#queer baiting isn't a joke

[sillyprettyfairy]

the lgbt community does not and never will forgive rainbow high

[mistchievous]

This fandom is such a toxic cesspool. It's no wonder trolls like today's are being born from it. Like, sure. It's rage bait, but people are allowed to be upset about it. This fandom has fostered and continues to foster an environment where people like this feel emboldened. Where they feel like they can say things like this and do things like this and get not only negative attention but positive support as well. Because they expect certain segments of the fandom to find it funny. Or to even legitimately enjoy it.

Every fucking side of this has bad actors. If I never see the term BoB again, it'll be too soon. And the negative posts about Tommy are not simple statements of disinterest or dislike or critique. They're violent and vitriolic posts aimed specifically at a queer man. Like, no fucking shit they're going to make people feel unsafe. This isn't your normal ship war toxicity. This is disgusting. It's not the first time a love interest has been portrayed this way either. Some of the fics about Ana make my skin crawl to this day. She was portrayed as a rapist, a child abuser, a kidnapper, a murderer, etc. And while there were certainly legitimate discussions to be had about her character, so much of this went far beyond any of that.

And she wasn't alone. This fandom has a dark history in how it handles love interests. It's never been cute. It's never been funny. And sure, it's fiction. But fiction can be upsetting. Particularly when demonization of certain characters seems rooted in something vile.

It's fair for people to be frustrated and hurt and upset that the worst of this fiction is being spawned because people encourage it with their so-called "jokes" and with callous behavior. That trolls are being born who are willing to risk triggering CSA survivors and more by disregarding fandom norms like basic fucking tagging.

The amount of hate being thrown around casually by some and dismissed easily by others is mindboggling at best and horrifying at worst.

We can do better than this.

[flavoredfaeman]

Okay making my own long post so that I can get out all my thoughts clearly

So to start off 1. I think that queer baiting is a completely useless term, in part because all it is used for is arguing whether or not something is queer enough (in part because queerbaiting is an incredibly rare phenomenon in western media), 2. I think that the way male queerness is treated in Deadpool is unfortunate, and 3. Gay people are allowed to find joy in goofy movies and it isn't that serious.

**this is all my opinion, a lot of these topics are up to personal interpretation just like with any other movies or media discussion (I am trying to also cover multiple perspectives here, but I am only one person)

Let's get one thing clear right off the bat, no one who is familiar with marvel and disney actually thought that Deadpool and Wolverine were going to kiss/fuck nasty/become an item. (Those were jokes guys.) Those of us who were hoping for queerness were hoping for some subtext at most or the Deadpool-typical type jokes where he smacks a guy's ass, makes a quippy comment and moves on. And within that context of expectation, we were given way more than we expected.

Now, I will say that it is absolutely sad that we can have these movies with gay jokes, but that actually portraying queer characters seems to be too much for them. As is typical (to my knowledge) of bigger movies, they were allowed to make a side lesbian couple (this is a much larger topic, but for the purposes of this conversation, let me add on: cishet men think lesbians are hot + women are not considered to be able to have "real" relationships without men. So they can get greenlit a bit easier.), but Deadpool is not allowed to have meaningful connections to other men.

Deadpool's jokes about gayness can be interpreted in different ways. To some people, they feel hurtful and deriding. To others, they are the jokes made by a man who is comfortable in his identity, and who makes jokes to take power away from people who may want to use his queerness against him. It's really hard to argue this one way or the other, since Deadpool isn't a real person who we can ask to clarify. As such, how one feels about these jokes usually sits within the context of how they view Deadpool and the movies in general. Personally, I think that these jokes are meant to shock audiences, but I don't think they are actually intended to be hurtful. Especially when the funny part of most of the jokes is when he is making them, not that it's gay. Like, straight or gay, it's funny to talk about sex in a really emotional/tense moment, or in the middle of a fight. Particularly when you see how he treats the other queer people around him, not to mention, you know, the fact that he's canonically pansexual. (Frankly I find it kinda weird to go "aah there's a queer man making jokes about being a queer man!! How terrible!!" but that's my prerogative)

From movie 2 to 3 there does seem to be a change in how queerness is being treated. A positive change, in my opinion. Because Deadpool isn't making all that many jokes in this one, he's got a few for sure (Wolverine has one or two as well!!) but a lot of what he's doing is becoming genuinely close to Wolverine. This shifts the dynamic, now it's not just Deadpool making gay jokes or advances to people who don't really reciprocate (to my memory, though I feel like Colossus may have flirted back at like the end of Deadpool 2?), instead the jokes are being reciprocated/responded to and the characters are being put on even ground. Wolverine is a realized character, just like Deadpool, so they are able to grow closer over the course of the movie, and form an actual connection and bond. (Also a lot of the gay jokes become "wow isn't wolverine so hot?" jokes)

Important to also add that yes, they do start the movie with a very fraught and tense relationship, they are both very violent characters, Wolverine has crazy anger issues, and Deadpool makes everything a joke. All of these things are important to their characters and story! If you took some of those early interactions out of context you could argue that Wolverine isn't reciprocating or something of the like, but that would require ignoring the majority of the film. They are kinda crazy and impervious characters who have opposite personalities in a high stakes setting, of course they are going to fight and try to harm one another.

As much as it's already been talked to death, it is genuinely important to discuss the metaphors in this movie. Because as funny as the Honda jokes are, that scene is heavily implied to be a sex scene. This is the art of film, what you cannot show the viewer, you must convey some other way. The fight happens to You're The One That I Want, they repeatedly stab intimate places (stabbing as metaphor for penetration), the way they position themselves in the car and through themselves at each other, and the camera panning towards the bumper as the car shakes (a classic fade to black sex move). This is all movie language, and it is vital to understanding what a movie is portraying.

The climax is also very important in this regard, because as camp as it is, they were willing to die for each other and in that willingness they were able to save each other. Like A Prayer is playing, they are holding hands, when Wolverine's shirt explodes Deadpool takes a moment to oggle him despite the fact that they're both getting absolutely electrocuted or whatever.

Now, despite all of this absolutely beautiful subtext, Deadpool and Wolverine do not get together. That is absolutely an important part of this conversation, their relationship is ultimately left ambiguous. But a queer man being in a homoerotic ambiguous relationship with another man, does not a queer bait make.

Vanessa is an important part of this discussion of course - though to preface this, I find their relationship really boring so I don't really remember a lot of what happened between them in the first movie. Deadpool is canonically pansexual, so his relationship with any woman does not make him any less queer. Though, it could be argued that she's been kept around as a character to make sure he's always in or longing for a straight relationship.

Some people have been arguing that the movie ends with Deadpool getting back together with her, which blatantly does not happen. They were in a weird stage of exes being friends at the start of the movie, where she was in a new relationship, and he was still pining. All he does at the end of the movie is go over to her to let her know he cares about her, which could be romantic or platonic - but IS NOT them getting together. And again - even if he still is in love with her by the end of the movie, he is still queer.

In addition, I don't think that Deadpool is monogamous. He's constantly flirting and showing interest in many different people. Now I don't remember if he ever has a conversation with Vanessa about monogamy, so I could be missing an important part of their dynamic. But as it stands to my knowledge, Deadpool being in love with Vanessa doesn't mean he's not in love with Wolverine.

Both of these potential relationships end in the air. And of the two (if we assume monogamy is important) Vanessa said she had a boyfriend, and Wolverine just moved into Deadpool's apartment. So Wolverine is in a much better position to end up with Deadpool than Vanessa is.

It's also good to note that everything we got in this movie was fought tooth and nail for by Ryan Reynolds and the movie's team. There is every chance that Deadpool and Wolverine's relationship would not be implied but rather outright in a world where studio opinions don't matter.

Everything that I've just described is not queerbaiting. A movie with queer people in it canonically, is not queerbaiting. Queerbaiting is when media sells a character/relationship as queer in order to get an audience and then tells that audience that they are not actually queer (usually done incredibly insultingly, think Sherlock). Marvel and Disney do not need to market towards queer people to get an audience, in fact marketing towards queer people is more likely to lose fans, and gain hate. It's also important to note that the marketing hasn't been marketing these two as queer, they aren't almost kissing in material, the cover is a friendship charm, the most they do is address the fact that Wolverine/Hugh Jackman is hot af. So it literally isn't queerbaiting.

Now, whether or not someone is disappointed in the level of queerness is completely up to the individual! Everyone is welcome to their opinions and feelings about the movie, disappointed or delighted. But a movie is not queerbaiting just because you are disappointed.

[supervisionx]

I keep seeing posts that Hannibal is queerbait (not necessarily on Tumblr but it's really prevalent on Twitter and tiktok) so I'm going to break down how it is NOT queerbait under 'keep reading' (long ass rant ahead)

I'm going to use Supernatural and Sherlock as an example because they are both pretty infamous for queerbaiting, but this isn't to make fun of those shows altogether.

In both Supernatural and Sherlock, the main 'ships' are between Sherlock Holmes / John Watson and Castiel / Dean Winchester. In their respective shows, there is almost nothing stopping them from getting together. In both cases, they are friends, have good chemistry, spend a frequent amount of time together, and do not have any significant others. The only thing stopping them from being in a relationship is that one or both of them are presumably straight or are simply not in love with each other.

In Hannibal, however, one is an FBI agent, and the other is a serial killer. There is an in-show reason that would stop (especially Will Graham) from wanting to be in a relationship with the other despite personal feelings. Even in earlier seasons, when Will Graham did not know Hannibal was a serial killer, Hannibal was still his therapist.

Next, what makes the queerbait stand out especially in Sherlock and Supernatural, is that every time anything is suggested between the two popular ships, it is often played off as a joke.

Think of the scene in Sherlock where John fumbles asking Sherlock if he has a boyfriend. The scene where Sherlock is about to kiss Moriarty is presented as a flashback by a crazy fan (making fun of the viewer for thinking Sherlock could be in a male/male relationship)

In Supernatural, there is a scene where castiel is alluded to being teleported naked on top of Dean's car, dialog such as "Get out of my ass" "I was never in your..." and an awkward pause. These are all one-off jokes, scenes, etc. Meant to allude to queerness without having to actually commit to it.

In Hannibal, however, no scene that alludes to queerness is played as a joke. Hannibal is genuine when he says he cares for Will, when he is worried the other man has died, the constant touches, and where he compares their relationship to Achilles and Patroclus. (Do I even have to mention the "Is Hannibal... In love with me?" Scene?)

"But Hannibal and Will never kissed / never had a relationship!"

Okay, it's fair to be upset that the pair never kissed or had a full relationship established, but you have to remember Hannibal was canceled. Sherlock and Supernatural both came to their conclusions naturally and decided to continue never establishing a proper relationship between their queerbaited characters.

(I'm not counting that scene where castiel says "I love you" to Dean and gets sent to Super Hell as a relationship. You could argue that this makes Castiel explicitly queer and therefore not queerbait, but it still feels more like executives doing the same thing as the joke part of this argument; not wanting to commit to making him queer and throwing in a one-off line. Plus, this does not excuse baiting Dean as queer and baiting the relationship between Dean and Castiel as more than friendship)

However, Hannibal never got to reach its natural conclusion. More seasons were planned, in which the creator of the show explicitly stated he wanted to explore the relationship between Hannibal and Will more in those seasons before being canceled. Being upset that they never kissed / had a relationship does NOT mean the show was queerbait.

[lemuel-apologist]

Hey, everybody. I am going to keep this post short. (I'm coming back partway through to say that this was, evidently, a lie.)

I said something about it yesterday; I'll say something more in-depth now.

So, a couple years ago, when a round of r4cs0 troll asks reached the exmo blog-sphere of tumblr, I got frustrated and posted something fairly strongly-worded (an understatement). Over the course of the past three years, I have received asks here and on my main blog (and, I believe, my writing blog?) implicating myself over and over in whatever that guy is being accused of this time. It's one thing when it's in my inbox. I can say something dumb to it or, more often, ignore and delete it.

It's another thing when it's sent to other people, which is something I had not considered. Yesterday, someone reached out to me right before I went to ward choir with my brother (they need altos. I need a musical outlet. Don't judge me) to let me know they had received this ask concerning r4cs0 and myself; and I knew the kind of ask he was talking about, but not the content. We talked about it a bit, over the course of yesterday and tomorrow; and, in the interim, my friend Shine (hi, Shine, love you) notified me that her fiance, Serra (hi, Serra, I don't know you) had received the exact same ask on his blog. And I don't know Serra outside of Shine. I still follow her even though Shine doesn't have a Tumblr anymore, but, to my knowledge, Serra doesn't follow this blog? Unless he sneakily did that? What would be the connection there?

Of course, there probably isn't one, unless I am the connection. Speculating doesn't do much of anything. So let's bump some Paramore and work through it, shall we?

I know now, of course, that the ask says the following, where I'm concerned:

Unfortunately an exmo blogger I follow called lemuel-apologist took the bait. And I'm assuming (and really hoping) that she was just joking around to try to troll r4cs0… But she claims that r4cs0 is "right" because she allegedly did organize a "queer jump humping orgy" when she was at BYU in order to protest the "inherent ecclesiastical absolutism of colonized Mormon institutions!" I'll spare you the more gruesome details that she divulged, but I guess the "punchline" of this story was that in order to have multiple groups of people jump humping at once, they needed access to multiple beds. So they broke into a furniture store and held the orgy there, causing it to become a protest of both Mormonism and capitalism at the same time! As you can imagine, r4cs0 and his hateful followers didn't think this was a gotcha at all and instead have been spreading this story around to whip up even more bigotry. They even said they plan to send it in to Libs of Tik Tok!!

I don't blame anyone for taking that at face value. I don't. Tumblr culture is set up in a certain way, and that results in people taking callout asks at face value. I get it.

But, genuinely, I have never acted like that in my life. Like I said, I can't prove something in the negative. It's impossible to provide proof that you didn't do something of this nature, especially when the claims are so vague-- and especially when it's presented to a court of public opinion. And I know that hashing all of this out does nothing but throw words into the air, spur on more asks and encourage whoever is sending them to keep putting my name in there (because it's oh-so funny), and offer everyone else a chance to come to their own conclusions. I can't make this stop. I can't make anyone believe me. I certainly can't make everyone see this post.

To be clear, I never made a claim about r4cs0 being "right" about anything (not pertaining to sex; not in general). I have never once organized an orgy. I'm...

Okay, to be clear, asexuality doesn't preclude someone's participation in or organization of an orgy, including as an act of protest, but I patently didn't do that? I've studied sex (on a genetic level) and sexuality (both the social construction and act of it), sure. I went out of my way to study both of those topics as a part of my degree. I think human sexuality is fascinating. It's also just... not for me. Just writing about sex in a non-clinical way took me ten years to get to, almost.

And that's not something that can clear me from this, I know, but it's necessary context to why I'm so baffled by this. I sent this to my friend Cody and he was just as baffled. If you know me, you know that's not something I would ever do; and you know I didn't go to BYU; and you know I don't say thinks like "the inherent ecclesiastical absolutism of colonized Mormon institutions." Frankly, I went out of my way to lie to my mother and not apply to BYU so I could go to school in Ogden (and if you're from Utah, now you know where I got my CJ/CSI degree, lol. There's only one queer studies program here, to my knowledge). Frankly, "the inherent ecclesiastical absolutism of colonized Mormon institutions" is a bit of a nonsense clause. I don't write like that. Not in my academic work! I would never argue that a Mormon institution could be colonized (lol). For all the nuance of the past discrimination against Mormons in the United States versus the current persecution complex, that is not the way I construct my arguments. I could provide examples from my papers on queer feminism, Marxist feminism, and so on, but I don't think that would be very conducive to the discussion.

I also just... have never broken into a furniture store. I don't think I've ever been into the furniture store by my house. And, like I said, I didn't go to BYU. I only ever marched there for competitions when I was in high school. The last time I was on that campus was to go to the Bean Museum with my meemaw, and the time before that was either for an astronomy thing years ago or a marching competition (or the paleontology museum. Love that thing). I didn't go to BYU. I actively organized a Rainbow Day on my college's campus.

Like, to be clear, that's the kind of action I've always tended toward. When I didn't accidentally get dragged into protests, I like to make exhibits, run events, and do educational outreach. Our Rainbow Day was about the history of Rainbow Day itself, Utah's queer history, and America's queer history. That was what we did. That was my big protest.

Like, I could keep going. I just patently did not do this. I don't give a shit about the other guy, but I did not do this. I wouldn't do something so reckless. I don't judge if other people want to-- more power to you; someone has to do the big, flashy acts of protest-- but I... don't... operate like that.

Listen, this post got long; I got distracted by what I was writing in the other tab; and I have things I need to work on today (and I have to go put on a sweater, because my meds are making my hair stand on end and I'm SO COLD that I can't concentrate). Just... suffice it to say, that's not true. Whatever that ask says about me, it's not true. These asks go around every so often, infuriatingly, and I'm never sure what they're saying until I look up my name or his. I stopped obsessing over my name getting smeared back in 2021/2022, and it was better for me, but... you know.

Anyway, like I said yesterday: if there's something you see that you're concerned about, please let me know. Ask me. My inbox exists for a reason. I care a lot. Not about my public image (lol), but about whether or not people feel they can trust me, especially in the niche I have carved for myself. When things like this get spread around, it affects my credibility-- as an exmormon, as an ex-JW's daughter, as a CJ-hopeful, as an academic, and so on. I want people to feel safe around me, and to not feel like I'd do something that would endanger them. I wouldn't.

That's where I have to leave it for now. I'm just... really sorry about all of this. I don't know what I did wrong this time. I'm trying not to be anxious about it; and so I'm leaving it here.

[cursedvibes]

jjk having queer-coded villains seems to be an intentional choice. what are your thoughts on this

Honestly, I think the queer themes and characters we've gotten in jjk are pretty great. Yes, some of them are villains and that is a common harmful trope, but first of all it is not just the villains and second you have to look at how their queerness is portrayed and implemented into their characters.

We have characters like Kirara and Hakari and I think you can count Tengen too, who are queer(-coded) and not villains. Their queerness is pretty explicit in case of Kirara and Tengen with Kirara having clearly transitioned and being some flavour of trans and Tengen also openly stating she's lost interest in gender and is if anything a gnc woman. Queerness is also not their entire character, just one minor aspect of it that is honestly not that important. Tengen being responsible for the creation of jujutsu society and Kirara rebelling against the school and then choosing to aid the kids in the Culling Game is much more significant than their gender. Tengen corrects Yuki about being a man and then we move on, it is not actually a big deal. Yuki is more concerned with Tengen's actions than her gender.

The comment from Panda insisting that Kirara is a guy was weird, but it isn't brought up again, everyone just doesn't gender Kirara when seeing them without making a big deal about how "weird" it is for a presumed guy to have boobs like you might've expected in other pieces of media. The implication here I think is just that Panda hasn't seen Kirara in a while nor knows them very well. The comment was unnecessary in my opinion, you could've shown in a better way that Kirara transitioned, but the way it is treated afterwards makes it better. I think it especially helps that we see Hakari so accepting of Kirara, it is something normal and their relationship is loving. Kirara's gender or presumed sex is no issue at all between them and the other characters just roll with it too.

Same could be said for things like Geto and Gojo's relationship for example, the most prominent example of queer-coding in jjk as is also heavily displayed in marketing for season 2 of the anime. Obvious choice, they are by for the most popular ship and tapping into shipping sells. Their the sasunaru of jjk. I don't think you could call it queerbaiting though because contrary to sasunaru you don't have this "jk they both ended up marrying some random women like the heterosexual men they are" and there are literally no confirmed relationships in jjk anywhere except for the people who are married (and those usually don't love each other). stsg have as much ground to stand on as Kirara/Hakari or Muta/Miwa. They are milking that money cow, but with the way it is handled in canon, it doesn't bother me much ignoring their fanbase.

Another aspect we see in stsg that also applies to how we see queerness in some of the villains is that their relationship (of whatever nature that might be) is there to humanize both Gojo and Geto. There is actually some meaning to it, not just shipper bait or an insane villain being gay and that being included as another aspect of him being reproachful like you see with many Disney villains. Geto's bond with Gojo (and his family) is portrayed as the last bits of sanity left in him and also any criticism you'd leverage against that could apply to Gojo as well, a main character.

Similar with the queerness of the other villains. It is either an unimportant detail of their identity or it is actively used to humanize them. Uraume's gender is purposefully unconfirmed, nobody even makes any assumptions and that fact is about as important as their hair colour. It's just part of their identity, nothing more. It is not portrayed as predatory or used for any "trap" jokes. At least not in canon, the fandom is its own beast and I think their behaviour comes from what they are used to seeing in other media not due to anything done in jjk.

Kashimo falls into the same category of unconfirmed gender. Fans and some fantranslators assume Kashimo is a man based on what they looked like in the past, but it is actually never confirmed in the manga. Neither Hakari or anyone else ever genders Kashimo. There being no assumptions made or their possible gender or androgynous appearance discussed. People just roll with it and it isn't made to stand out in the story. I don't think you can even call Kashimo a villain, more like an antagonist similar to Higuruma was one with selfish morality. Their gender or appearance doesn't play into that at all.

With Kenjaku I guess you could see them taking over Kaori as predatory towards Jin, but it is played different than the common tropes. For one, Jin is as it seems aware of the change, just chooses to ignore it. It isn't played as a "man tricked other man into sex" or "man disguised as a woman", in fact the story goes quite out of its way to state that Kenjaku isn't (cis) male actually. Both Wasuke and Jin address Kenjaku as a women, even when they have suspicions. Kaori stays in some form with Kenjaku, she isn't just a cheap disguise and pregnancy overall is an important topic for Kenjaku both in good and bad ways. When Kenjaku says "thank you for getting along with my son" it is the first big step towards giving Kenjaku more depth than just them being a big bad mastermind. Kenjaku cares in some way for their child and doesn't just see him as a test subject. So the time in Kaori's body clearly had value to them as well beyond just getting a vessel for Sukuna. Same goes for their meeting with Takaba for example, which is the biggest example we got so far of Kenjaku being proven to care about other people and gaining depth through it. Their relationship with Tengen could count as well.

So the queer aspects we got of Kenjaku are there, but they aren't shown in canon to be something strange, quite the opposite usually. I think you see it best when you compare Kenjaku to Orochimaru, who clearly, as stated by Gege too, is a big influence for the character. Orochimaru has the body of a woman in the first part of the series, takes over the bodies of children and shows interest in Sasuke that is often seen as gay. Orochimaru is portrayed as predatory particularly towards children/boys, a persistent stereotype of gay and/or effeminate men as well as trans people. When Orochimaru reveals in the fight against Hiruzen that he inhabits the body of a woman, the characters around are disgusted and not only because this means another person's body was violated, the uncertainty of Orochimaru's gender unsettles them. You see the same thing in Boruto. Multiple characters make mean or disgusted comments about Orochimaru because they can't tell their gender and the whole "are you a man or a woman, a father or a mother" gets pushed a lot, often used as a joke. Mitsuki is being supportive and corrects people, but that doesn't stop Orochimaru's gender being brought up almost every time they feature in the series. "omg I can't tell this person's gender this is so weird and creepy" don't you have more pressing concerns like the fetuses swimming in those tanks or the human cloning?

Compared to that, Kenjaku is handled much better. There is no weird fixation on children, they have only taken over adults from what we've seen so far (due to the size of their brain and it being a real organ I think that is even a necessity) and the bodies are also mainly there for practical needs, Kenjaku isn't shown lusting after them no matter the person's gender. Choso goes from assuming Kenjaku is Yuuji's father to calling them a parent. It isn't commented on, we just assume Tengen informed him. Kenjaku being revealed to be Yuuji's mother isn't shocking because "wtf that's a man in a woman's body", it is more so about the implications of them being related. It is also used to show that Kenjaku is actually not a cis man (everyone at that time even doubting Wasuke uses she/her naturally with Kenjaku not objecting to it despite not really pretending to be Kaori) and by being his mother they have a closer personal connection to Yuuji. The fandom usually puts more harmful tropes into this moment than there actually are in the manga. I'm pretty sure Yuuji was more concerned about Kenjaku actually being related to him than Kenjaku being his mother aka exhibiting a gender he might not have expected. The "my father is your mother that's so mind-boggling and weird" is something that only exists in fandom. I don't see a reason why Choso or Yuuji would care and everyone else even less.

Takaba putting Kenjaku in a nurse outfit is also only portrayed as another fun part of their shenanigans, being neither overly sexualized nor seen as off-putting or weird. I think it was actually put there because Gege wanted to emphasize once more that having a female body doesn't unsettle Kenjaku, they see it as normal. It is part of their identity, but that itself isn't the thing being made fun of, it's a joke about sexy nurses that's detrimental to Takaba if anything.

In the same way, Kenjaku being pregnant with Tengen isn't made a big deal either beyond what it means for the Culling Game or the merger. It isn't a strange pregnant man, just another instance of pregnancy symbolism in this manga where cursed wombs are quite a common thing. And Kenjaku's whole deal is motherhood, birth and pregnancy down to the choice of their name, which is derived from an ambiguously gendered or Virgin Mary-adjacent bodhisattva. These pregnancy themes are shown as both a good thing and a bad thing depending on the context and not on principle as disgusting or bad. Kenjaku's gender fluidity has thematic relevance, but it isn't mocked or portrayed as bad by itself.

Beyond Uraume, Kenjaku and maybe Geto depending on how you look at it, I don't think there are any other queer-coded villains? Mahito was a high school girl for a juju sanpo, but that episode was more wholesome if anything and I think it was just there to show his fluidity in sex and gender. Once again not mocked or brought up as a reason for why he's evil (she isn't even that evil in that high school AU).

So yeah, I don't see a problem here, I actually wish more mangas or animes would portray queer characters this way. Make sure villains aren't the only queer characters, don't make queerness their entire character trait and treat the characters with respect.

[34saveme34]

yall expecting anything interesting from this week's episode?

like. I've been thinking n like I wish I could stop that

because in a sense, the series has been.... very unrpredictable

in like, a bad way

I'm not even saying they're telling bad stories but that it all just goes weirdly and some choices they make are.... odd? yeah, odd

like I guess it's odd they don't use their cast better

or that Melony's whole personality is just Axol (god awful thing I'm about to say but maybe it would've been better for her if she died in revelations so we wouldn't have to see her character reduced to this so badly. like I'm not even kidding)

or making 4 seem so god damn evil then immediately backpedalling on that with the "it's an act" and I'll say it again, if they wanted to make a good story about it being an ACT, they should've shown more signs, even if tiny, they should've shown more. Like you could try and explain this shit away if you want but just think about it, before A Night at SMG4's, what did you believe? Did you believe he was becoming evil or did you believe it was an act? What made more sense to you? It's odd and unpredictable

the also weird ass ignoring of 3 drinking away his problems, it appearing TWICE

and like, that's been a storyline that was going for a while, I even pointed out that like, lately episodes that were all capital had something to do with him failing with it

but no uh, suddenly it's good after that shitty night at 4's shitty ass episode I still hate it for what it did for the story

like, what did that episode even do for it? Anything? NO

NO, and DON'T F U C K I N lie to me, you know that shit didn't happen either

and I'm done lying to myself about it

there was NO indication it actually helped

all it did was drive Puzzles away, but my man had nothing to do with the café, at least not to our knowledge which would be really negligent if they didn't tell us that he actually did

like, there's no reason for why it would get better, there's just nothing

and I knooooooooow I should enjoy the show for what it is and stop complaining because I'm gonna sound like a reddit user on r/smg4 but also like

I AM the complainer, I interpret things and discuss them, I'm all about it, I love discussing possibilities and have a lot of joy out of it

hell I also like crack ideas that sometimes. stem out of desperation

like me when I said, Idk if it was on the blog but me when I said it would be silly if 3 was drinking away his feelings for 4 perhaps in those silly little scenes

but like, nah, team's not brave enough

like what I noticed is that the ship is probably not becoming canon

but not because there wouldn't be a reason to, or they couldn't work out a narrative, in FACT it would be REALLY easy, even just today I thought of a way, in fact all of us think of ways so many times, Sever the Ties was also me thinking of a way, that would've been a narratively nice way to get them together and also show they care for each other

but yeah, I think they're not becoming canon because the writers are scared of doing more than jokes with them, I think what they wanted with them was just 2 homoerotic dudes having silly moments that can be laughed at, almost like they. can't take them seriously (trash friends-esque episodes, please comes back.......... sobbing)

which, aight, I guess

NOT QUEERBAITING THOUGH!!!! QUEER BAITING ISN'T ABOUT HINTS, IT'S ABOUT PROMISES!!!! THEY AREN'T QUEERBAITING US!!!!!!!!!!! THEY DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT GETTING THEM TOGETHER!!!!!!!!!

so yea I'm, not jaded with the show, I'm really not, I still like a lot of things about it and can't wait to see what they cook up this week

and even like, episodes I hate have good moments, not even a question, I can enjoy them (besides the endings)

I just yknow, I like to complain and I KNOW I'm not the only one

you don't need to like, agree with me, you can like botched storylines, I just like complain about said storylines even if I like some parts of it

[sophieinwonderland]

Shit when you bring up Tartarus & your only knowledge of it is fucking western media, ofc you’re gonna get called out. Some people actually grow up in the culture, and yes- joking about things from cultures you don’t belong to HAS ALWAYS BEEN BAD. You’re a cishet white man, check your fucking privilege.

Honey, I'm a bi-girl in an AMAB body. 🙄

But sure, double down on the misgendering and queer erasure. It's a great look for you and your hate group.

Also, do you realize how easy you are to bait? Ghost had a long-time interest in legends and mythology. Was obsessed with with Egyptian mythology as a child, and later Greek. That particular interest probably was spurred by reading Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson books, although Ghost did enough research into the gods on his own time to be annoyed with mistakes in the books, like confusing Kronos with Chronos.

And we've studied a lot more of the original Greek stories since then.

(Not to mention Ghost having a very brief stint in pagan communities around people who worshipped those deities.)

But I just knew making it sound like our only knowledge of Greek mythology and religion came from watching the Disney+ Percy Jackson series would cause you guys to have a meltdown. Or fake a meltdown, anyway. 🤷‍♀️

Like I said, Greek myths and religion is heavily ingrained in Western society and always has been. Hellenism is an open religion. And joking that your hate sub should be sent to Tartarus isn't going to be offensive to Hellenists. (Except maybe ones who are members of your hategroup.)

I don't care about your pretend outrage.

[go-goh]

Queer Coding in Inazuma Eleven

Character: Mizukamiya Seriyuu

Although Mizukamiya plays a rather minor role in the Areorion anime, the spin-off manga Heir to the Penguins following the deuteragonist Haizaki and Seishou academy provides us with more depth surrounding his character. With this development I’d argue that writers (whether intentional or not) made Mizukamiya one of the most definitive queer/gay characters in the series.

Regardless whether you believe Haizaki reciprocates Mizukamiya's feelings or not, it's nearly impossible to ignore the romantic subtext that is written into the spin off manga between the two characters. Sharing headphones, riding Ferris wheels alone together, and even the "pin against the wall moment", all of these romantic tropes support the idea that the relationship between Haizaki and Mizukamiya (at least through Mizukamiya's perspective) can be interpreted as romantic.

The essences of queer coding is implementing common romantic themes and elements into a character/relationship while not overtly telling the reader that it's queer. When looking at how romance is portrayed in anime/manga (particularly in romance stories following cis-het relationships), we often see protagonist continuous effort to become closer with their love interest and desire to form an interpersonal relationship; one that is unique to them and their love interest. Ex. Kimi ni Todeke, Monthly Girls Nozaki-Kun, etc.

Even though Mizukamiya's desire to become closer with Haizaki plays into the running joke that is it's his "duty as captain" it's shown throughout the story that his actions are fueled by a genuine desire to build a personal relationship with Haizaki.

For example Mizukamiya wanting a nickname from Haizaki is differentiated from the other characters. While the other characters view their nicknames are derogatory (bc frankly they are lol), Mizukamiya see it as endearing and therefore wants one. Seeing his reaction to Kidou questioning his desire for a nickname further supports reading Mizukamiya's actions as him wanting to be special to Hazaki; everyone calls him "captain" so he wants the person he considers special to call him something else.

When you combine this concept with the common romantic tropes written into their relationship, Mizukamiya's dynamic with Haizaki mirrors that of a crush typically found in romance media. His awkwardness when alone with him, always being concerned about him, and crying when finding out he transferred (with a very telling screen tone) show that seeing his feelings towards Haizaki as romantic is not farfetched; in fact it's pretty much implied.

Conclusion :D

Mizukamiya is one of my favorite examples of queer coding in ina11. His character is often seen as comedic yet his queerness isn't a bastardization or bait. His relationship with Haizaki is candid and honestly refreshing after seeing little to nothing of his character Ares. This is technically my first post so expect more of this series :))

Extras

bc they speak for themselves

[ngardgni]

...So, we've been reading a few posts about how "Warrior Nun" is the best because it isn't like all the other queer shows, where apparently the queer couples have sex right away or non-queer shows that queer bait viewers, etc.

Let's just get something straight:

The original L-Word came out in 2004. That show was criticized for being too white, too narrow, too limiting in its depiction of gay women. In fact, it was mostly lesbians, and one bi woman (Tina) and most were femmes. Over the years, the show tried to course correct with the addition of other characters, most notably Max (Daniela Sea) and even that was fraught with controversy. At the time, Daniela Sea was interviewed about this and she had said (and we're paraphrasing here, that was a long time ago), that L-Word doesn't claim to represent all gay women, and she had hoped that there would be more representation of gay women, more movies, more tv shows to show the diversity, the variety, the spectrum of the gay experience.

At the time, pre-L-Word, there were only a handful of les/bi movies, mostly indie, some of questionable quality (there were a lot, we're not going to name names), some good (our favorite being "When Night is Falling" and "Incredibly True Adventures of Two Girls in Love"). On TV, we had "Ellen" which was groundbreaking and promptly cancelled, and there was "Carol the Lesbian" on "Friends", who was treated more as a joke, along with Chandler's trans-mom.

Cut to now - where we have so much more to choose from: we have period dramas with A-List directors and actors ("Carol", "Tell it to the Bees", "Portrait of a Lady on Fire"), we have shows on TV networks and online streaming platforms (tho the line between those are blurring). So we can watch Cyrano de Bergerac style movies ("The Half of It") or Asian American ones ("Saving Face") or pretty straightforward ones, really ("Imagine Me and You"), and though some, if not half or most series/shows have been cancelled ("Teenage Bounty Hunters", "I Am Not Okay with This", etc.), we still have more shows/series now that tell our queer stories than ever before ("Buffy the Vampire Slayer", "The 100", "Glee", etc.) and we still think that's better than the time the only thing we had was stories with only subtext to keep us company ("Fried Green Tomatoes", "Thelma and Louise", "A League of their Own").

So, whenever we feel like it's getting bad, let's also remember the time when queer stories weren't even mainstream, when directors and actors wouldn't even touch or go near our stories, when we didn't have as many allies in the industry willing to put our stories out there. A lot of our queer stories from before, though far from perfect, paved the way for stories like "Warrior Nun"to see the light of day. And we love that yeah, "Warrior Nun" is about a friends-to-lovers queer story, but that isn't just the one queer story that can be told. The diversity and complexity of the queer experience can hardly be encompassed by just one series and it's not fair to ignore or put the others down just because they don't fit what you like. We like that we have the more adult, they-had-a-one-night-stand-right-away-and-fell-in-love story of Kacy on NCIS Hawai'i, the sex-positive one of Leighton on "The Sex Lives of College Girls", the stranded-on-an-island one of "The Wilds", the vampire-and-vampire-slayer-falling-in-love narrative of "First Kill", etc.

So, let's keep celebrating the diversity and complexity of the queer female experience onscreen but still honor the stories that came before them. They may not have been perfect, hell, they were even problematic, but, again, at least we got these stories and our lives are better for it.

And let's keep pushing for "Warrior Nun"and other stories to keep getting made and renewed.

Like and reblog if you agree.

Drop your favorite queer women story (movie, series, show) below.

[lover-of-mine]

I think purposely bad. And made worst. Because Tim didn't expect between episode 4 and 5 that those shippers would create a whole new character that never existed. Or that on the side Lou would financially gain and feed them head canons. So now he's like look... Don't you see he sucks.

I actually truly believe the medal ceremony was supposed to be his last scene of the season, then come back for an Ana style break-up. If you look at it organically, there was no reason for the daddy joke scene, and we know he wasn't supposed to be there. I think it was to create an off-putting scene where if he chooses, he could do an off-screen break up and avoid queer baiting accusations.

Lou has already created too much tension. He could still do a break up within a few episodes, but I'm not sure if Tim wants to have the head aches Lou brings... Closing down his cameo is the only reason I think he could be back for a bit. But if that's the case, then he definitely had a meeting, you know.

Okay, first of all, this may sound mean and not trying to and this isn't targeted to you I just keep seeing queerbaiting allegations and you used the word, but Buck is queer, the queerbaiting ship has sailed, a queer storyline not going the way we expected is not queerbaiting. Whatever they do with Buck's love life, there is no queerbaiting just because it feels unsatisfying to us. They marketed Buck as queer and Buck is bi. Not liking the way it was done doesn't change that.

But on the Lou thing, I agree that they didn't plan on having Lou stick around for the whole season, but the relationship was better accepted than anticipated and they are capitalizing on it. Full conspiracy theory, but I think that with how Oliver refuses to talk about bt, and how Ryan changed his tune after 706, something happened behind the scenes that went against what they were told the beginning of the season, because again, a tv show is a living organism that needs to adapt to the circumstances in which is airing, bt brought audience, keep him around a bit longer. The kink scene was there to remind us of how bad Gerrard is, but we could've had that reminder happen with Chim or Hen, so yeah, he didn't have to be there, but keeping bt alive during the hiatus keeps the numbers up while giving shippers time to cool off. And considering the publicity that came with Buck being bi, if they are planning on eventually getting to buddie, they are probably anticipating a similar level of publicity to come from queer Eddie, so they spaced it out to get the most out of both arcs. Especially because queer Eddie has to mean canon buddie and that would break the internet. I don't blame Lou for trying to capitalize from the ship, it keeps him on the role longer and it is exposure, but obviously, there's controlled chaos brought on by the high of a confirmation that a character is queer and there's *gestures vaguely* whatever is going on. There is a chance T will get the Ali treatment, there's a chance he will get the Ana treatment, but there is also the chance he will get the Taylor treatment and stick around while being a bad match for Buck, we don't know the plan and we don't know if Lou created enough problems for them to want to write him off. T is being shown to us in a very specific way, but they can still turn it around if they chose to, because we don't know enough. He is in the same spot Taylor was during s4 so it will all depend on how he will be handled during s8. Sure fanon T is not the character that exists on the show and Lou's cameos probably were shut down because it was creating a level of expectation they didn't plan on delivering, but at this point it could still go in any direction, we can't say anything for sure.

[queermania]

ok i wanna preface this by saying i’m not trying to bait at all! this is a genuine, looking for clarification on a complicated situation, question. and please forgive me if i’ve worded some things poorly/weirdly, articulation is hard lol.

anyway! having been in the spn fandom for a few years now, i’ve obviously heard that “jackles is homophobic.” personally i don’t believe he is, well actually yes, or at least he was, because (as you said in a recent post, very well said btw) being uncomfortable with being perceived as gay is still homophobia. but i’ve never believed he actually hates gay people or is a full-on f-slur-using homophobe like i’ve seen people claim.

but like i said, i’ve only been in the fandom since like 2018/19, so the only thing i’ve ever seen referenced for why people say he’s homophobic is from that one con when, upon a person just mentioning destiel at the beginning of their question, he said smth along the lines of “let’s not ruin it for everybody.” obviously, that’s not a good response! that was mean.

other than that, everything else i’ve seen about jackles’s relationship to anything queer is like, his past roles and him going to drag shows and happily signing destiel art. but again, that’s what i’ve observed in only the past few years.

so what i’m wondering is, besides that one con situation (which i’ll repeat, i know was bad), what else has jackles done/said that is, or even just could be interpreted as, homophobic?

thanks for bearing with me, and if you do decide to answer, thanks again!

so that's the main one (and i want to say for the record that i know there are people who think he was scolding the audience for booing or that he was in an impossible situation or there were extenuating circumstances or whatever but i think that's being a little willfully obtuse. he was being an asshole when he said what he said and he should have handled that situation better because he was a trained professional doing a job and the girl who asked the question was a paying customer and nobody deserves to be belittled for their sexuality. full stop.).

there's another one about him writing "?no" on an essay a fan brought for him to sign about dean's bisexuality. this one is highly in dispute because the only person who really knows what happened is the person who brought the essay and i've seen an account from someone who claims to be that person saying that the whole thing was a silly back-and-forth between them and jensen that was all in good fun and that the internet then misinterpreted and ran with. i don't know if that's true. but i do know this is one of the things people most often cite as evidence that he's homophobic.

the rest of the examples are really just casual homophobia type stuff (that jared and misha are also guilty of doing like making blow job jokes and jokes about how it's emasculating to be a bottom or whatever) and/or people assuming things in the most bad faith way possible (like misha saying that they had to get jensen's permission to do the confession) and/or people attributing things to him that are not actually his fault (like destiel questions being banned at cons for so long). and to be perfectly honest a lot of it is just him not saying what they want him to say about dean being queer or about destiel, which, you know, isn't actually homophobia. it is him being a bit of a wet blanket about it, but like.............. that's not really the same thing.

so yeah. mostly just a lot of casual homophobia.

[giraffeclass]

my personal thoughts about the whole queerbait discourse regarding the daddies that are buddies

So. Do I think Buddy Daddies is queerbait? There's two things to analyze there. First, is the marketing of the show geared towards grabbing a BL audience? I'm not japanese nor speak the language so it's impossible for me accurately make a judgement on that.

But at least regarding the show itself, I don't think so. Like, I don't think the show is promising anything it isn't delivering? It's very straightforward about Kazuki and Rei having a strong partnership as roommates/coworkers/friends, and both being Miri's dads and the three of them being family and that's it, it never hints at anything else, never goes "wink wink nudge nudge are they a couple~? ;333"

Like in episode 4 for example(the daycare episode) it would have been so easy to sneak in some bait-y jokes, have a teacher assume they're a couple and then show Kazuki denying it getting all nervous and blushy, but they don't do that. They directly say "Yes, we are both her fathers" and no other characters in the episode question that or make any suggestive comments. What you see is what you get. It ends up being pretty refreshing how easily accepted it is.

Basically I think the show is like... non-hostile to a queer interpretation while also not feeding any false hope I guess?

And of course there's a lot of subtext, whether that subtext is accidental or not. Just the premise itself is already inherently queer. At the end of the day, this anime has a message of acceptance for non-conventional families, which is very queer-positive, whether intentional or not.

I started this show genuinely thinking it was gonna be generic bait and so far I've honestly just been pleasantly surprised? Like I just don't feel like they're dangling something in front of me or whatever. idk I'm just enjoying the ride lol

also here's the thing. I actually tend to really enjoy the more ambiguous/subtle kind of relationship writing, the kind of stuff that blurs the line between friendship and romance, and so I gravitate towards a lot of stuff that people would usually consider queerbait lol. I just love the concept of two people who have this deep and unspoken trust and love for each other and don't need precise words to define it, or don't know how to define it, or are not emotionally honest enough yet to define it, but the love is clear as day. Like I love it when two characters refuse to even call each other "friend" but you know they would die for each other lmao.

Best example I can think of is G/ood Omens(the show, haven't read the book yet). Lots of queer people complained that they never kiss or outright say "I love you" or anything like that, meanwhile I was there like oh shit, I actually really loved the way their relationship was portrayed in the show and wouldn't change a single thing about it

I do understand the feelings of people who want something that leaves absolutely no room to be interpreted as platonic, and I think we need more of that always. But also I feel like the discourse has lost a lot of nuance, idk. anyway I got off topic oops

[stormblessed95]

What is Queerbaiting?

I had a good conversation about this with @ejassy the other day and figured I'd just make a post about it in case anyone else wanted to either share their own thoughts too or were just confused over what people mean when they say queerbaiting. Which CAN get confusing, especially when it gets used incorrectly ALOT.

So in short simple terms, for queerbaiting and its similar phrases?

Queer subtext: I normally think of this in 2 ways. The first being unintentionally gay. This was clearly not the intention of the writer ever, but the gay ships were just accidentally too full of chemistry and the ship shipped itself by accident even though the characters aren't "canon" gay (think batman and joker. Or Lord of the rings or Elsa from Frozen. Or like a good portion of misogynistic anime writers who can't write a female character that isn't flat AF lol)

The second being where it can also be defined as INTENTIONALLY gay. Where instead of it being something that just happened, it was written like this pn purpose and with full intention of being queer and is in its own way, good queer representation, even if the queer relationship isn't ever technically confirmed, or only confirmed "off screen" by the writers. This is subtext and its sometimes left only as subtext because the romance is only a subplot or because of censorship. (Think Legend of Korra or Think Merthur from Merlin bbc.)

Queercoding: acting queer or leaning into queer themes/subtext but not explicity queer for any number of reasons, including censorship for fictional universes or just being closeted. Basically there is enough subtext available for the audience to read them as queer regardless of if their sexuality is never confirmed either way. (Again, think Elsa. Or Jo March from Little Women, or think Nick Carraway from the Great Gatsby. Think of Wei Wuxian and Lan Wangji from The Untamed, the show not the web novel verison lol. Think Xena: Warrior Princess)

Queerbaiting: obviously leaning into and promoting queer subtext and queer themes to keep gay fans on the hook and invested in your media with zero intentions of follow through. Almost at times even turning it into like a joke or just making it very obvious that the character was never actually queer. This was a term coined by queer theorist academics in the 1990s and didn't actually exist before then. This is not a term that can apply to real people. Real people can't queerbait. With very few exceptions to that "rule." Which I will discuss some of those possible exceptions in a bit. (Think Destial from supernatural, or Johnlock from Sherlock, or think Supercorp, Lena and Kara, from Supergirl. Or think Sam and Bucky from MCU, Bechloe from Pitch Perfect or Sterek from Teen Wolf. If anyone doesnt know why these would fall under a more queerbaiting label and dont already know, please feel free to ask for sure)

There are some good sources out there that go into much more detail about what queerbaiting is, how it's been misused and more too as well if you have the time to watch them. This video was recommended from @guacamoli-avocadorado here. It is a great intro to the term and how it is used/should be used broken down in an easy to understand way. And it gives a bunch more examples like I shared above, etc.

And this one is longer but a really good and interesting dialogue about the topic. They take the definition of queerbaiting and expands upon it greatly as well as gives a very through dive down the history of queerness and queer subtext through film and media. This one was recommended by @chikooritajjk

Now, real people cannot queer bait. It's impossible UNLESS they have CONFIRMED their sexuality as "straight" and will sometimes "play gay," for an audience. And not just a straight actor playing a gay one, but doing something that is intentionally queer but backtracking and being like "well I mean, I'm straight so I didn't mean it." And doing so repeatedly and/or even making light of it or joking about it. Or even just being plain homophobic about it. Unless you are talking about the actions they take to promote their "brand" in an effort to profit off queer fans on purpose, while continuing to make it clear its not "that serious," then you could make an argument that that person is queerbaiting. Which, for clarification, two people of the same sex simply interacting together, even with lots of general affection, cannot be classified as queerbaiting ever. Especially because a person doesn't have to be "out" to act on their queerness. Our queerness is our own. No one gets to demand someone to give answers about their sexuality to confirm queerness or not before the public "decides" to keep trying to bully an answer out of them or not. You don't get to take self expression and someone else's comfort away from them for your own comfort in labels that don't belong to you anyway. The thing is, no one owes anyone any explanations about how they present themselves or what their sexuality is. You can't forcibly out people. "I think you are gay, therefore I'm owed an explanation and if you don't give me one, it means you are just queerbaiting" is WRONG. It's an umbrella media term, not a bullying tactic. This applys to everyone, random people off the street, actors, musicians, authors who write/engage in queer literature, public speakers, influencers, etc...

There are some of kpop idol groups (or other celebrities in general) that could be classified as queerbaiting. Because they use queerness to build and promote their "brand" while otherwise never doing anything about it (even as an ally) and/or even being lowkey homophobic about it all or just continuing to make sure the audience knows they "arent actually gay." Or they use queerness in a way that fetishizies it, again without actually meaning it in any way. That's a whole seperate issue, and it could in ways be considered queerbaiting. Or it could more likely dig further into the issue of inauthenic queer fetishization used as a shock value for an audience to be used as sexual fantasies for their STRAIGHT audience, rather than to draw in a queer audience who are more looking for the possible authenticity of queerness or allyship in the celebrities/idols they are building these parasocial relationships with. Because again, unless you know what this person's sexuality is, how are you sure they aren't just exploring/or expressing their own queerness and aren't labeling it or are closeted for whatever their reasons may be, including just not being ready to come out yet.

It is a fine line to walk, and there will probably be times in the "real life" instances above where you will have to use your own critical thinking skills to decide how you feel about things, etc. But for the most part, real people can't really queerbait. But hopefully this helps anyone who was/is confused. There are also a lot more resources out there if you wanted to continue looking into it. This is just what I know about it all myself too, if anyone has anything to add, they are free to do so. 💜

[ayarnofpearls]

Since Alastor is girlie pop:

I needed to draw them bonding and kicking legs together. They are bonding over favorite body disposal methods during a sleep over.

(UH so I'll info dump about these under the cut lmao bc I love talking about death too much. Plus relationship dynamics!)

I need to work on Scurris feet more, because as a squirrel she can totally do shit like this:

And a lot of that has to do with the feet, which is part of why I draw her bare foot a lot. Part of her thing is that she's only really a physical fighter- she does lightly use her magic but girlie has to get good. Meanwhile she's gonna crawl up walls for pouncing advantage.

And yes Alastor still has his monocle on, (Scurri took her glasses off) He...might sleep with it on. I can't decide what'd be funnier. 🤔 this actually might be before this doodle now that I think about it.

@sunstar-of-the-north

I like to think given the time period Alastor knew where the hog farms were for body disposal. There's a bunch of old tales about pigs that they will eat anything in their pen and if a pig tastes human blood you gotta put it down because it'll get aggressive and try to go after people idk about the second one but pigs will absolutely eat humans! A lil prep before hand and well nomnom.

The gator bait is more of a joke because I don't think they are that effective at complete consumption but if he plotted it right he maybe could fool authorities that it was a gator death. Forensics wasn't as good back then.

Dinner is dinner, though it's not said if he was a cannibal in life or if he started in death.

My favorite body disposal method is tossing that body in a hole and planting a tree over it actually but what I mean by fertilizer here is the nitrogen gas frozen body then pulverized version. However composting does yield lovely fertilizer as well.

Aquamation is using water for cremation type effect leaving only bones behind for later powedering in a cremulator.

Funeral pyre is like you think, only instead of the 'viking funeral' which will burn out before cremation it's more of an open air bonfire with the body in the middle. Loved ones or hired people will continually feed the fire until completion. These can be lovely ceremonies as loved ones can bring flowers or other burnable memorabilia to add to the fire.

...

This actually all futher plays into the opposite but complementary nature of Scurri vs Alastor. Alastor of course thinks of the dead in terms of meat vs Scurri thinking of them in terms of meaningful disposition. Design wise I like that they are two sides of the same coin.

Scurri has to be a physical brawler vs Alastors magic allowing him distance in fights, he can dip dive dodge but could you imagine him kicking someone in the face? Highly unlikely. Scurri has to dress for fighting whenever possible and Alastor is afforded his sense of style that would otherwise make fist fighting difficult. Scurri being my self insert would actually like to wear delicate clothing but isn't afforded that luxury yet. Same with her short hair. Her tail is huge weak point I joke with my friends it's a 4 feet long handle attached to her spine so she keeps her hair short, dont need ANOTHER thing for opponents to grab onto. Vs Alastor who if he has a tail it would be comparatively shorter. Fucking try grabbing his tail. You can't because you're dead for trying.

Alastor is a prey animal that has completely overcome his form, Scurri is doing her best okay.

So why do they hang out and eventually become queer platonic partners? They make each other laugh. Yeah Jessica Rabbit said it best. Ace icon she is.

"What do you see in that guy?"

"He makes me laugh."

Anyway this wandered a little from the point BUT I do plan on actually writing a profile. Usually my inserts are just me in hats but I reworked Scurri and then you know, she did kill a guy to go to Hell which (knock on wood) I have most definitely not done. So she's both me and not me. Love that for her.

I have a whole lore background and she doesn't even go to the Hotel until her 3rd year of being in Hell due to finding a found family (tm) and such.

[sanversandfriends]

This writer needs no introduction. She's been keeping eyeballs glued to AO3 since the Halcyon days when the show was still good and Alex was still Alex. Behold the origin story of the Sanvers fandom's very own @performativezippers!

Tell us a little about yourself. How did you get started writing fic? Have you written for other fandoms? What are your favorite tropes?   I've talked about this before, but I found fic because of research I was doing in grad school. I was studying a fan advocacy group about queer representation on Glee (bleak times!) but the group folded before I had everything I needed. I had to produce a publishable paper by the end of the semester, and fanfic was the closest pivot I could make to use the research I'd already done. So I started studying Glee fanfic, and went down a rabbit hole of canon vs noncanon representation in fanfic and what that means for queer imaginations, basically (one of my papers was called "Faberry is Love, Pass it On," and another was "Write Your Own God Damned Stories," good fucking times). And then later I was like...you know what, there's a formula to successful fanfics, and now that I know it, could I do it? What if I wrote something as a test? And oops that was in like 2013! 

I originally wrote for Rizzoli and Isles, then for Sanvers, now also for Kacy (ncis hawaii).

In terms of tropes, I'm a sucker for a good friends-to-lovers slow burn arc. That's *chef's kiss* when it's done just right. What were your inspirations for this particular story? What was it about this/these ships that grabbed you?

Not to remind people of The Wars, but if you don't mind remembering, back when Sanvers was broken up (I'M SORRY), they said it was because Alex wanted a kid. Now, I thought that was stupid, because lord knows I fucking love Alexandra Danvers with all my heart but she was definitely not a parent of the year candidate in any way. I don't remember how it happened, but to get through our pain, some of us were joking about like, "just give her a dog and dress it up like a baby" and then I was thinking, "hmm, Alex would probably want like, a big ass predator for a child" and then somehow, probably in a fever dream, it became Make Alex's Child a Velociraptor. So it's actually a direct response to canon, which is weird because it's about a dinosaur and also Kara isn't in it, but there you have it.

This ship (Sanvers) grabbed me in a chokehold from day one. I had started watching Supergirl in season one because I like superhero stuff and I like ladies, and I crushed on Alex hard from the beginning. And then Maggie showed up for season two, and it was...fucking magic. I didn't know what was going to happen, I wasn't on the spoiler internet yet, so I watched it with baited breath. So often when you see two women characters with that kind of chemistry, you're screaming at the TV "YOU GUYS, THAT'S GAY" but it never happens. And this time it did. I yelled, "Alex, that's gay," and Maggie said, "Damn Alex, that's pretty gay," and then Alex said, "Fuck, you guys, I'm gay" and then THEY KISSED. I couldn't believe it.

And Alex's coming out speech was the most me-like thing I had ever seen on television, hands down. Has the time spent away from your story changed your outlook or approach to any of the storylines or themes? Have you had any new inspirations or breakthroughs/revelations in the meantime?

I'm a much better writer than I was when I started this fic. I've learned so much, from line-level work to how to write a plot and everything between. I still really love the worldbuilding I did originally, and the character of Gertrude the Dinosaur, and most of the large-scale choices I made for the ship and the tension. What's interesting about this fic is that it's the only thing I ever outlined, and it's the only thing I never finished. Not a coincidence! If I know what's happening, I get both bored and confined, and it doesn't work for me. The trick was to wait so long that I straight up forgot what was in the outline. I literally haven't reopened that word document, and I won't until my draft is finished. Maybe I'll find some gems in there that I want to work in, but I learned my lesson! No outlines! No thinking too far ahead!! That way lies madness (and unfinished fics). Any advice for new or aspiring fic writers?

Write what you want to read. Honestly, that's it. When I'm sad, I read my own stuff. When I want to be delighted, I read my own stuff. It's really easy to get hung up on what other people say or want to see, how many comments or kudos you get (I'm very guilty of this!) but ultimately, write something that, when you want comfort, you can read and go, "oh yeah, that's the good shit right there." Maybe that's fluff, maybe smut, maybe 100k of bloody torture--doesn't matter. Write what you want to read.

(But please, for the love of lesbian jesus, my actual advice is to put the dialogue tag on the same line as the dialogue. Please!) If you were going to promote this fic with a single line, what would it be?

Alex's child doesn't like Maggie, which is difficult because Alex is in love with Maggie and also the child is a velociraptor.  If you’ve already posted some of your work, please provide a link.

You can find the fic here, but I haven't posted the edited versions of the existing chapters yet, so I honestly recommend not diving in until I've posted the first of the new chapters (chapter 10): https://archiveofourown.org/works/13799136/chapters/31724760 

"Thanks, Zipps!"

she said.