she could. Many times, even using her humor as a shield. Picture certain events like a time bomb. Picture her depression as a progression ready to explode:

And the list goes on… Anxiety consumed her life for a long time. Now comes and goes.

4) 3 times. But, as we saw with Dinah in that 2017 video, they may have given her intravenous therapies when she needed it. It’s common, especially for overworked artists.

I (Interviewer): “This one an interesting one. Are Camila and Lauren dating?”

L: “No”

C: “Ugh, Jesus Christ”

I: “Yeah, I know” at the same time as what he says, C laughs awkwardly as a result of her comment “It comes down on Google 'cause people are googling it!”

L: “No! It’s amazing how people continue to do that”

Okay. Love u, guys. Stay safe, please. With love, Faby.

#f anon

39 notes · View notes