#shapeshifters get such a bad rep in a lot of media

[musiclover2732]

not enough of you are appreciating that Stringbean is a snakeshifter so this is a snakeshifter Stringbean appreciation post

[dateamonster]

what’s your opinion on monstrous transformations (both fast and slow), and also more controversially what do you think about having monsters/nonhuman characters serve as minority allegory (as opposed to society’s hate for them being being an allegory)

ohhh hold on this is a rly good question i think abt a Lot actually.

ok getting the first bit out of the way, love a good monstrous transformation. fast, slow, its all good. i personally like gradual slow shifts the most but its a situational thing. transformation is one of those things that like just always has to be symbolic. even more than the degree to which Everything is symbolic ya know. so like context rly matters when it comes to how to invoke it most effectively.

MOVING ON

i think from the phrasing of the ask ur looking for something more along the lines of like. for example shapeshifters as representation of nonbinary people or aliens as representation of different cultures rather than like monsters vs humans as allegory for racism. but im also not sure you can meaningfully separate the two! the latter i think is more overused so it like registers more as an immediate red flag, but its like. if the aliens from avatar werent being violently invaded by humans it wouldnt make like their reskinned stereotypical indigeneity anymore tolerable i dont think.

which isnt to say i think every story that draws connections between fantastical fictional species and real world people are inherently bad. i dont really think theres any trope that i believe cant be handled well by anyone under any circumstance. the super easy fix to bad rep via monster or fantasy creature characters is basically just have actual humans who also represent those same identities and communities and experiences so that the audience isnt drawn to connect the traits of any one group with your fictional species.

the harder fix is to like seriously analyze why you want this character to be a monster and what that says about them and what that says about you and your own experiences and biases and what you actually want to communicate with the inclusion of this character. and when applicable hire a sensitivity reader. its kinda crazy how many pieces of media seem to prefer half-assing the hard way over just doing the easy thing and not assigning the status of token minority to a literal monster.

of course once again all of this is ya know circumstantial. im speaking to like my own experiences and the things ive observed. and its weird too! bc im also speaking as someone who like is trans and nonbinary and thinks of myself and my gender expression as inherently intertwined with monstrosity. and as someone who is autistic and thinks of myself as a changeling. and as someone who is a fat person who represents themself with a pig themed sona. if i talk abt cringeass hollywood blockbusters engaging in High Fantasy Racism i feel like to be fair i kinda have to talk about independent own-voices creators who write stories and make art about their own identities in the lovely language of monstrosity. theres not rly a way to draw a hard line around the former without the risk of catching some of the latter.

so umm as usual i dont rly have a snappy all encompassing answer for how i feel abt this kind of characterization. im simply too much of a Nuance Enjoyer. i do i guess think this is something that generally turns out better when it is someone making art about their own experiences, but also unless i believe minority artists are a monolith, which i dont, i need to accept that artists will inevitably make stuff that is beautiful and resonant to some people and totally repugnant and offensive to others, and that both of those responses can be like totally justified and correct. thats art babey!

anyway slight digression but i think any case where a character feels more like an allegory than a fully fleshed u know Character is gonna flop for me no matter how relatable it is. tbqh, id rather more ppl try and fail to make beautiful grotesque frightening sensually moving monsters out of their lived experiences and their empathetic connections with others than succeed at creating bland toothless universally approachable Good Rep tm. if u know u know. if u feel me u feel me. that is all.

[oblivious-aro]

Apologies if this is a bit of a weird ask, but I'm kinda curious about if you've had any experiences with not liking LGBT+ media that was seen as a must watch, and what your thoughts were on them? That reblog sprung me back to thinking the Matrix was boring in middle school despite it being a Trans movie and feeling slightly confused why my friends were surprised by it.

(also that dear lgbt kids blog is really cool, thank you for sharing it!)

Not a weird ask at all, 'tis an honour when the internet people are interested in my thoughts :)

(also yes, I looove dear lgbt kids, that blog is so soothing!)

I wasn't really thinking of anything in particular when I reblogged that post, but if I had to list some specific examples, Steven Universe and Nimona come to mind.

SU's lgbt+ content never sat right with me because of the fact that only character that were lgbt+ were the gems. So in this show, any and all lgbt+ characters are...literaly aliens.

Yeah...

Even outside any lgbt+ themes, the show was a slog to watch. It started off decently enough, but as the it went on, the quality deteriorated heavily. The plot was all over the place, the characters were massacred, and the protagonist is the only child character in all of media who I genuinely hate.

But for some reason, lgbt+ fandom loses their mind over SU. When I read the stuff they say, I honestly wonder if we watched the same show. Like the show's got some decent moments, but it ain't all that. Not even close.

This might be a catty thing to say, but I think it's because it's got a space theme, pastel colours, and some androgynous looking characters. From the way some people talk, a lot of them seem to think that certain aesthetics are more valuable rep than actual lgbt+ content.

I didn't really interact with people online when SU was airing, but my sister was a diehard fan of the show, and we got into a lot of (in hindsight very petty) arguments about it.

I don't judge people who like bad shows (my most used tag is 'Lego ninjago', glass houses), but SU fans always seemed so defensive wave atright up dishonest about the show they claimed to love (this post is long enough, so I won't go into specifics).

It was borderline surreal (and slightly insanity inducing), watching a show that did so little get praised for so much.

Nimona was okay, but very overhyped. Story wise, I think it needed some buffing in a few areas, but it's a fine kids movie that just didn't super grab me.

As for the lgbt+ elements, the two main bits are a gay couple and some gender stuff.

The gay couple are...well they exist I guess. I didn't like how any potentially interesting angles of Goldenloin's character were sacrificed because the writers really wanted him and Boldheart to be fighting the whole movie instead of doing anything actually romantic. The romance isn't interesting, and one of the characters is barely a character. Eh.

Now on to the gender stuff, aka the thing everyone raves about. See, the movie wants Nimona the character to be a metaphor for transgender struggles in society, but instead of making Nimona trans, they made her a shapeshifter.

Why would you not just...make her trans of you want to tell a trans narrative? And you can't blame "homophobic executives" on this one because there's an explicit gay couple right there, and this movie came out on Netflix post 2020. Why do I feel like I'm back in 2016?

And to be clear, it very much is a trans narrative they're trying to push, and not just the story happening to be presented in a way that resonates with trans people. There's some bits (such as the train scene) where the trans narrative directly interferes with what's happened in the story and what we know about the characters, but they're there anyway.

They reeeeeeally want to talk about trans people without talking about trans people for some reason that absolutely boggles my mind.

I just...I don't get it. Just tell the story you say you want to tell. Why are we being so weird and indirect?

That's been my experience with a lot of the lgbt+ media I hear people raving about. I don't know why this seems especially true with specifically lgbt+ people, but a lot of the community has incredibly low standards for lgbt+ themes and representation in media.

A year or two ago, I specifically remember a looking at a list of top transgender characters in children's tv, and literally only ONE character on the list was actually trans.

In summary, I just can't get behind media that acts needlessly secretive yet weirdly proud about specifically its lgbt+ themes and characters, but that's the kind of writing I hear getting the loudest praise and the most glorifying articles.

It felt like I was in the twilight zone.

Finding like 3 people online who were like 'no, you're right, people are being weird about this' was such a relief, and I think knowing there were at least a few people who had the same take as me helped me be able to deal better.

Things are getting better as more mainstream media is incorporating actual explicit lgbt+ representation, but the the crowd that celebrates over scraps of nothing is very much still there.

It didn't bother me nearly as much as it did years ago, but I've learned to take online ravings and reccomendations with a large pinch of salt.

[strangestcase]

So fucking tired of people headcanoning the most problematic person as LGBT and then making them their poor little trans and gay meow who can do no wrong. Like no let the trans girl be a bad mom and a shitty girlfriend let the trans guy be an unrepentant serial killer let the shapeshifting murder enby commit war crimes.

That's what made them cool don't take it away. Also I am referencing candyverse because you're the master of "trans and fucked up" and it's why we're friends.

Seriously why sexyman the most fucked up of white twinks only to saw they're just misunderstood and make them generic bad boy #459 in self insert yaoi fic?

I get the feeling that people want their cake and to eat it too but that Tumblr as a whole is kind of scared of “problematic” queer rep. Which like I can get since (gestures broadly at media history) but you can’t expect perfection all the time. Not only that but due to the weird “if you like an evil character you’re a bad person” phase social media had a while back has forced people into show of mental gymnastics like “they are hot and I like them- therefore they can’t be evil!” But like… that’s not how it works. Usually it’s not the characters you like what’s wrong but the way you interpret them (and even then there is a lot of room for change!) We are human after all.

Also thank you. I am the master of Trans And Fucked Up. That’s what all my characters are. Always.

[tweewig]

fire 🔥 and peacock 🦚 emoji < not a tree surprisingly

🔥 - how has the way you think about yourself changed since you realized you were queer?

hmm. in short i gained a LOT more confidence and felt home in my skin? ok im gonna describe how i interpret it and hope it’s comprehensible. before i only saw myself as a mass of muddled color and shape and it stressed me the FUCK out, but after the process of accepting myself i finally had a solid form and shade which was. a relief to say the least.

🦚 - are there any queer books/shows/etc. that you would suggest?

i consume a LOT of queer media hmm. okay i have two suggestions

• purrgatory by niv (darvin heo)! it’s a game set in purrgatory, a waiting zone for people who’s afterlives are undetermined. it’s really sweet and tbh i did cry the first time playing it? you follow the stories of 7 different characters, helping them change their path so they can leave and live their afterlives to the fullest. it’s more centered around personal growth and life after death, but there’s a lot of lgbt rep! you help a wlw couple get together, there’s some trans and nonbinary characters, and a good majority of the cast has stated sexualities! the game also lets you choose your pronouns and HAS THE OPTION FOR NEOPRONOUNS !! one of the first games i’ve seen implement that so it’s. very nice. 100/10 recommend if you like point and click indie games :]] (it’s free on steam and itch.io!)

• nimona by noelle stevenson. listen. i will promote this graphic novel at ANY cost. it’s the story of an aspiring villain (who happens to be a shapeshifter) that tags along with the bad guy of the town in his quest to tear down the corrupt hero’s organization. once again it’s not wholly centered around being queer, but fuck yeah rep! the main character, nimona, is canonically nonbinary and the villain and hero have a gay friends-to-enemies-to-lovers storyline which. sorry im a sucker for enemies to lovers it’s a problem. the book is a worthwhile read w/ great storytelling and art, and it’s actually being made into a movie that’ll be released sometime in 2023!!! (the post where i found that out :]]) i HIGHLY recommend this novel it’s genuinely one of my favorite books out there!!

[emptymasks]

The Fluidphobia in the Loki Series and it’s Fandom

These are posts I made for my Instagram but I was asked if I could share them properly on here. As much as I’ve talked about these issues on here, I’ve not shared these more coherent posts out of fear from the backlash I got from a couple of non-binary people. But I need to make one thing clear: if you are LGBT+ but not specifically genderfluid, you do not get to say what is and what is not fluidphobic. Sadly, gays, bisexuals, transgender and non-binary people can be fluidphobic.

Am I trying to cancel the show? No, I’m still watching it and enjoying a lot of it. Do I think they were fluidphobic on purpose and malicious? No, I think it’s out of the ignorance and privilege of an all-cis creative team who didn’t consult real genderfluid people. If they hadn’t boasted about how they were making MCU Loki genderfluid and MCU Loki had remained a cis man then I wouldn’t be making this post and I wouldn’t be complaining. But they made him genderfluid, they bragged about him being genderfluid, and then did this. Genderfluid people deserve better.

And before I get any comments that I’ve been getting everyone else saying “it’s fiction, it’s not real”, bad LGBT+ representation does affect real life. Bad and offensive and inaccurate LGBT+ representation actively affects how real LGBT+ people are treated. Already the fluidphobia in this fandom has surged and I’ve had a lot of firsthand experience of it as a genderfluid person. Don’t tell me that it doesn’t matter when I know people who have gotten death threats, hate, abuse, harassment, who have been told ‘genderfluidity isn’t real’ ‘only fictional character’s can be genderfluid because you need to be able to shapeshift to be genderfluid’ ‘Loki isn’t genderfluid, he’s sexfluid’ ‘Loki is only ever male because everyone calls him he/him and brother and god’ ‘Loki is bi/pan because he fucked a horse’. Just stop. And stop conflating the myths with the Marvel character, they’re not the same things and there are many differences between them.

Real people matter more than fictional characters. Real people getting hurt is more important than whether you think something makes a good story or feels in character for Loki.

I’m so tired guys, I just want a few simple things:

Stop misgendering Loki. The cast and crew, Marvel and Disney, have all confirmed he is genderfluid now in the MCU. not a cis man, and not ‘sexfluid’. Stop calling ships with him in m/f or het or mslash or mlm.

Stop saying “it’s not real, it’s just fiction” when a queer person complains about bad queer rep. It’s horrible and naive. If representation didn’t affect reality then why would we want more and better representation? Bad and homophobic/transphobic scenes and characters in the media actively affect and increase the homophobia and transphobia in real life.

If you’re not genderfluid stop assuming you understand genderfluidity better than genderfluid people do and stop telling them to shut up and that they don’t understand or are reading too much into things when they say something upset them. If you’re genderfluid you’re welcome to think I’ve said wrong things, I do not and have never claimed to speak on behalf of all genderfluid people. I always put a preface on my posts stating that as I get people angry at me when I haven’t.

And dear god please, please stop using the horse fucking in the myths to justify anything. I’ve seen biphobes using it to say why Loki is digusting and why bi people are bad, and I’ve seen allies and LGBT+ people using it to say why “Loki’s amazing, he can do and be anything, of course he’s bi, he’s always been bi, he fucked a horse!”. That is not empowering, that is not supportive of bi and pan and genderfluid people. Bestiality is something that has been used for a long time to harass bisexual and pansexual (omnisexual, polysexual) people. It is a panphobic belief that pansexuals will fuck anything including animals. Comparing bis and pans to the horse fucking is not the support you think it is. And Marvel comics and MCU Loki have never done that. Slephnir is not Loki’s child in Marvel. The myths are different from Marvel and the MCU. Hela is Loki’s daughter in the comics but not in the MCU.

[queenangst]

I've been a pjo fan for a long time, but I never was very into the online fandom until recently. So my question is this: what is considered "problematic" with Rick Riordan, from what I've seen he's just tried to always please fans, if not a little too much, but like I said I only got online very very recently.

oh, boy. 

there’s a lot to unpack. 

i’m going to be honest, generally when i criticize i don’t do it on my very public blog. most discussions i’ve had are private, with people i trust; i’m not saying i won’t discuss it with you, what i mean by this is if you look on my blog you probably won’t find a lot of pjo/hoo/rr crit in the past. 

before i get into it, here’s a couple things to keep in mind. 

1. it is okay to absolutely love percy jackson and criticize it. they are not mutually exclusive. it’s important and healthy to be able to take a step back and look at the media you’re reading with a critical eye and from different perspectives. 

2. sometimes, reading crit can kind of hurt. acknowledging that an author or a creator you look up to is flawed can hurt. no creator is perfect, and no critic is perfect. just understand that when you read crit you’re likely looking through the lens of someone who probably has seen something damaging, etc in rick’s writing. 

also, it doesn’t really matter if you’ve been part of the fandom for a long time or not; online or not; these issues stem from rick and the writing itself.

okay: 

here’s my pjo crit tag and my hoo crit tag. like i said, they’re pretty scarce, because most of me talking about what went wrong in hoo is in private circles. 

the issues become much more apparent in hoo, because hoo was kind of a hot mess. so you might tend to see more hoo crit than pjo crit, but there are flaws in both series that deal with diversity or lack thereof, tokenism, racism, stereotypes, and also just some bad writing choices and bad narrative.

here’s some bloggers who have great discussions about pjo/hoo/rick + problems. 

@transannabeth - anti rick tag (tea also has a pjo crit, hoo crit, and some other tags but i think most posts fall under anti rick)

@reynaisalesbian - hoo crit tag

@bananannabeth - hoo crit tag

some other bloggers who don’t (afaik) have crit under tags or have a couple posts, but who have made good posts/points/etc: @blackjacktheboss, @ofswordsandpens, @gr33kg0ds, @sawasawako. 

if you want to look outside of these bloggers or tags (which i encourage you to), common tags that people use for criticism on tumblr are: anti pjo, anti hoo, anti rick/riordan/rr, pjo crit, hoo crit, rr crit, pjo criticism, hoo criticism.

i... do not have the time or energy to address every single issue that comes up in pjo, hoo, and with rick. i’m sorry. there’s a lot of books, a lot of characters, and a lot of bad narrative. and bad choices. i’d go through the links above, maybe reach out to people (reach out to me, or anyone), discuss, look at the books and step back from what you like and want to defend and use your critical thinking skills. 

i guess to get you started (since i can’t cover every single issue ever) here’s something i was discussing with @wisdom-walks-alone and a couple other people earlier; the east asian/asian representation (hello! that’s me!) is uh, not hot, to say the least. for example, if you look at the canonical asian pjo characters—

ethan nakamura, who is basically the only one in pjo, dies. he’s a kid on the wrong side, he tries to defy kronos, and he dies. cool! then we hop on over to hoo, and we have two whole east asian characters. one of them is drew tanaka, who is reduced to stereotypes and a ‘queen bitch’ like character, vain and petty and rude to say the least. her focus is completely on her appearance. she doesn’t get development. she’s there to be pitted against piper, another woman of color. 

but that’s okay, because we have frank, right? frank zhang, who is actually chinese. except i never identified with him because he was 1) extremely underdeveloped for a main character of the series and 2) his arc is, as i remember it, getting buff. let’s see. 

he’s a chinese character, which means there are a lot of conflicting and interesting values to play with and develop. i really liked him in son, and with the shapeshifting abilities and his life stick, as well as his discomfort in his own body; those could have really been elements in a fantastic character arc. sacrifice, duty, loyalty to your family, to your country/people (i.e. the romans).... these are all things that are important to chinese people, and could have played a larger role (which is why i liked that frank burned his own stick to free thanatos). but eventually he’s given a fireproof bag so his stick will never burn and he just... gets buff and strong, because that’s important. that’s some surface level criticism because i don’t remember much of what happens to frank in the series (probably not much?), but yeah. i’m not saying frank’s character arc should revolve around him being chinese, or that being chinese should play a huge role in the series, but a fundamental part of character is background. there are a hundred different experiences rick could have pulled from, and each of them are unique. tfw your “rep” isn’t rep at all.

so the three east asian characters i get to read about, who look like me, who might have grown up like me, who i’m supposed to relate to... one is dead, one is a stereotypical bitch, and one is.. i don’t even know. so it’s something to think about, yeah?

EDIT: do not take this post as saying you have to ‘hate’ hoo or hate pjo or hate rick now. (though some of us do, for good reason.) just keep the criticism in mind and accept it as a part of your view of rick and his writing as a whole. you can still love pjo! you can still love hoo! you can still like rick. that’s okay. don’t put them on a pedestal. form your own opinions, and let them shape your experience. 

i think he has done some good things. i think he can write well. but there’s also a lot of problems that should be addressed and that could be improved upon.

[sevens-evan]

opinion on DT? ik Noelle is nb and iirc at 3 of the writers are, but they've been called nbphobic rep?

yeah i got thoughts. putting them under a cut bc this is gonna be long

so, first off, dt isn’t nbphobic rep. that’s a dumb take. noelle is nb and has talked specifically about why dt reflects their experience with gender in this interview. to quote:

...we introduced the character of Double Trouble, who is a reptilian shapeshifter, which I love because I think my own gender is a shapeshifter. I always relate to the shapeshifter characters, they're in everything that I do. We got a lot of feedback from fans who were really really hungry for a human, nonbinary character. It is so interesting because I think when your gender doesn't conform, you tend to feel like an outsider in ways that I always related to aliens, monsters and robots. That's how those emotions represented themselves to me: to explore those through a shapeshifter, someone who has absolute control over their presentation to the world at all times, I found that was my absolute dream.

it’s just stupid to look at a nb character designed by a nb person to reflect their own identity and call it transphobic. you’d be more or less saying that their identity and experiences are transphobic, which is dumb as hell.

i think that some people take issue with dt as nb representation because they don’t relate to them. like, i don’t identify as nonbinary, i identify as genderqueer, but i don’t really relate to dt at all, except in one specific aspect that i’ll touch on in a bit. the gender fluidity and androgyny that they portray is not a universal nb experience. personally i’m firmly and comfortably masculine. lots of nb people don’t want to meet any standard of androgyny, and lots of nb people aren’t genderfluid, so it makes sense that they wouldn’t relate to a shapeshifting character. that’s fine. but i think some of those people are angry that the nb rep in the show doesn’t match their experiences, and are making stupid accusations as a response.

i’ve seen a number of different criticisms of dt as nb rep; the ones i tend to see a lot are that the only nb character in the show shouldn’t have been amoral, and that it sends a bad message to have a trans character ‘tricking’ other characters with their gender presentation.

as far as the first point goes, i think it’s somewhat of a valid criticism, but i suspect it’s an issue because of whatever corporate execs refused to sign off on gay people for four seasons. i imagine noelle had to fight really hard to get one (1) nb character onscreen. i doubt they could’ve gotten more than that. as far as the choice to make them amoral goes, i don’t think dt as an amoral character frames gender nonconformance as wrong or evil simply by being sort of evil and nb. they’re a bad guy, sure, but you spend a lot of time in spop rooting for bad guys. catra is a bad guy for like 85% of the show. scorpia is a bad guy for a good few seasons, and it’s kind of impossible to not root for her. i personally find dt to be a kind of charming character. dt’s gender nonconformance isn’t visually threatening or disgusting. even their lizard form is nonthreatening—a little weird, but not, like, ooh scary trans person. i don’t think it sends a message to the viewer that being gnc is bad.

as far as dt ‘tricking’ other characters with their gender: this is a criticism i’m personally torn on, because as a trans person, tricking cis people is, like, my second favorite hobby. that looks different for me than it does for dt, since i’m male-passing and i just like outing myself to watch cis people’s brains melt as they realize they can’t always clock a trans person, but i really like doing it. for me, my gender does kind of feel like a big trick i’m playing on the world sometimes, and i enjoy that feeling. but i also understand why having a nb character be a shapeshifting spy could be upsetting to people who don’t share that feeling with me. i think that the problem here is, again, the lack of nb rep in general. not just on spop, but in pretty much all mainstream media. there are nb people who relate to dt’s trickery, and a lot of nb people who don’t, and the issue is that there aren’t other nb characters that reflect those other nb experiences.

i think the most fair criticism that can be levied is that there should’ve been more nb characters on the show, reflecting more aspects of nb experiences. that same criticism can be levied at every single show that’s ever been made, pretty much, and it should be directed at executives and producers who decide what shows get made and how diverse they get to be. there are a huge number of ways in which someone can be nb, and until there’s enough space in the media to tell all of those stories—shapeshifting trickery, androgyny or a lack thereof—there’s always going to be someone who feels hurt when they don’t relate to a character meant to represent them.

basically, dt is not nbphobic rep. i understand how people reach that conclusion, but it’s a really fucking stupid conclusion to reach.

[airagorncharda]

I know this is kind of an outdated Steven Universe fandom gripe, but...

I find it really suspicious that people who are/were mad that Jasper has so far only been an antagonist keep saying that there are no buff butch protagonists, as though, like... Amethyst and Ruby don’t exist...? Or don’t count for some reason?

I agree wholeheartedly about the issues around Bismuth’s arc, and I agree that Jasper is an interesting character and I hope we see more of her (whether she changes for the better or remains an antagonist, I’m good either way). I’m also wholeheartedly on board with more buff butch gems, and I REALLY HOPE that they’re protags (or at least presented in a positive light) in the future. I’m not arguing any of those points.

What I AM saying is just that all these people angry about Jasper not (yet) being redeemed are flat out ignoring buff butch awesomeness that already exists on the show (Amethyst and Ruby). 

((Also, I know the other Amethysts and Jaspers from the Zoo hadn’t appeared yet when most of this anger was at it’s height, but they have now. Also Topaz.))

I just find it really suspicious that there are/were a lot of people people arguing for why “Jasper MUST be redeemed (or else the writers hate buff butch women)”, who conveniently forget that there ARE buff butch women on the show in protagonist roles ALREADY. And it makes me even more uncomfortable when the only three reasons I can think of for why people prioritize Jasper over Amethyst are:

Possibility #1) Jasper is coded as a man.

Let me be really clear, she’s not a man. The gems aren’t even necessarily women either, since they’re polymorphic sentient rocks from space (with the exception of Amethyst, who is a polymorphic sentient rock who was raised on earth among humans and human ideas of gender), but they’re perceived as women and that appears to be their preference for how they’re perceived.

Effectively, as far as we know, Gems are all women. There are no gem men aside from (as far as we know) Steven.

So gems do not have men. They certainly don’t have a gender based hierarchy in their society. They do HAVE a hierarchy, though, which in many ways functionally acts the way our patriarchy does. Gems are assigned roles at the moment of creation, and given privileges and powers and social expectations about their behavior and status based on that role.

Jasper is (and was expected to be) everything that OUR society expects (especially white) men to be. She has the privileges and social role that a man has in a patriarchy, she seems to feel entitled to it, and she seems to thoroughly enjoy it. She is, in many or all of the ways we’ve yet seen, the gem equivalent of hypermasculine. She also literally LOOKS like the standard male hero/superhero in a lot of ways (not all, but more than most/possibly all other characters on the show).

People (especially women) are conditioned to prioritize men. 

In a story with so few men, and especially so few hypermasculine men who behave or look like your standard White Male Hero, I find it REALLY suspicious that so many people jump at the opportunity to prioritize the one antagonistic character who really resembles that trope, especially when the rational for doing so (“she’s the only buff butch”) blatantly ignores other existing characters.

Possibility #2) Amethyst is short.

I’ve at least seen some people acknowledging Ruby (or the other Ruby’s) when they talk about Jasper being butch, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen people talk about Amethyst. And when the other Amethyst’s from the Zoo showed up, I saw some people who were very excited about them (which is good) in a way that they haven’t really ever been about OUR Amethyst (which is bad). 

What’s the difference between our Amethyst and those Amethysts again? Oh yeah, she’s short. 

As in, she literally has dwarfism.

((She was also (as I said) raised on earth among humans and human ideas of gender, and encouraged to be herself (whoever that is) rather than expected to and rewarded for being (the gem equivalent of) hypermasculine. But that jumps back to point #1, which is that our Amethyst isn’t “male” enough to be prioritized.))

Back to her being short (which is also something humans don’t associate with men or masculinity, and especially not male heroes)... 

She’s butch, and she’s buff, and she’s masculine too because she literally feels so masculine sometimes that she shapeshifts into a male persona to go wrestle. But because she’s short she doesn’t count for some reason.

Which really irks me, because that’s something the character herself has been dealing with (thus the male persona being tall).

Also, the people arguing that Jasper being a villain implies that the writers don’t like butch women (and therefore are letting down butch women) are blatantly ignoring a butch woman with dwarfism possibly BECAUSE she has dwarfism. You’re not being progressive by ignoring Amethyst’s existence to demand more butch representation-- especially when you’re demanding more butch rep by denying the butch rep that exists and is also rep for people with dwarfism. 

Possibility #3) They don’t find Amethyst or Ruby attractive enough.

This is a gross combination of #1 & #2. 

Basically, people are conditioned to find big buff characters attractive, especially when they act entitled and aggressive and... like Jasper. We’re all taught to think of THAT character trope as the hero, and to think of them as attractive, and therefore sympathetic. We’re taught to expect conventionally attractive characters (especially men) to be heroes, and for those characters to be the center of the narrative. 

It creates mental dissonance to have them as the villain.

I wholeheartedly believe this is one of the reasons people have been coming up with “Rose Quartz is secretly evil” headcanons since the beginning of the show. She’s a fat woman and a hero, and people CANNOT ACCEPT THAT.

Ruby is constantly referred to by the fandom as cute, and Amethyst is... largely ignored, to be honest. Again, chubby (possibly gender fluid) woman with dwarfism who is a protagonist and a hero. People don’t shit talk her as much as they do Pearl or Lapis (no surprise there, people shit-talk femmes CONSTANTLY; femmes can never do anything right), but they don’t really defend her or do meta of her either (sorta like Garnet, the black woman, hmmmm I wonder what that means, no wait it’s racism).

Jasper is a thin(ish) buff White Male Hero stand-in in a show that doesn’t have ANY of those. She’s the closest thing this show HAS to the hot white heroic man, and when she wasn’t a hero people lost their collective shit.

To be clear, again, I'm very on board with having female characters who are masculine, and who are buff and/or butch. I’m just side-eyeing the people who are demanding more of a very specific (and slightly suspicious) form of butch representation, and are willing to piss all over all the other amazing representation we’ve gotten out of this show to do it. 

Jasper is NOT more important than Amethyst. 

Do not take Amethyst or Ruby for granted. 

If you want an aggressive destructive muscly butch who is still on the heroes side, we’ve got Sugilite. We’ve got the other Amethysts and Jaspers now, and Topaz, and Rutile is thin but she’s not femme at all. 

And the show is still going, guys. 

I’m never going to tell people not to criticize media when it fucks up, and I’m never going to tell people not to ask for more or for better.

You can absolutely say “I want more buff butch protagonists who get to act like I’ve always want to act so that little girls know they don’t have to be femme” and I GET that and I AGREE with that. 

You can also absolutely say “I hope Jasper is redeemed, because I like her as a character, like her voice acting, like her potential, and/or like her physical design” because that’s also TOTALLY FINE.

What I don’t agree with is this continuous stream of “Jasper is the only version of buff butch that I will accept, I refuse to acknowledge the existing buff butch protags, and if you don’t redeem Jasper (at the expense of Lapis specifically) then the show is terrible and the writers are misogynists” that I used to see and hear about a lot. 

I find it endlessly suspicious.

Again, I know this is an old-ass gripe, I just never had the words to articulate it when it was at the height of relevance, nor the energy to defend it if/when people would have come for my throat over it.