#something something queer narratives only being acceptable when they're mainstream

[thorniest-rose]

find it really fascinating that modern shows about queer characters and queer desire & romance are all very sweet and twee and funny (Heartstopper, Good Omens, OFMD, also that Red, White & Royal Blue movie)... where are the shows about queer desire that are violent and messy and hard-hitting? I want stories where queer desire is something carnal and complicated,,, these other examples all feel so safe and antiseptic.

[drinkthestars]

spoilers for nimona (2023)

just watched the new nimona movie and it was fantastic! great children's movie, excellent animation and clean plot progression. but it's missing something: the subversive morality that i first experienced when reading nimona as a kid.

in the actual comic, nimona killed people. she was morally gray- she took that step into murder and atrocity. in the movie, she's a punk kid who likes to make (admittedly pretty scary) faces and joke around about death, but it doesn't seem like she's actually gotten around to the real murder part.

and you know what? i get it.

this movie isn't meant to be the book, and that's fine. it's a wholesome misunderstood hero story for kids and a non-controversial way to have positive queer representation without compromising the themes with characters that aren't 100% good and sweet and lovely. it's great for a mainstream audience.

here's the thing: it would've been so much more INTERESTING if nimona WAS the killer. i was expecting it as a plot twist the whole movie- nimona impersonating the director (who was, tbh, not a very interesting twist villain, especially with her lack of forshadowing and her very easy and quick admit to her crimes- you'd think such a high-ranking individual would know better than to confess her sins and then murder the direct descent of gloreth in her office)

nimona has been trying and trying to convince ballister to reform the system the whole movie, saying that he SHOULD be mad, the INSTITUTE is what's in the wrong, not JUST the director. they can't run away- they have to fight back! that would've been such good foreshadowing for her having orchestrated the whole thing, with her being clearly shown to be able to shift into other people.

i'm almost convinced that the writers initially planned for that as the plot progression and then edited it to make it more family-friendly.

so in an ideal world, here's what i think should've happened:

nimona actually does frame the director for the murder- but as revenge for experimenting on and torturing her, as in the book. ballister is pardoned by the public and by ambrosius, but then the director shows the video footage of nimona shapeshifting into her, and the consequent sword-swapping. in a nutshell, nimona uses ballister to kill the queen and tries to manipulate him to help the world change, for a place where she isn't tortured needlessly just for being different.

ballister, betrayed, fights with nimona (insert key weakness that she has told only him here) and she is captured. the director informs him of the experiments on nimona (while dismissing her as a heartless monster) and he is horrified. the director reveals her new plan to get rid of (non-existent) potential monsters in the city like nimona (witch-hunting, reference to eugenics, you get it). ballister and ambrosius free nimona, and they work together to stop the enby-murder laser or whatever, nimona sacrificing herself in the process (or does she...). the ending remains the same from there.

the unfortunate issue with queer media at the moment is that people need it to be pure- a depiction of a morally gray queer character right now might throw the whole theme into question. after all, if queer people aren't perfect, than they're dead. which is interesting, because that's kind of the theme of nimona, in a sense. a narrative about people who are different, and for that reason alone are unforgivable monsters.

queer and disabled folk (see attorney woo, a show i love, for a similar problem) aren't allowed to be flawed in media. if they're not paragons of humanity or supergeniuses, they can't be accepted. nd stevenson was one of the first authors i ever saw really subvert that in widely known media meant for teens.

real life people aren't going to be as forgiving as the movies make it look. i liked the old nimona because she reflected that- she was not a sinless matyr in the end- she gave into her rage and despair and let it warp her. did that make her a monster? no- it made her human. queer media is trying its best, but in the end the issue is the very inhumanity of perfection.

[wolfnanaki]

Not the anon(s) from previous asks. Don't feel obligated to reply to this, as like you, I'm tired of giving the "parody" any form of atention anymore. Plus, the reaction to that PS tweet yesterday made me realize, regardless of the ocasional shittyness, that almost nobody actually knows or cares about the parody in the grand scheme of things anyway. The dino-game only needs to come out and be good, and I'm optimistic it will be.

I just wanted to thank you, a lot, for warning people about the disturbing content of the parody, wich has no content warning (even horror games that rely on shock have one), all this time. Especially the sudden gory ending. For a while its fans kept trying to bait people into going in completely blind, as if hoping it will shock them, but that seems to have passed. Thanks a lot for helping spare people from a potential disturbing (in a bad, non horror game way) experience. Hope you are doing well.

Thank you very much for the kind words. ❤️ I'm doing well. Still trying to find work after my temp job ended, running out of money, but I'm holding up by some miracle.

Yeah, I've been gleaming over the recent comments too, and thankfully "that game" hasn't entered mainstream consciousness yet. People just seem to be surprised to see GVH at all, many seem under the impression it was quietly cancelled after the initial negative reception to the reveal trailer.

And yeah, I think while I don't want to give "that game" any more attention than it's already gotten, I at least want to put out a warning for people who might be going into it blind or based on misinformation. There was a brief time where it was being marketed as "GVH was cancelled, but some brave and loving anonymous fans from 4chan picked up the broken pieces and finished the game". Lots of the people who promote the game claim it to be a heartwarming story about friendship and self-acceptance, but they have to leave out the worst parts of it (the stale memes, the racism, the anti-trans narrative, the school shooting, etc.). All I did was point out the parts they're hiding, so people are informed before they decide to try it. And if I have to face harassment from the game's fans for doing so (which I have, from both 4chan and Twitter), then so be it.

Goodbye Volcano High is a special game to me. When it was first announced, it was the most interesting game to me in the whole PS5 reveal stream. Between dozens of the same AAA slop was this indie game with queer anthro dinosaurs. The devs said something to the affect of "we know we're going to face a lot of anti-queer hate for this but we wanted to tell this story" and that moved me. I hope people give this game a chance and it does well.

[darkshrimpemotions]

Hi! just wanted to let you know, re: the last of us--the 'heartbreaking gay love story' is less a 'bury your gays' than it is a really beautiful portrait of a loving relationship even in the midst of a bleak world. there's no brutality that happens to either characters, and the heartbreak at the end is that of a life well lived, not one gone too soon. and wrt representation, ellie is a lesbian in the game and they're keeping her gay in the tv show so bill and frank aren't just a one off.

Love and light but I am zero percent interested in further queer rep from a piece of media whose first queer rep attempt ends in a double suicide.

Yes, I understand the narrative context of the death and that it makes sense for the story and is an improvement on the game. I get all of that. I don't need it explained to me, actually.

Because that doesn't make it not a bury your gays. That doesn't magically exempt it from being two more dead queer characters in a long history of dead queer characters. That doesn't isolate it from the cultural context of queer characters constantly being relegated to the margins of mainstream media where they can only exist insofar as they can be palatable to or ignored by straight audiences. That they framed it really well in the story doesn't absolve them of adding to that legacy, any more than giving a narrative reason for a sexist costume absolves a writer of putting women in sexist costumes.

If you enjoyed it or got something positive out of it, I'm glad for you. I'm glad it was beautiful, for you. I'm not even saying full stop that writers should never write about death when it comes to queer characters. After all, we all do die eventually. But they and straight audiences need to understand what context those stories are existing in. Bury your gays isn't about the method or narrative surroundings of the death. It's about the constant, consistent prevalence of death being the ending to queer stories, and what that's like to experience as a queer person.

And to be frank, I am on week 2 of clueless straight friends and relatives constantly begging me to watch this shit with no warnings attached, because they don't see any issue with shoving my queer disabled ass at a story where a queer disabled man and his lover kill themselves. And so my patience with people trying to explain to me why it's not really bury your gays is tissue paper fucking thin at this point.

It IS part of the bury your gays trope, and also this new little method of queer catching TV writers are doing where they squeeze the whole love story into a single episode so their straight viewers can easily skip it. And I'm so fucking tired of this shit.

If writers are going to claim to write for us, they need to actually think about what it's like for actual queer people to experience these stories. And straight people recommending these stories to their queer loved ones also need to consider what it's like for us to have every tryhard pseudo-progressive straight person in our lives badger us to watch these stories while withholding any trigger warnings so we can "experience it fully," because to them queers dying is a plot device, acceptable if well enough executed.

It isn't for us.

[toxicsamruby]

1/7 MM okay gotcha gotcha. I was thinking about this on a smaller scale, where i don't think discussing racism in supernatural should be "fun and interesting" (phrase you used in your original post that rubbed me the wrong way b/c [hot take] I don't think racist tropes reminiscent of the Birth of a Nation and the policing of poor black communities are fun and interesting. they're horrible. but, like you said, we shouldn't shy away from horrible things), but no yeah i get what you're saying about

2/7 people showing the same enthusiasm, willing participation, and depth when talking about this stuff as w/gender&sexuality. I agree with that AND it's important to keep in mind, especially with a fanbase that's largely white, whom these analyses are for and who is writing them (b/c a white person's racial reading isn't the same as a bipoc's). But, again, that's on the smaller scale, which appears to have more to do with personal accountability and discussion norms.

3/7 AND i also get what you're saying about using the entirety of supernatural to examine "american attitudes about the Other" and how that needs to be broken down in ethnic/racial/culture identities just as it is with queer indentities and yes i agree. as for the marketing/monetary engagement thing, i may have been speaking out of turn there because i don't know a ton about marketing or audience appeal and i also wasn't invested in all the spn meta/BTS stuff until recently.

4/7 what I said was purely my observations of the very specific 'spn renaissance' tumblr circle, which appeared different from the, say, twitter circles that pay for merch and whatnot (again, this may not be accurate, it's just from what i've seen). HOWEVER, that being said, if we're speaking specifically about the long-term, /larger/ cultural impact supernatural has, I 100% agree that it needs to be recognized and condemned as a racist and all-around patriarchal show. I did forget that spn made

5/7 so many headlines about both queerbaiting and having a queer character or whatever, and the same headlines need to be made about how it treats bipoc and other minorities. Although supernatural is a mess and considered cringey and a dead horse, it still holds a significant amount of power and (at least some) reputability in media. and this is all despite its misogyny and homophobia and cisheteronormativity (this is the case for so many shows, not just spn). I guess i was just concerned about

6/7 'ok, what if mainstream starts having these conversations about racism very specifically in a way that normalizes it and makes it seem hatecrime-but we'll-allow-it,' so now we have this monster of a show that KNOWS it's racist but doesn't really care. But it's equally as terrible to not point it out. But it doesn't matter anyways, because the show is over now, and it's not like they're gonna give reparations to the actors they killed and the people they hurt. your point about us having these

7/7 conversations (in a way that does not make it seem like like fun ideas to ponder over) being the only thing we CAN do to lessen the power the White Narrative of Supernatural (both meta and in-text) really resonates, and i hadn't thought of that but i totally agree. in other words lmao, fuck this show

yeah “fun” might’ve been the wrong word choice for all the reasons u gave i really didn’t mean to trivialize racism as a discussion and i see what u mean especially w how people have responded to the homophobia of supernatural me included like saying oh its homophobic but its funny so it’s fine and ur absolutely right that we Cant allow the discussion of race to go the same way (and honestly ur intuition was right bc in the tags of that post theres white people saying we SHOULD take it as lightly as the homophobia). so yeah the phrasing was my bad

but my general point stands. like i personally find it really fulfilling and interesting to talk abt how supernatural (and other fiction) replicates these american ideas about the Other bc supernatural is a FASCINATING microcosm of american culture (and of course in part bc i Am an american other)! and that post was mostly in response to how white fans seem to shy away from these extremely complex and interesting conversations bc they consider discussion of racism a chore like something they Have to do so they can say “it was bad that they killed off kevin tran. see i engaged critically! now back to the meta that relates to Me and My experiences”

and of course the analysis that becomes generally accepted and talked abt by fans shapes the actual presence of the show in pop culture. so we should do our best to write good and thoughtful and compassionate analysis of EVERY aspect of the text, especially one so deeply embedded as the race element.

basically yeah ur right and i think we pretty much agree. fuck this show! thank you for sending me these messages by the way im glad we could talk this out :)

[ailuronymy]

Hello Grey! I was messing w/ the character generator, and I got "Callous apprentice molly with a grey-and-white pelt who is good at tricking others and doesn't make promises." Now, this would be *perfect* for an antagonist in my fanfic, who confesses her love for the main char, so maybe when they're warriors they can be mates, but the main char doesn't want a mate, and rejects her. She gets angry and calls out main char's BFF, convinced that she was lying to not hurt her feelings, and (cont.)

(cont.-callous grey & white molly) challenges the tom to a fight in secret, and he accepts. soon after the battle begins, main char 2 realizes she’s out for blood. now, after a scar, the fur can grow back white, and in her clan’s culture, white pelts are believed to be unlucky, & therefore unattractive. she plans to scar him badly, and that all his fur’ll grow back white, leaving the main char to choose her over him. now here’s the problem: main char is also a molly. I don’t want -cont again :I--cont. grey and white molly- I don’t want people thinking I’m putting gay chars in an evil light, but I find I prefer her as a molly than a tom. What should I do to establish I have no beef with gay/lesbian people/cats?

Hello, Ruddles! Thank you for writing in. This one is going to be a long answer, and most of it is going to be me asking you questions, I’m afraid. I’d like for you to consider them as carefully and truthfully as you can, but don’t worry, there’s not going to be quiz! They’re the kind of questions that you only have to answer to yourself, and I believe by asking these kinds of questions–whenever we’re creating–helps us become better writers and more self-aware people in general.

First of all, I’d like to ask are there other gay characters in your story? Is the protagonist gay/same-gender attracted? Is her best friend? Are any non-villainous supporting cast (with central speaking roles) gay? Having a gay villain in an otherwise straight story portrays a very different picture–and ideology–than a gay villain in a story that has a variety of other gay, non-villainous characters. The former inherently aligns gayness (and queerness) with deviant or evil behaviour–and that’s really not great. It’s also been a blatant long-time staple of Western media and a fundamental part of how character archetypes are conceptualised in film. (If you wanted to read more about that, I can recommend following up on the concept of “queer-coding.” It’s a built-in aspect of a lot of traditional mainstream television/film these days, and features prominently in Disney productions as well as many other franchises). 

The second thing I’d like to ask is what is it that makes you prefer her as a molly? What we like and dislike–and especially why–can be slippery to grasp, and harder to articulate, but as a creator, it’s something that you should ask yourself from time to time. What is it about this character in this story that makes you feel the role must be female? Because characters in stories are playing roles, and I think people sometimes forget that. Often we get attached to them (which is normal and part of the creating process for many people!) but they are still only non-living creations which we place in situations we’ve invented. We are making decisions, and that makes us responsible. Therefore, much like how we might play a game of Cluedo if finding the motive was the goal, intermittently asking yourself, “Why this person, why this place, why this action?” is a good way to interrogate your own habits, biases, goals, and assumptions, and that can only help you make informed creative choices. (You can even consider it practice for the questions people–especially critics–would eventually ask you about your story and your creative process). 

That’s not to say I’m encouraging you to turn her into a male character, mind you! If you did that, you would have the same story, albeit one that (unhappily) looked much more familiar to most people: an envious scorned man who acts out revenge on a woman who won’t date him, through violence against her friends/family. Although the exact details might change, I think we’ve all heard these stories in real life, about men who don’t know how to accept the answer “no.” I believe Warriors’ canon story of Ashfur isn’t too dissimilar either?–although, I admit, it’s been a very long time since I’ve read any Warriors book and my memory is foggy on specifics. Perhaps an additional question worth asking in this light is, to borrow a quote of Stanisław Jerzy Lec, is it progress if a cannibal uses a knife and fork? Or, a more relevant version, is it feminist/equality/progress/[whatever word you prefer] if a woman is the one abusing other women, instead of a man? (My argument would firmly be no). 

The third question I’d like to ask is what is your reason for this story? In other words, do you believe it needs to be told, and told in this way? Importantly: what is this story doing that isn’t adding to a history of homophobic narratives and cultural perceptions? What is it doing that is adding to those narratives and perceptions, and what can you do to change that? How will you feel and how will you react if you write this story, put it out in the world, and receive feedback that it is, in fact, hurtful or offensive? If you’re concerned that you might not be able to tell a story in a way that isn’t going to be offensive (or your worry about the possibility of criticism is greater than your conviction in the value of your story), that might be a sign that you shouldn’t tell that particular story and should instead change it to something that doesn’t hold that fear for you. It’s not failure to evaluate your work and adapt when you feel out of your depth, or uncertain, or don’t believe in what you’re doing as much as you want to, or you’re not creating to the standard you want to be. That’s self-awareness, and it’s a valuable skill. It takes humility and maturity to make mistakes (or any kind of creative misstep) and learn from them. 

As far as advice goes, I feel that posing these questions to you is the best that I can offer. The short answer to the question of “how do I avoid being called homophobic for my writing?” is “don’t write homophobic narratives,” but I’m hoping that by asking these questions back to you, you–and anyone else with similar concerns and questions–can develop a practical way of thinking through these issues now and from here on. The solution isn’t not to write about gay characters: it’s to learn how to write about gay characters in a way that doesn’t mimic and perpetuate straight narratives, beliefs, and prejudices about gayness and gay characters. Learning how to do this is a skill, and it’s one I believe everyone can learn–just like learning how to use punctuation properly, or write snappy dialogue–and, like most skills, it can start off being a bit rough and difficult if you’re not used to it and things you make will probably not be perfect first go. But keep going anyway, because that’s how you become a master pianist or an athlete or a great writer. Good luck with your writing, Ruddles. I hope this helps.