#also excuse any grammar errors; didn’t proofread beyond general thought cohesion

[writesailingdreams]

Hey! Long time no chat! I just saw your tags on kaizoku-ni-naru's post about depiction vs. framing of queer characters in One Piece. Just curious on where you fell on the subject. I found the delineation between depiction and framing useful but was curious whether you agreed that a character could be represented badly yet still be presented positively

Yo!

Where I fell on the subject? I thought it seemed reasonable enough to reblog, and I didn’t initially think much beyond “cool meta.”

I DID super agree about the bad representation of the Momoiro okama. While I don’t think masculine coded—hairy legs, strong jawlines—folk in dresses and heavy makeup is necessarily bad representation, the way they were visually depicted was very Yikes! And atrocious. (See: post time-skip comparative scenes between them and Hancock winking; sense of being repulsive and dangerous while fighting off the marines. Bleh!)

As for the second part of your question... I’m not actually sure. The way I see it, bad framing is somewhat analogous to stereotyping, and that’s something to avoid as much as possible. So, can any bad representation be presented positively?

I feel like I can imagine feeling it’s possible, if a story, through action or dialogue or visual staging, implies a character is someone good, admirable, worthy of respect. So, the argument would follow, if a story codes a character as good, then even if the representation isn’t great, the character (and maybe the stereotypic traits/bad representation) are seen less negatively.

But!! Isn’t using bad representation (or stereotypical shorthand) just perpetuating stereotypes and consequently other kinds of aggression against people? So, having sat down and thought about it, I do wonder if it’s possible if you dig into the undercurrent social context.

Overall, I’ve really only found the Momoiro okama to be depicted/represented badly. But I’m not well versed in Japanese queer coding to be able to recognize bad or good representation in Bon Clay or Ivankov. (I’m also not super great at noticing story tropes, let alone stereotypes, without being told about them or learning about them myself.)

As to gender specifically (as that was in my tags), I feel I could keep running through thoughts and adding and revising, but here’s some thoughts I had thinking about all this:

I do think it’s neat (and interesting) that Yamato and Kiku are the first two gender-diverse queer characters to be depicted right off as allies. Bon Clay was introduced as a villain, while Ivankov was indifferent about helping (from what I remember). So that’s unique.

I also feel Kiku is the most...gender compliant, in terms of depiction. She’s depicted at the start as a woman in appearance, with the exception of her size, and continues to be (flashback notwithstanding).

Not that Yamato doesn’t identify as a man at his introduction, but he’s not designed to abide to a certain physical depiction of what a man is supposed to look like. (And that’s a whole other spiel on why he’s been such an emotional punch in the face for me)

What were your thoughts or what did you think?