#also ppl in the tags are getting real worked up about their cishet woman rep……

[kabutone]

OR maybe art can be interpreted multiple ways? the way it’s always been? this is an incredibly bad faith take. you assume people hc mizu as trans bc they’re a “strong female character” and you jump to label these people misogynists? or do you suppose those trans hcs may come from something like, idk, mizu living and presenting as male for many years? they can be read in multiple different ways. i even saw someone in the tags saying they could be relatable to trans women (and ive seen people in the reblogs of This post saying bes is FOR cis women and NOT for anyone else)

after the life mizu’s lived i wouldn’t be surprised if they’ve never gotten to know who they are beyond revenge. they even said they have “no interest in being happy, only satisfied” do you think they’ve ever given themselves the chance to introspect on who they are outside of revenge?? the writers can take it any way they want and it could still make sense. i’m not saying you can’t see it as a story of oppression against women, cause it very much is, but there is a Lot of room for further interpretation and you can’t just act like that doesn’t exist either

ultimately the writers stated it’s about not feeling like you belong anywhere.

“And what it is to not feel like you belong anywhere really is something that a lot of people resonate with.”

you could draw parallels between people not accepting mizu as white AND japanese; there is only room for them to be “japanese and i’ll pretend that’s all you are” or “demon” but they don’t get to be both. they’ve lived as both a man and a woman. they may end up preferring one over the other, but if not, isn’t there room for both?

if someone says a song means something to them are they suddenly wrong because it means something different to you? people in the reblogs keep saying “trans mascs it’s not all about you!!!!” well it’s not all about you either. a good story is one that can resonate with many people on many levels. the ACTUAL point of the story is living as someone who isn’t accepted as who they are, and that can resonate with everyone on some level. don’t be mad because you don’t think other people get to relate to something in a different way.

I don’t know how some of you could watch blu eyed samurai and still debate Mizu’s gender like hello ??? media literacy dead ??? Mizu is a woman, that’s the whole fucking point !!!! That’s her biggest crime !!!

Eiji couldn’t care less about her heritage but he literally cut her off when she tried to confess her gender !!!!

Mikio was fine with her being half white but the moment she dared to show him that -as a woman- she was a greater fighter it was over. His ego was irreparably hurt because a woman defeated him !!!!

And he calls her a monster !!!! He calls her a monster because she’s a woman and she’s strong she’s capable she can fight she isn’t submissive and that’s the point !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[nikadd]

i think that. and this is not just abt supernatural but thinking abt spn is what got me to this point. i think that sometimes (presumed) cishet writers would come up with a gay joke out of innate mundane homophobia bc of the backlog of gay jokes for inspiration and it’s really a gay joke by straight ppl for straight ppl. but what these people don’t consider (simply bc they don’t think gay people exist when they write gay jokes) is that sometimes these jokes could actually describe an actually funny situation or thought that is familiar and recognizable by actual gay people. so then it’s not actually that much of a stretch for gay people to presume that a gay character could make this joke (or this joke could have been made abt a gay character) and - like other parts of dialogue or scene actions that are not that joke - could give some insight into this character.

i know i’m basically chewing this whole argument up to feed baby birds but what i mean is there is this tinge of clueless-to-ignorant lack of consideration for what these details do to characterization and character arcs, and so i understand (but, have to note here lest i’m misunderstood, do not excuse) the writers’ utter confusion at actually gay reading of their work, bc they only have straight audiences in mind. sure, some gay jokes said by and about certain characters on spn are quite homophobic in the gay rep/trope way, but as someone who’s gay irl and knows other irl gay ppl, i can easily picture some of them either saying or doing something that spn joke described.

i’m still thinking abt that comment? tag? something that said “haha dean being bi is my favorite running gag of the show” and how much that actually reveals abt, well, everything they were doing. bc sure, it was definitely in many ways a joke bc contrast and opposites are funny, and it’s funny to put a super masculine womanizer guy into situations and spaces of gay desire on both his and other men’s side, and you get a real kick out of those moments bc isn’t it just something uncomfortable and taboo. but then there’s him as a person, who constantly experiences these things, who is shown to be building strong emotional bonds with men, have a difficult relationship with his masculinity and masculine models of his life, show desire and attachment towards other male characters, whether it’s a monster in a male form that successfully seduces him, a trickster angel in a fictional sexy male doctor form that is also set up to affect specifically him, or an angel in a male form who is his biggest non-familial emotional connection.

there is a strong separation as to what a person does and what a fictional character does, as there are specific rules for fictional characters and what their behavior, words, and actions in general can represent. but when we talk about gay characters, the rules are somehow a lot more specific, because we simply don’t have much variety to how gay characters are written, so writers have to either rely more or less fully on previous examples, or try to base certain things on how real gay people are. then you run into a wall bc sometimes how real gay people are doesn’t fit too well into the rules and tropes, and you have to adjust. this is why i think a lot of times people prefer fanfiction of non-canon gay ships to how actual gay representation is written in movies and tv, bc there are so many elements that are, while not necessarily untrue - like, sure, there are coming out scenes and such, for example - seem to be limited in the ways how they can play out.

all that is to say that sometimes cishet writers do stumble into an organic way to set up a gay character, but do not recognize them as such, and there’s a lot of conflict that follows. what i think is that there is a limit to what an intention can excuse, and there are many conversations to be had as to how strong and explicit certain implications have to be to be considered canon.