while I’m saying controversial things: I don’t really care what makes people arrive at the decision to transition or to date someone of the same gender or whatever. I don’t care if someone completely medically transitions whilst identifying as cis and I don’t care if someone gets in a consensual same gender relationship without identifying as gay or bi or whatever. I don’t care if someone deliberately chooses to be gay or trans or queer of any stripe. I don’t care. as long as everyone involved is happy and safe and not hurting anyone? cool. chill. live your life
4K notes
·
View notes
i feel like in s13 they were really losing the plot. like what do you mean jack and mary are trapped in an alternate dimension where michael is hot but evil and to get them back the rest of tfw has to do a spell they don’t even think will work because they don’t know asmodeus kept gabriel hidden away for years like rapunzel so he’ll conveniently be around to help but first cas has to go to syria and get married to the djinn queen while sam and dean live out an actual mafia movie and all three of them get trapped in a cartoon because of an evil real estate manager and then to get the last ingredient for the spell they have to fight a tentacle porn monster from another alternate dimension, all while lucifer is shacking up with danneel ackles and successfully taking over heaven? oh and sam and dean were stuck in jurassic world for a bit and donatello went insane via chicken wings
342 notes
·
View notes
I NEEEED people—especially those with unfathomably large platforms???—to start doing just a tiny bit of internal evaluation before they log onto a blue website and say “I don’t want these queer characters to fuck in canon” or “I’d be fine if these characters never kissed again” or whatever.
This is a post about Good Omens and the prospect of Aziraphale and Crowley potentially having sex in season 3. It's a response to a tweet that I'm crossposting, but let it be known the above statement and this topic applies broadly across multiple fandoms too.
But anyway, in regards to Good Omens specifically:
I am seeing this take that essentially boils down to "Canon has now made it clear that these characters want to have sex with each other through subtext (i.e. Aziraphale and the ox), but I don’t want that to reach narrative completion because the idea of them having sex makes me uncomfortable or isn’t my personal preference” and it is, to put it mildly and delicately, A Very Bad Take.
This is rhetorical (and I do not expect or particularly want an answer), but: explain to me how and why queer characters who are unavoidably visibly queer (aka 2 "man-shaped beings") fucking on screen wouldn’t be a net positive, especially when you can indicate how canon has set it up.
Presumably, some people say things like this because ~they want to see them as visibly ace.~ Okay. But by some of these people’s own admission, there IS more evidence in canon now to indicate these characters crave sex with each other (vs arguing otherwise)... yet people would rather that be ignored/erased all for the sake of them feeling comfortable or feeling better about what canon shows or doesn’t show explicitly??
I’m sorry, but—speaking as an ace person, to be clear—your personal preferences for the story shouldn’t / don’t affect anything here. There’s too much in this.
Yeah, I understand on a personal level not having “representation.” I almost never see myself or my unique experiences and identity reflected in stories. And yet, I also understand that that doesn’t change any story or the world in which we live. Things like this are not said in a vacuum.
Any queer characters having sex on screen IS a net positive. It is rare and impactful, and openly calling for or hoping for otherwise when canon points to its potential is a detrimental alliance with purity culture, whether intentionally or accidentally. Because we live in a Goddamn society!
Who knows (other than Neil Gaiman) whether Aziraphale and Crowley ARE going to fuck on international TV. None of us do! But the subtext right now blatantly says they’re starving for it. And you don’t have to like the prospect of that, but honestly? We SHOULD get to see it play out. There’s no truly legitimate reason we shouldn’t ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Whether you "prefer" it or not.
And my ultimate hot take is… if someone balks at the idea of that or doesn’t understand the importance of it, despite even seeing the subtext… then they should perhaps unpack that? Just a thought.
Truly the way fandoms are managing to hit either “subtext doesn’t count :/ ” or “let’s keep it to subtext so it’s ‘open to interpretation’ :) ” nowadays depending on what corner one visits is MADDENING. Whiplash-inducing. Surreal. And so much nonsense you can’t pick where to start.
So! I do genuinely hope I'm not kicking off discourse but I felt this Needed To Be Said (and on more than one site). Because posts like “even if they never kiss again, we’ve won <3 “ make me want to be like…
These characters are YEARNING. Do not doom them and us to it. For once, we can reach for the stars and maybe–against all odds–pull them down. Embrace it!
---
[Update: after more discourse has occurred, I have somewhat elaborated on this further, from the POV of the significance of the queer themes in Good Omens and more specifically how they center illicit pleasure/desire]
222 notes
·
View notes
Never a Romione shipper but tbh, love Harry and Ginny or at least the potential of them. It always irked me to no end that JK Rowling reduced Ginny to "hot cool girl who likes Quidditch" when, in reality, that girl's been through some stuff. There was so much missed opportunity here for them to bond on a deeper level i‘ll be mad forever. Hello?? She knows what it's like to have Voldemort in her head, she was possessed for like a year at ELEVEN. That's insane, only to be brought up literally once
This is what I'm talking about with Early Installment Weirdness! The transition from children's book to Y/A involves a major pivot in how serious you can be about the almost-dying stuff. Plus, if you take it on face, Chamber of Secrets is by far the darkest book. The main plot is a slasher thriller stapled onto a murder mystery. There's an 11-year-old girl being possessed by a malignant spirit. There's a dead girl haunting the bathroom. Threats are painted in blood in the walls. Dumbledore warns Hogwarts might have to "close forever." Harry's hallucinating a whispering voice in his head saying "hunt, hunt" and "kill, kill." It's all gothic as hell and fucking awesome, but also, uh: "children's book"? HEWWO?
This is part of the reason I cut Ginny's possession arc in Lionheart. It's a shame to take a major plot beat away from her, but I didn't feel that Book 3 or Book 4 gave her any space on the page to deal with it, and by the time she loops back around to being a major character in Book 5, it's been two years and the book's so crowded I can't imagine where an arc for her would fit.
20 notes
·
View notes
i just, don't think that the Phum and his dad scene actually was forgiveness of any kind. It looked more like Phum trying to learn how to cope with these shitty family dinners better.
Like, I do acknowledge that the show itself maybe is implying some kind of reconciliation, what with that food on Phum's plate by his dad thing. But like actually fuck that. Phum has clearly not forgiven his father. He can't make eye contact with him, he introduced Peem, his boyfriend of many years, as a friend. Like, clearly they aren't sorted, and likely won't be anytime soon, if ever.
But I'm choosing to interpret the scene as Phum moving forward in a way that can help him personally. He's clearly at an emotional place where he can try to say some pleasantries and gtfo. To be emotionally stable enough to not need your parents to acknowledge the harms they caused you, even in casual interactions, takes work. And I think the connections that Phum has built with Peem and the entire extended friend group over the last few years has provided him with the foundation to try a new coping method with his parents. One which is less volatile and less impactful on Phum.
I feel like this is him trying to protect himself from these dinners in a different way than before. Not that it's a better way, but perhaps one he wants to try now that he has other places, like Peem and his friends, that can provide him with the emotional validation where his parents, and even in this instance Fang, won't.
Or idk, maybe I'm reading too much into it. Either way, I'm happy that Peem was there to hug him and tell him he did well after it all.
32 notes
·
View notes
Watching Wayward Pines for potential ST5 inspo bc the Duffers wrote a couple episodes in s1, and when I got to their second (last) episode and their name crossed the screen, I noticed a visual parallel that might already exist on the show…
Recognize it??
It instantly reminded me of that last shot for the opening of s3, with the landscape peaking out behind the Russian base. But when I went back and actually compared the two, holy shit it’s near identical, and not just the landscape.
I didn’t even remember the helicopter being there on the left, not to mention the pillar-esaue contraption at the center. Like… they’re the same picture.!
With them being credited right at that moment, it’s obvious this was an intentional nod to their previous work.
I just thought it was cool so I wanted to share, but in terms of my watch overall, there is a LOT going on that they could pull from. I’m only halfway through s1, though I’ve heard the show goes downhill in s2 so we’ll see how that goes 😂
37 notes
·
View notes
Dear God how I fucking hate when people dismiss s character's traits because "that's just a facade! you as the reader have to see underneath it!!" like yeah no fucking shit Sherlock, a well written character has more than one (1) defining trait but that doesn't mean their most prominent one or the one most recognized by fandom ISN'T there
yes this is about people thinking dick grayson isn't actually a ray of sunshine, that it's just a mask. he's much more than the happy one, of fucking course, all batfam members (when written well) are, but that doesn't mean that being happy and bright is not a crucial part of his personality. he brings light to people's lives, he's a beacon of hope, that's what Robin was born for, as a light to Batman's darkness. That's what Nightwing is. He can be serious, sure. He's smart, an amazing strategist, incredibly good at fighting, he can be manipulative and morally gray and sometimes an objectively bad person. But he's ALSO funny and quippy and bright and sunshine. BECAUSE HE'S WELL WRITTEN.
Like Jesus stop making him so sad and wrong all the time just because you want so bad to go against "fanon". It's not fanon if it's literally his core trait. It's not fanon if it's what the character was BORN AS. God.
33 notes
·
View notes