#it's cool that we have enough queer men in the same show for me to dig into though

[starnana7]

every time I remember that the hit show supernatural made God, the literal God from the Bible, canonically bisexual but couldn’t do the same with a random guy who hunts monsters it actually makes me feel physically ill.. like blasphemy is okay but we draw the line at making the main character a little bit queer because it would “upset the heterosexuals men”? okay ig… and it’s so funny to me that they tried SO bad to make dean like really really straight and macho and a manly womanizer (I mean dude has literal porn brain and is obsessed with cars and is a film nerd) And still is the number 1 bissexual boy.. I mean no one that into cowboys is 100% straight 🙄 and if they actually wanted him to be that much of a cishet guy WHY would they make him have a codependent homosexual friendship with his best friend for more than a decade ?? and we have so much subtext to corroborates it that it’s actually insane.

and it’s also rlly funny to me that sam would be the most obvious choice for a queer storyline. like i’m not sure this is true but i heard somewhere that he actually was supposed to like be lgbt and that it’s implied in the show he’s pan bc he basically have sex w/ everyone and doesn’t care (like monsters and stuff). i wholeheartedly disagree bc sure he hited a demon and a werewolf and a kitsune and God knows what more But it still were just women and for me he’s still just straight 💀 we do have gabriel however and i would say that’s a valid argument but i don’t actually like them together because of the whole torturing-sam-every-tuesday-over-and-over-again but it’s still a good take ig. again this is just my opinion But anyways doesn’t matter my point Is that sam always felt like a freak and wanted to be normal and like was more open minded and “less-macho-toxic-behavior” than dean. he was a theater kid and talked about his feelings and all. STILL THO dean went and become The bissexual icon (Not Sam, Dean!!). and the fact that he was more manly actually only emphasized to his sexuality (and him being closeted) and sam being the straight one, and bare with me here. as sam winchester once wisely said “well you are kind of butch they probably think you're compinsating.” (to dean asking why people always assumed they were gay) and like this is so true, sam always felt comfortable in himself and like his nerdier and less cool strong man personality. But dean, oh, dean, no, no, no. and it could all be linked to john. we know how much dean wanted to gain his father approval and respect, all he ever wanted was for john to be proud of him. so he’d listen to the same music as john, same clothes… and so on. but when we really see a glance of him, we realize he’s actually much more “““girly””” (sorry for the term i lacked a better one) than he shows, Especially when compared to sam—who’s supposed to be the more girly one (again sorry for the term lol) or whatever. dean canonically likes taylor swift, chick flick films, actually liked when a woman made him wear underwear, the bailarinas shoe were “speaking to him” in that one ep of cursed objects, and so on. and every time he makes fun of sam for doing something not-manly-enough (like drinking lemon water or drinking from tiny coups) he eventually goes and do the same thing 😭 and i’m 100% sure that the writers just thought “haha funny scene this really straight deadly man does something not so convencional/more feminine(?) haha comedy relief time!!” but it actually just made him have a whole perfect queer background developed in the series. specially with the fact that He Does Overcompensate. why is he always flirting with women, why is he so butch and scary, always talking about straight sex and so on? because he’s really just deep in the closet. and it makes so much sense with john being his father, with him having to hunt two lesbians nuns in his 17 bday, always having to be strong and macho and cool and perfect—and therefore straight. even without cas, dean really does immaculate the bissexual experience and i’m so sorry but this is just true.

and now pointing to the subtext that i mentioned in the first paragraph (lol i can’t believe i’m making a whole rant as to why dean winchester is a confirmed bisexual), that whole confession to that priest where he says he wants experience new feelings, new people, FOR THE FIRST TIME. that always that the show mentioned a gay couple it ALWAYS focused on dean—not sam, DEAN. the gay hunters, the gay couple on the bar that the cupid “made”, the two cosplayers partners… the fact that every time that dean liked something it was borderline fangirl (gay) obsessive (the dr. sexy episode, that wrestler fighter). he Had a gay thing—and was all flustered about it. he flirted with a guy throughout charlie. THE MALE SIREN. the male siren like after that ep i was 100% convinced that man was not straight. he had a hot demon sumer with crowley?!!! and it’s so funny to me that not one of these things involves castiel, so if they really wanted to make dean be that straight why would they do that?? and only to dean, not even once to sam. Like. and not to mention all the homoeretic tension with benny??? sam never had a male best friend like that.. all of that and i didn’t even entered on destiel. Because this then really just confirms that he is Not straight. even if he wasn’t In Love with cas, they had something going on and the fact that if cas was a girl it would 100% be canon and filmed and Everyone would ship—and I really mean everyone—it just makes me go fucking insane. they could’ve had it all. the fanfic episodes, the parallels between dean and cas and “real couples”, ruby and cas duality and the fact that sam indeed had a relationship w/ her. Anyway i’m a # bi dean truth believer and i know this bc same boy # happy pride month to my fav bissexual boy in the whole world

also to anyone that says that “destiel” was unrequited love yes it kinda of was but only bc dean was so deep in the closet, he did love cas. he was indeed a bissexual man. i’ll die on that hill.

[smytherines]

I often wonder if I would feel differently about The Staircase Scene if I had seen SAF when it first came out in 2016. The first time I saw it was probably around October or November of 2023, and like... the context is different now.

Whatever we want to say about the personal story arcs of these characters (and I know I'm in a tiny minority because, for me, killing Owen does not constitute a satisfying close to Curt's arc, that's totally fine), there is the very real issue of the sociopolitical context that this scene takes place within- both in their time (1961) and in ours.

One very cool thing about SAF is that, in order to understand these characters better, a lot of younger queer folks end up learning about the Lavender Scare, about Executive Order 10450- which officially prohibited gay people from working for the US government- for the first time. That's an incredible, precious thing to me. Yay queer history! It's important!

The show itself never addresses the fact that both the US and UK governments had very public, very brutal campaigns equating homosexuality with communism with being a traitor to your country. But if you want to understand these characters, and especially write fanfiction, you're really incentivized to teach yourself some fundamentally important aspects of queer history.

In the 54 Below concert, before singing Not So Bad, Brian Rosenthal talks about how when they were developing the show they thought N@zis were more or less a thing of the past, that they're fully aware of how differently that song might be taken now after an escalation into a more open embrace of fascism in the US. And they're absolutely right about that.

But I think that's also perhaps an issue with the staircase scene, or at least it is for me. Obviously homophobia and transphobia were not "fixed" in 2016, they were still massive problems resulting in violence and discrimination and brutality. But institutionally, at least, you could look at the situation and point to some things that were gradually getting better.

In 2016 trans youth in my state were legally allowed to receive gender affirming care. In 2024, they are not. It's not that homophobia and transphobia went away and then came back, but there was a very real resurgence of the use of the media and of governmental power to inflict pain on queer & trans people and chase them out of public life- bathroom bans, gender affirming care bans, Don't Say Gay laws, trying to make drag illegal, equating queer and trans people with pedophilia. There has been a big cultural shift back towards the same kind of violent governmental moral panic that our beloved Curt & Owen would have lived under.

Whatever we want to say about these characters and this story (and there's tons of fascinating debate there), there is still the base of a gay man killing his ex-lover ostensibly to protect US foreign policy objectives. Killing the man he loves- or loved, at least- to protect the secret that he is gay. And that hits different for me now.

I watch that scene and it is heartbreaking on a personal level, but its also heartbreaking as a queer person who just wants to scream "your government will destroy you for being gay, you don't owe them shit!"

Owen tries to explain that the surveillance network is happening, that the future won't wait for Curt to catch up. Barb has been saying she's working on the same thing for the US government the entire show, but Curt just kept ignoring her. And I just want to say "Curt, honey, what do you think your government is going to do to you with that surveillance system? Do you think you're useful enough to keep around even though you have sex with men? Because I promise you they will not care."

It feels tragic to me because on some level it seems like Curt would actually be safer with another gay man having control of all the world's secrets than he will be if the government he has dedicated his life to gets their hands on that same technology.

And the thing is, having a tragic ending doesn't make the show bad. This show is great. This scene is spectacular. It makes you think, it makes you feel things, it does all the stuff that great art is supposed to do. Absolutely none of what I'm saying here is meant to denigrate the show as a musical or a story or even a queer story. I hope it doesn't come off as me saying "actually this show is bad," because I don't feel that way at all.

Clearly I live and breathe this show. That's why I spend all my time on here analyzing every scene, every frame, every facial expression. I love this show so much that I can't help but deconstruct it and look at all its component parts- including the sociopolitical context both now and in 1961. Because that context, despite never being explicitly mentioned, is important to our understanding of these characters.

I love these characters so much that it's actually pretty difficult for me to watch A2P7 anymore, because the staircase scene is so emotionally devastating to me that it's hard to try to swing back into that more comedic tone (even though Spy Dance is a certified bop).

I'm not even sure what my point is with all of this, other than to say that Spies Are Forever is a show that is great and fun and funny as written/performed, and becomes gradually more emotionally devastating when you rewatch it or when you understand the subtext of it. When you can engage with the themes of gender and sexuality, surveillance and technology, trauma and trust, and tease out even more satisfying theories around this show.

So yeah. It's a musical. It's about spies.

[rosemarydisaster]

I feel like the misogyny in fandom is only partially the fandom's fault. Let me explain: if the piece of media you're a fan of has a 50/50 female to male ratio, and treats its female characters with the same love, nuance and respect they treat their male characters with... Obviously you have a bigger chance of having your favorite character be a woman instead of a men.

If there's only one or two women, if they're written like shit, if they're not allowed the same complexity (because they're just set dressing or because "feminism dictates female characters can't have flaws" lest they call you out) well obviously you're gonna gravitate to the more nuanced male characters. If you don't care enough to write compelling female characters why should the audience feel compelled?

Don't get me wrong, even great female characters get sidelined in favor of "tall dudes with (dubiously) homoerotic tension". But in fandoms with majority female characters/really compelling female leads, the vibes are completely different. Even if there are still assholes. A great example is the fandom of Game of Thrones vs the fandom of A Song of Ice and Fire. When all your female characters either feel the same brand of girlboss/badass or are framed as annoying/evil while most of your male characters (even the evil ones) are painted as cool and badass as opposed to having a full cast of nuanced characters of both genders... yeah misogyny is gonna happen.

So yeah, we do need to work on our internalized misogyny and we do need to point out when we or the fandom treat female characters unfairly. But we also need more stories that love their female characters as much as their male counterparts. No one has the guts to hate on the female characters of The Locked Tomb Series. Mostly because why would you read a book with a mostly queer female cast about necromancy and the awfulness of love if you hated complex female characters??

We should try to give more attention to those stories. Once you start asking "isn't it weird there's no interesting women here?" When you watch/read/listen to a story you find yourself not caring much for a lot of shows. Hell it's why I can't watch most shonen anymore and why I gave up on supernatural at some point. As a "consumer" (hate that word) I also have the option to stop caring about a show that clearly doesn't care about me (or any woman for that matter).

Does this mean you can't read Sasunaru fanfic anymore? No, but when you start a new show you might want to keep that question in mind. And you also may want to consider specifically searching out for works about women or that care about their female cast as much as their male counterparts.

The fandoms don't yearn for the misogyny as much as we think. I've seen some fandom really work the terribly written female characters into extremely compelling stories. Or write new female characters in fandoms with barely any (shout out to "Local Skate Dads Adopt Three Sons and a Hooligan" for adding like three new female characters to a show with one and a half).

Our internalized misogyny is left alone to fester in a desert, deprived of good female characters. Of course people develop an almost paraphilic obsession with M/M ships when they've been trained from birth on shows that don't care for their female cast (if they have any). We center men because society centers men. And we have to do the individual job of decentering men/centering women while also aknowledging that the people that make our shows aren't doing the job.

Also if you're reading this and wondering "what even is good female representation? What kind of show should I watch?" Read the locked tomb series. Trust me, it is a religious experience (not just for women, it has so much gender in it).

Has this all been a ploy to get you to read about TLT? Yes. I also recommend The Magnus Protocol for podcasts, and Derry Girls for tv shows. They're all so good.

[sailorblossoms-snowbaz]

So I have more thoughts about labels. Yeah yeah, no one cares, I’m talking to myself here, please save your tomatoes and bricks. (Writing down my thoughts helps me stop overthinking things, like “I did something with this so now my brain will let me be free,” I treat this like a diary etc etc) (I’ve always been A Blogger haha). My disclaimer is always that Simon not labelling and not knowing himself is important and cool (I approach my own identity like that, I’m not super big on labels). 

When I first read these books last year, I did it as a casual reader. I looked at fanarts and some discussions between books (which I read pretty quickly). It actually made me think Simon Snow being bisexual was canon! so I was pretty shocked when I first read the scene discussing bisexuality. It almost made me feel like I was reading a direct answer to what turned out to be headcanon and... it wasn’t a yes. (so freaking popular that it apparently still has strength in certain parts of the fandom? as someone who grew up believing I was straight, and picked bisexuality as my first step into embracing my queerness – I now know I’m also somewhere in the acespec and honestly? Simon helped me accept that – Simon’s reactions alone would be enough for me to never want to call him bi again haha his gut reaction was “hell no, what are you talking about??”). Nowadays I’ll insist Simon Snow is a gay man who struggles but who slowly comes to terms with it (it’s a small part, but we can’t ignore that Simon found himself wondering “am I legally allowed to kiss Baz in this state?” that’s heavy stuff) and that the writing in these books is very acespec friendly. 

Reading My Rosebud Boy (an AU where the author tries to make them feel like the same people) makes me more confident that I’m not just seeing shit in the main trilogy. Simon in his early thirties explicitly says “yeah I’m gay, I used to have an issue with that (in his teenage years, when he dates girls, and maybe early 20s) but I’m cool with it now” (only dating men as an adult). I think we can find that sentiment in the trilogy. In Simon’s questions about women (“mayhaps I was never attracted to women in the first place” he says, while staring at the distant boobs, after not noticing boobs that were on his face or literally never in his life) (Baz having “a problem” with boobs while Simon doesn’t is not about Baz being gay while Simon isn’t. It’s about Baz, living in fear that Simon doesn’t want him anymore after spending his entire adolescence believing he’s straight, worrying that Simon would be into the boobs, and on that deeper level, that Simon would leave him. Note that every mild ass comment Simon makes about a girl being “cute” puts a focus on Baz's reaction. It’s more about Baz’s insecurities! And what we have is writing choices that make it so the timing of boobs being almost on Simon’s arms has Simon looking sick and green – a hell of a choice to not do it on purpose – Simon not even looking, Simon focusing only on the food, Simon thinking “maybe not for me and I don’t know what I am, but if a lady wants to show off her tits, why would I object?” While considering he might only be into Baz) (maybe his thoughts are also big tit solidarity. Ha.)  

I think the popularity of bisexual Simon could start with a misunderstanding of his feelings for Agatha. I have written lots of posts on why the “inanimate objects” comment about her is overcompensation and deliberately silly (inanimate objects don’t have feelings, don’t have wants and desires, don’t have choices) and equating the way he sees she’s pretty to the way Baz, a gay man can see it, etc etc. Him saying “I always wanted her” and then proceeding to make comments that indicates he wants to be like her, not that he desires her, but people interpreting the latter because well, boy and girl. Which takes me to the other reason I think this took off: media tropes and general assumptions. But media tropes and assumptions outside of the books. Like reading “maybe I’m half gay” and your mind instantly goes to “ah shit, here we go again” because how many of us have seen bisexuality described that way? Like it’s mathematical? A perfect 50/50 every single time? How many of us have been frustrated at reading sexuality struggles in media that has you like “this would be so much easier for y’all if you consider bisexuality is a thing that exists, that it’s fluid and can vary from bisexual to bisexual” etc etc. I’d bet this played into the reviewers I’ve seen writing off CO as bi erasure. But I don’t think this is on the books. It’s not what they were going for. I think this is on the reader. 

I include his comments about other girls here. “She’s cute” “she’s beautiful” so are kittens and flowers. I understand that someone horny can use “cute” when they’re attracted, but within the parameters of these specific books, I think it’s a stretch to see it that way. Attraction in these books can be measured in: repetition, hyper-fixation (on details no one else notice) and derailed thoughts (they go insane over it!). Shepard says Penny is cute! But note that he doesn’t says it and moves on. Oh no, Shepard has a whole fucking meltdown because Penny is cute. You would never think about Penny’s knees if it wasn’t for Shepard. It drives him insane that Penny is cute. He can’t cope! Cute, cute, cute. Repetition. Cute knees. Hyper-fixation. Derailed thoughts. Simon doesn’t linger on those comments. Baz also calls girls beautiful and gorgeous. Neither of them lingers on that. For Simon, All Horny Roads lead to Baz (even in my rosebud boy! yes I can write that post goddammit). I also think there might be some projecting in the sense that a reader can see the how horny he can be around Baz and project that into him, even when he just said “cute” and moved on immediately.

It also picks my attention that a common bullshit regarding bi erasure in media (looking at you, old trashy... guilty pleasure manga) is having the MC being all “I’m not gay!! I'm only about [male love interest]’s dick and that’s that” and maybe even putting on his clown shoes to insist he’s totally straight and totally only likes women. Or this would come in the character being asked questions about men in general or just called gay (so... much to unpack in those stories... I used to blog about old manga. Fun times). Simon doesn’t consider men in general (already telling). He considers women when he’s like “yeah... maybe not for me... i don’t know” and upon getting close to see the answer is maybe a nope, he goes to a place that gives him security: being a certified Baz-fucker. And the biggest thing that doesn’t play into those tropes or ideas or assumptions? Simon never thought he was straight. The mere suggestion irritates him. 

I wrote some posts about that, but I’m too lazy to search for it. It’s clearly lazy saturday (I also wrote too many fucking posts so linking starts to feel like work haha) The summary: Simon never thought about his sexuality at all, the repression of his desires and his crazy magic (can't get worked up without danger of going off) make it unlikely he’s ever even masturbated (using other outlets like practicing with his sword/jumping Baz to fight to work off some steam haha), his rejection of bisexuality (because he does reject it! Especially notable because it would have been “the easy” answer for him, the maybe more comfortable, and yet it inspires nothing but discomfort! and when he opens himself more to consider it, he’s still leaning more to the negative, he still always goes back to “gay” and never once to consider “bisexuality” — and putting 2 and 2 together, about Simon having a knee-jerk rejection of his relationship with Agatha being understood as sexual attraction, or him being seen as a woman-fucker. It’s Baz insisting that Simon must have liked/being attracted to her what frustrates and bothers Simon and pushes him enough to process in real time that the answer is no. It’s wild to me to read him saying “what I liked about her is that she awoke absolutely nothing in me,” which he demonstrates with his thoughts, and then still seeing the argument that he ever had a single horny feeling for her). 

I think that something that also complicates it is the negative idea that being bisexual is not good enough. Not gay enough. Not straight enough. We belong nowhere. Our validity is questioned every single fucking minute. The idea that bisexual Simon is contested because “that’s not good enough.” But I don’t think that’s it here. I don’t think that’s the intent of the books, or the people who have been seeing Agatha and Simon as lesbian and gay so far into the closet they don’t even know they’re there from day one (or mine!) 

I respect the author always replying “I don’t think Simon knows!” when directly asked if he’s bisexual, because it honors his struggles and journeys, but I also think the answer is on the page. I think Simon’s journey there is both about not feeling pressured to define himself, that he’s allowed to live and love without picking an exact word or a flag to fly at pride, and also about becoming comfortable being gay. He goes from “I’m not even remotely ready to think whether I’m gay” to “if we’re not safe to be gay in ikea, where would we be?”/"gets off with gay PSA with Baz” to “I’m totally gay for all intents and purposes” – there’s a progression. There’s growth and acceptance. And it’s always around the word “gay” (not as an umbrella term) and never anything else: not straight, not bi. Not even when it’s offered as a reasonable alternative. 

[positive-masculinity-enjoyer]

I fucking hate the negativity and sometimes outright hostility towards cishet people (and cishet allies) that I have noticed in some queer spaces. And since it slightly bothers me, I decided to make a post to explain my reasoning.

I get it, some cishet people are awful. Some of them are annoying as fuck. Some of them. I'm assuming that I don't need to list examples of fantastic, friendly, supportive cishets for you to get that not all of them are bad and hate/negativity in form of generalized statements mostly hurts the nice cishets. But I also see other problems with it.

Some LGBTQ+ people are cisgender. And that's totally fine. Some LGBTQ+ people are heterosexual. And that's completely fine too. If you say "I hate cis men.", some cis queer men will automatically feel hurt by that and other people will assume you actually hate them. Some transgender people are heterosexual. They might pass and look and act very cishet. And I feel like sometimes we forget that heterosexual people can be part of the LGBTQ+ community as well (even if you exclude allies).

The other issue is young people who discover queer spaces. Imagine a young person finding queer spaces online and being absolutely blown away. They feel at home. They start questioning their gender and/or sexuality, but over time they come to the conclusion that they are cisgender and heterosexual. And in the current atmosphere in some queer spaces that tends to have negativity towards cishet people, these young people will have trouble accepting their identity and feel excluded, because cishet people don't belong into queer spaces, right? Despite their love towards the community, despite feeling at home in queer spaces much the same as young queer people feel, they might feel like they are not really welcome anymore.

So I think we should be more accepting towards cis and hetero people, and show that it's totally fine to be cis and hetero. You don't have to be queer. You're still welcome here if you aren't queer. Yes, being queer and all is heckin' cool, but you can still be heckin' cool if you aren't queer.

Another thing I want to add is about LGBTQ+ allies (which are usually cishet people). Apparently it is controversial whether they belong to the LGBTQ+ community, and in my opinion, yes they do. Yeah, some allies are annoying, and yes, it might be a bit arrogant of an ally to claim that the A in LGBTQIA+ is for Ally, but hey, there's enough space for asexual, aromantic, agender and other people in the A, so why not also include allies? Allies are just as enthusiastic and supportive of LGBTQ+ topics as queer people. And yeah, they are not part of the "queer umbrella", but I think they should be part of the LGBTQ+ community. Another short argument that supports this point is that without cishet allies (whether they call(ed) themselves that or not) LGBTQ+ rights and acceptance would be nowhere close to where they are today.

[monstersinthecosmos]

News that may interest you: asexual podcast duo The Ace Couple just released part 1 (of 2) of their AMC IWTV breakdown! I really like these podcasters’ style of media discussion in general—it’s detailed and analytic but also consistently funny and conversational—and I highly recommend this episode. Still just as excited for your written overview of asexuality in VC, whenever that happens :)

Oh wow, this is so cool! Thank you for sharing!

I listened to the episode and it really was a great critique of ways the show erased the asexuality, and I think it was also a really nice overview of the allosexual attitude I see in fandom a lot. Oddly enough, coming from a more casual/mainstream perspective and not like a DEEP FANDOM NERD IN THE TUMBLR TRENCHES perspective ahaha. Like they brought up reviews from gay men about how good the changes were and it kinda brushed upon some of the bullshit I’ve had to navigate by discussing this topic on Tumblr for years.

Something I think they summed up really well was the concept that the show changed the vampires from “broadly queer” to “explicitly gay” and that really nails it on the head I think.

At some point I do want to write some more posts about this, especially if I can reread the books this year I want to take time to like share and discuss some of the passages that are explicitly ace to me and build my case for the ace read. I’m guilty of bringing it up when it gets framed as an argument against acephobia and I apologize!!!!!!! We deserve to talk about this without having to disclaim that we deserve to be here or having to use it as a counter argument to acephobic garbage. Unfortunately, fandom has a great track record for leaving me ignorant comments or sending anons every time the topic comes up so I feel like I’m always defending it and not just enjoying it and giving it its own space. Sorry!!!!!!!

So to do that some more LMAO. (Sorry!)

I’ve said before like, I really do understand that the mainstream maybe needs the visual clues to understand the romance, but personally one of my huge complaints about the show is that there wasn’t actually a whole lot of intimacy and romance between them. Like, we see them fuck, but there’s barely any warmth between them. I went the whole season not really understanding what Louis saw in him. And I was confused what the show was trying to say, because while I understand that we can also see this as “Louis is not being truthful about their relationship” (aided by the one cute moment being Claudia’s POV and not from Louis himself), Daniel’s remark that Louis was describing Lestat as his soulmate really threw me. Like, I wasn’t getting that from the story they were showing us at all.

So like, could they have shown romance and intimacy without sex? Of course. They chose not to. I appreciate and understand that it’s a win to show gay sex on mainstream TV, but I personally found it underwhelming as a choice for this particular story/series. The main thesis here is ROMANCE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE SEX. YOU CAN SHOW ROMANCE IN WAYS THAT ARE NOT SEX.

I don’t buy the pushback about asexuality somehow sanitizing the romance; in fact, that’s a fucking ignorant thing to say. I’ve had more than one person try to level me with this argument and I’m just not buying it. And as much as I think the mainstream is like centuries away from understand/accepting asexuality, it’s such a fucking problem even within the queer community.

✨Asexuals are queer. The characters are not less queer if they are asexual.✨

This talking point always tells me that someone either doesn’t believe aces belong in the queer community, or it tells me that the person just has an extremely fundamental misunderstanding of what asexuality is and isn’t.

But it’s the same way the heteros read IWTV and didn’t realize it was queer; I often think that allos in fandom do the same by missing the ace read.

And like, I’ve said this 100 times. It’s murky enough that I don’t think it’s worth arguing to death; I understand there is a bit of wiggle room. But that also means that shutting DOWN ace reads is ignorant as hell and frankly it’s pretty fuckin rude.

Something the podcast brought up that I don’t think I’ve given enough credit to is the idea that like Anne Rice’s writing is so SENSUOUS like, we can all agree that her vampires get turned and suddenly EVERYTHING is so heightened, like, they wanna touch velvet and cry at music and stare at buttons. DON’T WE THINK THEY’D BE CRAZY ABOUT SEX TOO? IF THEY WERE ALLO?????????? Hmm. Especially coming from an erotica writer like if she wanted them to fuck they would've fucked. (((Insert side essay about guilt/pleasure/Catholicism/etc don't @ me I don't got time today)))

Dgkjas sigh anyway

I’d really like to talk soon about the symbolism of drinking blood equating to sex and how because it’s not literal, IT IS NOT LITERAL. And how that’s no different from ace people finding ways around intimacy that are also not literally sex. I’ve been thinking about it a lot lately haha but again I don’t want to like, waste another ace post by wrapping it in discourse. We can have those conversations without having to defend our existence LOL. PUT A PIN IN THIS, REMIND ME TO BRING IT UP AT A LATER DATE AWAY FROM THE HATERS.  

[pb-dot]

Film Friday: Everything Everywhere All At Once

In order to sate my frequently insatiable appetite for talking about movies, I am going to start a bit of a column on this here webbed site. Every Friday I'll be sharing my perspectives, interpretation or just wild gushing about or rancorous condemnation of a movie. First in line is none other than Everything Everywhere All At Once. Content warning: Heavy topics such as family troubles, sexuality, mental health problems, and generational trauma. I'm getting into the weeds with this one. There'll also be spoilers, and frankly, if you haven't seen this one yet, I can hardly recommend it enough. Don't read the rest of this, just go see it, you will be confused and delighted and probably crying just a little bit.

Everything Everywhere All At Once has received all but unilateral praise, and I think it rightly deserves it. Even so, there are some aspects of how this thing is so impossibly awesome and some of the more specific facets of the ways it is so impossibly awesome that get overlooked.

Yes, there is no denying it is a powder keg of impossibly cool dimension-hopping kung fu, as raucously comedic as it is genuinely heartrending. It should stand on its own how powerfully the movie speaks on generational trauma, conflict, and healing from the same. The acting is somewhere north of incredible, with Michelle Yeoh, Stephanie Hsu, and Ke Hyu Quan delivering several lifetimes worth of life-best performances. You know the cast is stacked when James Hong is in a movie and he doesn't get to be the best thing about the movie all on his lonesome just by showing up, for once.

All of this is very true, but as far as I'm concerned it's hardly scratching the surface of EEAAO, and why it might be the best movie of the decade. First off, I want to talk a bit about the queer themes of the picture.

One thing I keep coming back to in Everything is how I find it nearly impossible to not read Evelyn Wang as bisexual. Well, I say bisexual which is probably a bad habit on my end, as mspec probably is a better umbrella term to use when the exact nature of her attraction isn't explored in much detail.

Now, why do I read her like this? Evelyn is, obviously, married to her husband Waymond, but there are still reasons one might suspect she is not exclusively attracted to men. We see Evelyn in a sapphic relationship, albeit it is in what might be the single most unlikely parallel universe imaginable where humans have evolved to possess functionally useless hotdog-fingered hands. Still, I would argue that the seeming impossibility of the outcome might be a narrative device all on its own.

Being in a queer relationship seems almost impossible to Evelyn, to the degree that professing genuine love to IRS Maven and minor antagonist Deidre is sufficiently out of character to launch her into her first multiversal ability jump. Almost impossible, however, does not mean impossible, and the fact that there's even a question and that she can eventually do it does imply something about Evelyn's sexuality I would say.

Also, on a less textual plane, doesn't part of this sound very familiar? If you, like me, came into your queer identity as an adult, doesn't the "living a genuine queer life feeling like a distant impossible dream" strike a deep resonating chord? Granted I've never considered having disgusting sausage fingers a prerequisite, but then again, Evelyn has a few years on me for such a neurosis to develop.

Now that I think about it, the visceral unpleasantness of the literal sausage fingers could be read as a form of body anxiety as it pertains to sexuality, at least when the condiments get involved.

Another thing that supports this reading is the parallels between Evelyn and her daughter Joy. This isn't to say that one has to be Mspec to have a sapphic daughter, of course. Considering how alike Evelyn and Joy are, though, and how acutely their struggles are mirrored in other fields, mental health struggles, desire for parental approval, etc., it's not an outrageous leap to assume Evelyn could also bat for the other team, as it were, lending extra weight to the "I prayed she wouldn't turn out like me" line she delivers to her disapproving father.

It's also interesting from this point that Evelyn acknowledging Joy's sexuality to her father's face functions as a sort of False Dawn in the plot. It is no doubt a part of mending the relationship but at the moment it's hard to not agree with Joy's assessment that this is more "[Evelyn] figuring her shit out" than the mending that her relationship with her daughter needs. To get all the way there, Evelyn, and we along with her, have to take a deep dive into the philosophy and the all-annihilating bagel.

There's also some really cool philosophy going on in Everything Everywhere. In the formal sense of things, the philosophy navigates the borderlands between Nihilism and Existentialism. Jobu Tupaki represents utter despairing nihilism, wishing for non-existence to rid herself of the pain of being and the crushing weight of knowledge of her million alternate lives and how nary a one of them offers as much as a morsel of relief.

Nihilism is one of those things that popular culture often imbues with entirely too much power owing to the understanding that hopelessness is somehow more intellectual than less despondent philosophies. Everything Everywhere treats Joy's hopelessness not as an inherently valid position, but as a reaction to the cascading failure of her family to prove proper care.

Look no further than how Jobu wants her mother, Evelyn Prime, to accompany her into the nothingness of the Everything Bagel. If, truly, nothing mattered, it wouldn't make any difference to Jobu whether she walked into the nothingness of the bagel singularity alone or hand in hand with Evelyn or with every single soul in the IRS. And yet, she pursues the version of her mother that can see what she sees in the vain hope that this Evelyn will feel as she feels and reach the same conclusions she has. It's very understandable, of course, but it severely undermines the point that there is nothing worth caring for in the universe.

It shouldn't really surprise the astute reader that the villain of a kung-fu action film isn't correct in the philosophical sense. The deftness with which Everything Everywhere handles the reveal of it all is, however, quite heartening. Jobu Tupaki isn't wrong because she's evil or evil because she's wrong; She's acting out because she's hurting and, ultimately in need of the help of her parents. Evelyn struggles similarly, and it's a good thing that she is married to the single most transcendentally kind man in all of existence.

Waymond Wang is in many ways the lynchpin of the entire movie, the pivot point that allows Evelyn to find a way out of hopelessness and regret. The way he accomplishes this is, again in the context of this being a kung-fu movie, highly unusual. Waymond is unflinchingly kind, in a way that at least initially makes him seem like a colossal wimp, a stereotypical henpecked husband. While it is true that Waymond is a bit of a wet blanket, there is also quiet strength to his approach. As In The Mood For Love-Waymond so memorably put it, his front of unflinching kindness is how he fights.

What makes the whole final sequence so rousingly powerful is how Evelyn internalizes and synthesizes the perspectives of her little family. Her instinct to protect her daughter in ways her father couldn't protect her and Waymond's conflict-solving kindness allows her to overcome the final barriers between her and Jobu. This comes in the form of some kickass untraditional kung fu, yes, but also from the realization that there is no one beyond hope, redemption, or beyond love. Even the bitter battleaxe IRS agent, even the parallel universe where everyone has hotdogs for fingers, even the aging widower with no sense of personal space, hell, even Chad the raccoon avatar.

It is a powerful scene of catharsis to see Evelyn compassion-fight entire swathes of opponents, but it doesn't become the transcendent piece of media that it is before the confrontation with Jobu in the Prime branch, and her father and Joy in the Prime Beta-branch. Here, the final piece of the puzzle awaits in the single most difficult thing a parent can do. Evelyn defeats Jobu and stands up to her father, yes, but to truly mend the rift between her and Joy, she must see and understand Joy's pain through true empathy, and if there is to be a happy ending for her and Joy, Evelyn must do the unthinkable.

Evelyn has to let Jobu go and trust that Joy comes back to her. If Joy chooses continued existence, it's of her own free will. Evelyn will go every step of the way alongside Joy if Joy will allow her, but it is ultimately up to her daughter. It's a profound act of love and empathy, and yet it feels almost impossible. It is an act of ultimate vulnerability, and, in some ways, the grandest act in a movie of grand acts, and even thinking back on it now brings tears to my eyes.

[ms-hells-bells]

Oh finally someone who understand me. I would love misogyny-free media, but either it's some kind of "queer story" crap (the rare "cis-woman" are over-sexualised and the resting interesting female characters are, of course, not woman. Without forgeting liberal misogyny, the empowerment of the prostitute, gender theory etc...), either story, where there is still obviously misogyny, but it's so normalize that people don't seems to perceive it. It just ruin the vibe for me. Sometime I feel like I'm just crazy when you clearly see segeregated by sex clothes, Stéréotypical character archetype who conforms to some kind of sexist belief (the creepy man is in fact kind and woman are paranoïd, the mean teenager girls etc..) but because there is no man saying "I hate woman, they are weak" and the heroïne is "cool" (it can be one heroïne for ten hero it still work) this is labelled as not-misogyne. Clearly I still see the misogyny.

I'm sorry for the rant, and possible mistake, not my natal language but some shit have to be said.

no, i understand perfectly, and thanks. yeah, even just the little stuff like visible makeup, unnecessary nude scenes (the queen's gambit has so much of beth either in the bath, in her underwear, or in a towel, and she's not even 18 at this point), mother/wife role, the 'reasonable, but nagging' character in a group, almost always has to be an attractive actress, etc. basically the only way i can cope with watching anything at this point is if the misogyny is acknowledged and the female characters push back in any way, even just supporting each other, like a mother who lets her daughter be free and encourages her. even just the characterisation of the female lead can be enough. i recently saw most of the russian doll, and natasha lyonne's character being so the opposite of female socialisation, as well as the avoidance of most sexism (the characterisation of the mother irked me, but was understandable in the story. but another example of the current trend of 'mentally ill, covertly abusive single mother') made it watchable. i'm not expecting the female character to go 'hey, that is misogyny, sir, and i stand against that!', it doesn't have to be in words, it can be in action. men just fail at doing that.

also....it's impossible to create misogyny free media. we have never lived in a misogyny free world, we have never experienced what it would be like without patriarchy, and the people who write this stuff have that socialised into them, and so it is always there, and i'm just so acutely aware of it that i can't ignore it. but that's just me. i'm not saying that others need to experience things the same way i do, and in fact, i'm a bit jealous of the radfems who are still able to shut their radfem brains off for two seconds to enjoy a show, i genuinely mean that, entertainment is great. but it just feels so odd seeing radfems talking about 'misogyny free shows' as if they actually exist.

[0junemeatcleaver0]

Using @kf-tea 's post as a jumping off point but not reblogging bc I don't want to derail the very good point made about asexuality made at the end, but this something that's been bothering me for a while re: queerness in the books vs the TV show:

The queerness of the book may not be explicit the way a full on sex scene is explicit but it was what could be permitted for the time. He'll, it even pushed the envelope a bit with Lestat explicitly stating that he "feels like becoming a mother" (paraphrasing) before rushing off to retrieve Claudia from the orphanage.

Even still, this type of representation can be so meaningful for both aces and allosexuals. I know being closeted as a teen in my small town had me full of longing and desire I could not fulfill safely and I know that is a pretty standard queer experience. TVC is full of that same kind of longing and thus holds great meaning for queers of all stripes.

Now that we've established why vampires being sensual but not sexual in the VC canon is good and important actually, I'm gonna move on to my problems with the shows version of vampire sexuality in terms of queerness.

Prefacing this by stating that you can keep your bath faith readings to yourself because no: I don't expect AMC to air graphic gay porn in their little vampire show. Obviously not.

But the floating sex scene has chapped my ass from the moment I saw gifs of it.

Because sure. We have a naked embrace between two men. Great. Cool.

The scene still feel neutered though.

And I can't possibly know the motivations behind it. Is it to keep the straights from feeling alienated? Because the skirt chasing showrunner isn't as comfortable with queer sex as he'd like to pretend? I don't know.

But I do know that putting these two midair for their sex scene--where there's no grip or traction to be had--was a cheat for making absolutely positive that no thrusting can occur.

Because heaven forbid, right?

The scene lies in this weird gray area between explicit and PG13--this weirdly sterile place where a lot of queer media ends up because sure, let us get married but no kink at Pride amirite?

Just a soupçon of faggotry, nothing more.

And I'm sick of people acting like it's some revolutionary step forward in queer rep just because naked midair cuddles and "gay vampire dads are judging their daughters outfits like she's on RuPaul's runway".

Like...this is enough for y'all???

[lover-of-mine]

no no that is such a good point like I've been so focused on the buddie of it all (bc well yeah they have my heart) & just like assuming Tommy & Eddie will be fine but like I don't actually know??? I guess I'm hoping that while we get Buck/Tommy development & Buddie development we also get Eddie & Tommy development but I have no idea like how they'll do it??? Bc Eddie would also probably feel hella guilty if he realizes he's in love with Buck while Buck is not only dating but dating one of his good friends? Like that's a lot. Even if Tommy is more aware that something's going on there and he & Buck are able to part on amicable terms like ugh where would that leave Eddie? Tho I mean I guess it also depends on how serious or casual Buck & Tommy are but still. I commented this on the other ask tho that I do like the idea of that being an aspect they explore if Buddie get together. And if Buck is able to part amicably with Tommy then maybe he could be in a position to like gently nudge Eddie in the direction of like "I know it's weird but you two had a really good thing going, I'd hate for you to lose that, how can I help" type of thing? And Eddie struggling but Tommy seems like idk he'd want to stay friends & be patient enough to work on it too? You know? I mean I really have no idea but that'd be cool to see and a good like first I don't want to say test but in terms of like showing us how Buddie works as a relationship and the ways they're maybe different but better? Idk. Eddie has so much of his own issues and I think a situation like this that's weird & messy could potentially be a way for him to work through some stuff?? But like *shrugs helplessly* WHO KNOWS? NOT ME.

Yeah, like, not to be an Eddie wobblifier on main, but the only thing I've been able to think about is the Eddie and Tommy of it all, because I can't remember the last time we saw Eddie that happy and that was a lot about his friendship with Tommy. And Eddie is already being used as a plot device here, if on top of it all he also loses this friendship he had going on Tommy, imma be mad as hell, because Eddie deserves how happy he was. That man has been through hell and to have him laughing about being on a helicopter or excited about a fight with everything that happened to him was everything to me. Eddie is in a better place, he is learning to do things for himself, and to have Buck take that away from him even if unintentionally would be tragic. Because if this is leading to buddie getting together, I don't see how Mr looks like he poisoned Taylor Kelly's food would handle being friends with Buck's ex. Sure they are all grown men, and Tommy and Buck will probably part ways amicably, but at the same time, how close to Tommy Eddie can be in this situation? Because Tommy will always be this person who Buck had all these firsts with, so Eddie being somewhat jealous, or just feeling weird about it in a general sense, would be perfectly natural. So, like, how are they working through that? Like, I get queer culture and go lesbians continuing to live together after they break up because they are still best friends, but this is a tv show, how well can that play out in the long run if they keep Tommy around after he and Buck break up and Buck and Eddie get together? I'm really curious.

[dhampiravidi]

to those who have an issue w/drag (& tbh, queer/nonconforming people in general)

TL;DR: please don't follow me if you are the above. I'd be supporting ignorance. Here's my explanation.

Brief background (on me & my stance): I was born AFAB, to parents who, for most of my childhood, either took no stance or a liberal stance in conversations that became politicized/publicized by the media. My school didn't talk about politics until President Obama was elected (& ofc his election was seen as a historic, positive moment). Anyway, no one talked about sexuality, biological sex, or gender identity--all of which are different, sometimes overlapping topics.

Then my mom happened to have a young student who had 2 dads. I was confused. When they'd hug or kiss (nothing graphic, just regular couple stuff), I felt...weird. No, not aroused OR disgusted--I was maybe 8 at the time, anyway. But I was definitely not used to seeing or hearing about gay people. Whenever that good ol' scene where 2 sexy college girls kiss to appease a bunch of boys came on the TV, my mom would roll her eyes. When 2 men would kiss in a different scene, my dad would make an excuse and leave. Long story short, until I literally Googled what it was to be queer, I didn't understand what I had seen. I'd learn that my mom supported all queer people (going as far as to publicly support a student's efforts to transition in high school) and my dad, who is still learning, grew up exposed to extremely heteronormative ideals.

Now we get to my identities.

I started to question my sexuality at 10, but I wasn't "sure"* that I was bisexual/pansexual (I don't mind either term; yes, I "can" be attracted to trans people) until I was 12. Unfortunately, my parents initially tried to ignore my realization. They didn't want to talk about it. But I had friends who came out at the same time. (I was also a very salty high schooler.) So I kept pushing and pushing for the discussion, because I had a right to be heard. I had a right to be myself and not lie about who I was. My parents had always talked about how I should be proud to be a smart Black woman, so...I ran with that. I am lucky to have a family who (finally) accepts my sexuality.

Again, I'm AFAB. I don't mind my genitalia. I hate my body, but that (for me) is tied to my mental health, as I have been diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder (I inherited a disposition to this), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (the result of several environmental and self-imposed factors), and Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (due to some trauma experienced outside my home). I have thought about having traditionally-male genitalia, but I don't think I personally need it to be happy. However, I acknowledge that this is just how I feel, and it doesn't take away from how others feel.

I didn't even think much about my own gender until the last year or so. I only knew that I had always been unhappy with my social life. I currently have a badass handful of buddies who I love SO MUCH, but I still sometimes feel...wrong. When I look in the mirror, I don't just feel ugly. I don't think I look human. I hung out with boys throughout elementary school and I (mostly via the CW and Disney Channel) was exposed to a lot of what some call the "male gaze". For example, I remember all the shows that featured a girl (usually the male characters' crush(es)) getting splashed with water--enough so her petite hourglass form would show through her then-transparent clothes. So I had an idea of what beauty was. Somehow, I also had an idea of what being cool/handsome (my words for "beautiful in a masculine way" back then) was: toned muscles, the ability to intimidate anyone, wearing tight clothes, etc. Anyway, I started school early, meaning that until maybe the end of middle school, I was always shorter than everyone else. I didn't mind being called cute all the time, until my friends were getting asked out as teenagers. Suddenly, I wanted to be seen as attractive. I ended up basing my self-image on how many people had crushes on me (which appeared to be zero, according to how many people turned me down). My point is, I believed that I had to be pretty for men. Then I realized that I liked women TOO, which irritated me because even when I came out, it saddened me that I still wasn't getting asked out (despite me supposedly having TWO TIMES the chance to find love, in my mind). In the end...I found that I identify as nonbinary. I'm agender, possibly genderfluid, because I don't understand OR want to conform to society's standards for gender (at least, in the USA). (Also, a bunch of the people I had crushes on years ago were actually insensitive jerks, but that's not the point.)

Elon Musk has said one thing that I might actually agree with. Said loosely, he asked why people are bothering to look so closely at gender when we claim that Western Civilization has come so far in terms of gender roles. Why DO people have a problem if someone who is AMAB wears a dress or a skirt? Kilts are part of Celtic culture, for both men and women. The Ancient/Classical Greek civilization that is so revered by so many countries had a garment called the chiton, a knee-length tunic worn by both men and women. Plenty of cultures throughout human history have worn ceremonial and/or optional makeup. Why DO some Americans still take issue with men teaching kids in elementary school? Is that any worse than a woman becoming President of the United States?

I was inspired to write this because of all the recent ideological and legislative attacks on human rights, specifically those of trans people and/or drag performers. I thought about the friends I have who identify as trans, and who have expressed their joy at discovering their identity. They are so relieved and happy and they have the most beautiful smiles when they detail their journeys. Their happiness isn't hurting anyone. I also thought about drag in general. I haven't been to a live drag show (yet), but I've seen the show Legendary (a dance show featuring drag, among other elements of queer culture) as well as the Netflix documentary Disclosure (a film about how trans people have historically been depicted in media). Drag is art, and for some, it's a lifestyle. It might be a kink or fetish for some people, in the same way that intercrural sex or lingerie might be. What it is NOT is a way that people commonly commit crimes--as the media has often claimed in the past, by showing AMAB "transvestite" serial killers wearing dresses to seduce their victims. It is NOT encouraging children to have sex at horribly young ages. And as many have explained, a drag queen is most definitely no more dangerous than a person (of ANY gender) purchasing an automatic weapon. If anything, seeing someone in drag perform can be an awesome learning experience for kids. They'll be exposed to a marginalized community that they may find themselves as part of as an adult. They won't grow up like I did, feeling like something is wrong with them just because they didn't know their identity existed.

I am not perfect and I do not claim to be. I had to do a lot of research to learn what I know about various communities. I still research online and ask (thoughtful) questions when members of these communities allow it. Until this year, I had no idea that some nonbinary people choose to get top surgery and/or begin hormone therapy because they like the way it helps others view them as more androgynous individuals. I did not know how much hormone therapy could cost (it's a heartbreaking reality, considering the meaning behind the whole process). I did not know that drag, something that I always saw as a fabulous form of self-expression and pure happiness, would be demonized by so many people.

I don't think this IS an opinion, but uh:

Gender Identities: woman, man, agender, nonbinary, two-spirit (term exclusive to Indigenous North Americans), etc.

Sexualities: gay, straight, queer, bisexual, pansexual, asexual, etc.

Sex: AFAB/female, AMAB/male, intersex.

People who are transgender are absolutely valid, whether or not they get and/or disclose their thoughts on personal sexual reassignment surgery. The term transgender is difficult to evaluate as a word because it's somewhere between gender identity and sex. In English, we say that someone identifies as trans, but someone who is a transwoman, for example, is someone AMAB (or possibly intersex) who identifies as a woman. But again, these people still exist and deserve just as much respect as anyone else.

No one hates people who grew up unaware of the queer community. The problem are those who hate queer people for simply being different--in essence, for those who pose a threat to the fantasy of a forever-heteronormative society that promotes unrealistic ideals.

*stuff in parentheses includes terms that you may not agree with, but it's how the mainstream media and groups I've interacted with define certain concepts. I'm sorry if the phrasing isn't perfect--despite my Master's and Bachelor's in various sections of the English Department, choosing the correct words to define feelings is still difficult.

[destiniesfic]

hi! I completely agree with you that we should just enjoy things, take what works and not waste too much energy on hating what doesn't. that said, i respectfully disagree with you on the "interpreting" thing, at least in some respects. significantly aging down alicent, her close relationship (the text would've hinted at it, instead of the mostly neutral **they weren't horrible to each other BEFORE** vibes) with rhae prior to her marrying viserys, her "you want to usurp rhaenyra??" pikachu face-ing that clashed even with the things the show had previously established about her character, ep 10 rhaenyra, and i could go on, tbh, those were all distorsions. i'm focusing on alicent because her character work might be the worst offender, and endemic of a lot of problems the show's writing suffers from. like no one could convince me that the alicent who isolated and beefed with a literal child for years, the one who had most of her lines painting rhae in horrible colors, like "bastard blood shed" alicent? "mayhaps the whore will die in childbirth"? alicent? has anything in common with the show's version. sure, there were elements of interpretation, too, some of which i actually agreed with, but condal et co suffer from the same curse d&d did: thinking that they're so much smarter than grrm, that they can write better. 95% of times, they can't (funnily enough, some of the show's best original moments had nothing to do with them, after all). anyway, always great to read your thoughts!

Well, I'm going to own this one.

Sooooo that is on me.

This is also all at the root of what I meant when I said something about "how the show portrayed women" in the original ask, which is what I consider to be the source of the majority of the book-to-show translation woes. Assuming the source text was primarily written by men who paint women in the least favorable light, sure, fine, but this led them to take it way too far the other direction, imo. My most trivial beef about this is actually found in Rhaenys, whose book counterpart 100% would have dracarys'd everyone at the coronation. F&B has her, not Daemon, tallying the dragons and urging their use! Show Rhaenys is so cool, but book Rhaenys is cooler, and I don't think boxing all of your women into "voice of reason" roles is the feminist win!!! that the writing staff want it to be.

But I do consider that take to be a reinterpretation, even if it's one that rubs me the wrong way. It's based in a philosophy rooted in one question: "What if the people who recorded history kinda sucked about women?" The biggest core divergence was aging Alicent down, I think, but I wouldn't consider that a "distortion" without the rest, and I generally think the writing for episodes 9 and 10 was kind of all over the place. If we'd had episode 6 and 7 Alicent through the entire back half of the season it would probably look a lot more like F&B, even though we began the story with her and Rhaenyra as friends. And honestly, the Queer Lady Sicko in me really wanted that, because who among us* hasn't had an intense, homoerotically charged friendship that's blown up spectacularly in a way you've wanted to go to war about?

Anyway, thanks for your ask and for keeping me honest. I totally get all of what you said! I haven't sat with this material as long, so I'm still refining my thoughts on it, and I appreciate you giving me more to think about.

*for a certain subset of us

[alvadee]

thoughts while watching eyes wide shut (1999) for the first time:

sky du mont?????

THE Sky du Mont?!

i still don't understand the allosexuals

i love the sets and the set dressing... the buildings/flats look great. it's because the characters are all rich assholes but goddamn i want to visit/stay at those places too

you want me to believe that all this secrecy and intimidation is for a vanilla sex party where the girls don't even appear to be underage???

also all of the girls there having the same body is so funny to me, as if irl such parties wouldn't offer everything to cater to all the different body type preferences and kinks. that all the girls look like that can only be explained by rich assholes seeing the bodies of these women as a status symbol to fetishize instead of actually indulging in their deprived sexual urges.

only saw two men dancing together. bad queer rep

i'm watching 1h 40 minutes now how tom cruise has a funny bewildered stare because his wife's fantasies cuckhold him lmao, he does NOT handle it well

ALAN CUMMING always a nice surprise!

tom cruise walking around showing his doctor's license like a police badge to literally everyone is funny to me. we get it!! you're a special boy!

the way he throws money around is also insufferable to me, yuppie scum....

how does he do all that shit at night, go to work and doesn't seem tired at all? movie magic, i could never.

i'm talking myself into believing that the christmas tree with the same multicolored lights at every house has a deeper symbolic meaning besides "this movie is set around christmas" and "everyone in the US has the same goddamn Christmas tree lights"

i really did think the fact that cruise picked up that newspaper, while he's being followed, which reads in huge letters on the front "Lucky to be alive" would have any significance but he didn't even acknowledge it lol

haha the article he reads repeats a sentence

another movie that convinced probably many that the wealthy and powerful have enough braincells to rub together between them to come up with cool secret societies and conspiracies

did they just basically say that a woman's sex fantasy, she's honest enough about to share with her husband, is the same as him doing all of that in the last 48h??? so oopsie daisies it kind of evens out "i forgive you because i committed a thought crime" ?

creepiest part of this movie was the goddamn resolution with the girl from the costume shop

wish nicole kidman would have had more screentime, i love her and she's gorgeous

[monstersinthecosmos]

... not to mention that most beloved trope, a girl or woman having to go through SA in order to grow, mature, "toughen up", and ultimately decide home wasn't so bad after all! The only option! No other way possible!! asdlfgkh ... Daniel Bogosian x Rashid for healthiest relationship in the series so far, which is both Rude and Wonderful, lol I'm fine

Right I'm just, really. Like.

Here's what I've been trying to say, and because No Negativity Allowed on Tumblr it's been tricky to navigate because suddenly I'm a loser book purist (?) and a "BOOMER" (lmfao??) but this is the thing when you make an adaptation that you need to be ready to defend:

Does this change make the story better?

If any random person turns this show on and doesn't know any better, cool! Enjoy! But it's *worth* asking what RJ is trying to say about women, and being queer, and being Black. And if some of these decisions are shaping up to be lazy, sketchy, harmful, etc, that's *worth* talking about.

And there's a CONTEXT here when it comes to Claudia, and the changes they've made. We lost a really excellent feminist character for this. And like, I've been saying the whole time, I understand if they didn't want to cast a small child for logistic purposes, but they haven't written a new character that has nearly the same care. Claudia on the show so far is just a bunch of sexist stereotypes about teenagers in a big trenchcoat, and to have her raped on top of that, is just. Beyond the pale.

It doesn't matter if a 14 year old still a "child" and it doesn't matter if we're all supposed to suspend disbelief a little bit to pretend Bailey doesn't look like she's 19. The show has gone out of its way to let us know that she can drive and she can blend in at college. This is a completely different set of struggles than a small child would have in navigating the world and the conflict is just, not there. The conflict they gave her is that she gets raped when she leaves home, and I just can't even begin to unpack it.

But BECAUSE she isn't a convincing child, it's introducing so many bad messages about. .. petite women? You aren't a real woman if you don't have tits? Only perverts will like you? .... cool.

Don't get me started on how the idea that she'd be hormonal for eternity is so fucking disgusting and stupid like she's dead bro why is she hormonal and why do you think teenage girls are fucking werewolves or whatever this is so gross but i'm already talking too much don't let me get into it now LOL

Plus like, don't get me started on all the smug meta moments breaking the fourth wall like Daniel acknowledging the story; it was bad enough that the show burns the tapes as if to say the novel is stupid (which is what RJ is telling us) but now we're raping Anne's fucking daughter. Cool!

It truly fucking baffles me that a show in 2022 is still leaning into this trope about SA, especially when we see that it affects the OTHER MEN in the show more than it affects Claudia herself. Daniel uses it as leverage for the story he's trying to tell. Louis (someone?) tore the pages out. If Louis is the one who removed the pages, he did that for his own needs. He altered Claudia's story because it makes *him* uncomfortable. It's painful for *him*. Louis waits around in squalor on Rue Royale for Claudia to get raped and come home to save him.

And the thing that's just, so fucking gross, is that they've given us enough information to know Claudia was abused already in her life as a mortal. Her response to recognizing Lestat as an abuser and sticking up to him does not need to be at the expense of raping her.

Also like, the entire reason that writing SA and violence against women is sensitive is because it's so likely the audience has experienced it. That's the entire conversation. We've had this conversation over and over and over. I wouldn't care about the lack of a CW if the show had NONE AT ALL but the fact that they put one in Ep1 for Paul but not for this is just really telling about the lack of care and sensitivity for this topic. And especially when they KNOW a huge portion of the fanbase is women and queer people.

I've been trying not to be such a raging misandrist LMAO but so many choices on the show for the past year and the way RJ and Alan Taylor talk about it kept sounding like IT WOULD BE SO COOL IF WE MADE IWTV BUT FOR MEN BC MEN DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TV TO WATCH and this really just hammered it home for me lol

BUT ALSO IT'S JUST. THE SHOW INVENTED THIS AREA OF DRAMA. Like the show made a decision to have the vampires be literally sexual. What the fuck does Killer need to RAPE someone for, anyway?! Like why.. would a vampire.. need to do that. What. WHAT.

All the talk about aging up Claudia (or Armand) because the sexy stuff is too gross is like, they could've just as easily not made it sexy? Especially on a network show that can't show too much anyway. I understand the need for a visual in a visual medium but this also will go towards my feeling that the show is not actually showing us a lot of queer intimacy anyway. It's like they threw Sam's ass into the first episode for shock value to reel everyone in and where is the rest? Blood drinking, cuddling, kissing, casual intimacy?

It's just honestly so fucking, pathetically and stereotypically Hollywood Cishet Old Guy to view love this way. It's subtext if they don't literally fuck. It's not scary to be 14 forever if you don't get raped.

idk man it's just. Wow.

[yes-these-obsessions-are-healthy]

Loki show really just is, how do you say, office manager!Loki AU, isn’t it. With extra flair, of course.

Like if you would have told me in 2013 they were gonna make a show where they took Avengers Loki and put him in a space-time office to do space-time office shit, I would’ve been “???”. Even watching the show I still can’t believe that who I’m watching is Avengers Loki.

I think this is a good example as to why I dislike time travel and multiverse concepts, because if I see a storyline play out, it is difficult for me to see an earlier version of that character and not project what I know of their futures onto them. I mean, I could see Thor: Ragnarok Loki making the same sacrifice given enough time, tbh, and definitely Loki in Endgame. I suppose that’s the point of the Loki series story—to take a Loki fresh off of a defeat, but before the character building moments that would mature and shape him (death of Frigga, his team up with Thor to save Jane, his team up with Thor to save Asgard, etc.) and put him in a position where he must mature outside of the narrative. He must mature within the bounds of the meta which is the essence of his existence, his by-nature-of-being-Loki and what that means or could mean. In a way, he is forcing the definition of who he is to change, like a word changing its own definition in a printed dictionary by virtue of the collective will of so many people using the word in a different way. Does that make sense.

It is great and bittersweet to see the story end as it does. I wish there had been more conniving and trickster Loki for us to enjoy over the years, more ruthless and chaotic Loki, but also more ‘Straight Man that is actually not as cool as he thinks’ Loki, but I guess comics and fanfic fill that role, yeah?

If they ever resurrect Loki as a character in the far off future I hope they give him red hair.

Edit: Also disappointed we never got anything but hints at queer attraction for Loki’s character because it has been established that Tom Hiddleston is 1680840284850% on board with kissing men full on the mouth.

[thepurplewombat]

U mentioned that jgy is one of your favorite characters of all time, can I ask about your other fav characters of all time? I'm very curious bc u seem to be a cultured individual

Oh boy you sure may! *turns into an unskippable cutscene*. Not so sure about a cultured individual but let's see what consensus is once I'm done.

Olay so I'm going to go roughly chronological here, because everyone who has ever been a blorbo to me is, on some level, still a blorbo. So they all still count!

Okay so at the top of the list is one Jean-Luc Picard (Star Trek The Next Generation) . My mom loves to tell the story of how I, at age three, decided I was going to marry Captain Picard and we would have six children. To be honest if he showed up in front of me today and asked me to run away with him on the Enterprise, I'm not sure I'd say no. He's such a wonderful character in so many ways - wise, kind, diplomatic. My first memory of watching television is the episode where he was assimilated by the Borg. The episode where Jean Grey from the X-men movies was an alien who became the perfect mate to the first person she saw when she hatched from her egg thing, and the first person she saw was Picard and so she still married the slimy guy from the enemy planet because Picard's perfect mate would never sacrifice duty on the altar of love lives rent-free in my mind decades later.

Dana Scully (X-Files). She's amazing. I love her. I love the fact that while she doesn't believe in the stuff Mulder does, she is openminded enough to acknowledge that science doesn't know everything, you know?

Neri from Ocean Girl. I watched this show when I was in primary school and I've got to tell you, Nonnie, for Literal Years all my Barbies wore wraps made out of rough hemp cloth. Her best friend was a whale named Charlie and she could swim underwater forever, she was amazing.

Xena (from Xena). Idk what to tell you, Nonnie, she was like, at least a third of my queer awakening.

Buffy (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) she tried. So hard. Like, she had a Destiny and she didn't want the destiny, but she was stuck with it and so she was going to do her damn best to live up to it. Spike, from the same show, is also on the list. He was just fun to watch, you know? (also Faith because I shipped her Buffy quite hard for a while)

Severus Snape, Harry Potter. He wasn't nice, but he was good, but tbh I adored him from the first time he appeared. Also, Hermione. Big hair and loves books? It me!

Everyone in Seaquest. Especially the captain and Lukas, who I'm pretty sure was included purely because TNG did it. But hey, I was like 15, I thought he was great.

Daniel Jackson, Stargate SG-1. He's just such a nerd? I love him tbh. I shipped him with Jack O'Neill but I appear to be alone in that (or all the archives where their fic was are dead now rip)

Teal'c, also from SG-1. It's just...how much courage does it take to turn on your literal actual god who is the source of your life? Also, the sass.

Garrus Vakarian, Mass Effect. I love him, your honor.

This one is chronologically in the wrong place since I read it when I was about 11, but Taita, from River God by Wilbur Smith. I loved that sneaky little asshole so damn much. I named my cat after him. (I was very annoyed when, years later, I read one of the sequels to River God, and on the first page Taita had a beard. Taita was a eunuch...)

Sarah Kerrigan, Starcraft. I could write a book about her. I have written a book about her. The first thing I ever wrote was a Starcraft fanfic (I had no idea fanfic even existed) about Kerrigan's clone Tedra. I'm weak for stories about evil governments, people who are treated like weapons, and assimilation narratives, so you can see why she captured my attention. (also I loved Zeratul, he was amazing)

Lestat from Interview with a Vampire. He was just cool.

There are a bunch more (I haven't even got to when I discovered danmei yet) , but unfortunately my power just went out and this post is already hella long, so take this as part 1 🤣