#gay for whatever crowley is presenting at the time

[agentjadelaufeyson]

I'M SORRY ??? Are we just going gloss over this lore??

thank you for this @neil-gaiman

S2E3

[davidtennantgenderenvy]

My Two Cents On The “ Is David Tennant Queer” Drama

As some of you know, I spent a solid third of the past year working on a movie-length video essay about David Tennant. This video essay features an eight minute section titled “Gender, Vulnerability, and Why David Tennant Is A Queer Icon”, which does not speculate on David’s own sexuality, but discusses the queer coding and subversion of gender norms in plenty of his roles and his importance as an ally to the LGBT community. At the same time, I was also coming to terms with my own identity as nonbinary and bisexual, and it ended up playing a crucial role in me finally working up the courage to come out to my parents. Characters like Crowley and the Doctor, both in terms of how they present themselves and how and who they love, have been absolutely instrumental in me developing my queer identity, and my comments section was full of people who had had similar experiences, who’d realized they were trans, nonbinary, gay, etc thanks to David and his characters. And as a result, I won’t deny that if David himself were to be queer, it would mean a lot to me.

Do I think David is queer? It’s certainly possible. I see a lot of how I express my queerness in how david chooses to express himself, most prominently through his frequent queer coding of characters who don’t necessarily have to be played as such. This can especially be seen through his Shakespeare characters, such as Richard, Hamlet, and some would argue Benedick as well. When I was 15 I played Mercutio in Romeo and Juliet, who I chose to play as a closeted young gay man harboring an unrequited crush on Romeo. I think I saw this role subconsciously as an outlet for my own repressed queerness, both of gender and sexuality, as I had experienced an unrequited crush on my female best friend the previous year which I was still in denial about. I’ve described my gender identity as “a girl with a chaotic tortured gay man inside of her that needs to be let out every once in a while”, which has never been more true than with Mercutio- a character who I might add, I took a great deal of inspiration from David when playing! In terms of using roles as an outlet for one’s queerness, I could absolutelt see this being true with David, especially when it comes to Crowley, who seems to have had an impact on David’s style, behavior, etc in a rather similar way to how he’s impacted me. I don’t want to act like David wearing pink docs means he must be gay, I think people should be allowed to wear whatever they want regardless of sexuality, but taken in conjunction with so many other things about him, it does make one wonder, and the fact that a seemingly straight man has been so many people’s queer awakening is a bit puzzling to say the least. I won’t pretend that these “signs” (if you interpret them that way), haven’t been increasing somewhat in the past year, and if I got to share my own coming out journey with the man who inspired it, I would be absolutely thrilled. I also can’t specifically think of an instance where David has SAID he is straight, as opposed to Taylor swift, who has.

With all of that said, where I personally draw the line is when mere speculation crosses into interfering with the subject’s personal relationships and the sense that one is OWED something. I believe that what matters to David more than anything is being a husband and a father. I believe he adores Georgia and his children and would not do anything in the world that he believes would jeopardize his family. As happy as I would be for David if he were to come out (probably as bi) I realize that that would put so much unwanted attention on his marriage and family and I think that’s the last thing he wants. I don’t think it’s IMPOSSIBLE that he and Michael Sheen are having a passionate love affair behind everyone’s backs, but I absolutely don’t consider it my place to insist that they are, because as much as I may feel like I do, I don’t know these people! And besides, if David were cheating on Georgia, he really would not be the person I thought he was.

So many queer people see themselves in David and his characters, and that is beautiful. And I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with having theories that David might be queer himself. However, it must be acknowledged that these theories are THEORIES, and they should not be used to invalidate people’s real life relationships- after all, it’s totally possible to be bi/pan and also be in a loving and healthy heterosexual relationship like David and Georgia at least seem to be in! If David were in fact “one of us”, I would welcome him with the openest of open arms, but unless and until he himself decides to proclaim himself that way, I will not expect anything of him other than to be the incredible artist and person we know and love.

[ouidamforeman]

This may make me look like an idiot bc I can’t articulate myself BUT!!!!!!!! Big Queer Good Omens meta incoming

I want to talk about This Neil Gaiman ask for a minute because I figured out why I really like his blanket response to this “discourse” a lot but still somewhat disagree on the nuance, and why fandom attitudes about this bother me much much more than his open ended response like this one

Under a read more because im going to get Insane

First of all this is going to be riddled with my own viewpoints on queerness as a transmasculine nonbinary person who reads too much theory so if u disagree please be polite lol

So like. To begin with I really don’t think Neil is obligated to understand these nuances or even comment on them, let alone explain them to fans desperate for validation, so the fact that he’s been able to answer so eloquently is pretty impressive considering how vicious fandom is. But I want to specifically talk about what I think he means here and why that seems to bother fandom so much sometimes, and how fan interpretation of these ideas he presents can get Really weird and interesting imo.

In my view, Neil is answering this from a Doylist perspective, as in like. To the real life human audience, angels and demons are inherently queer because they don’t fit into traditional human definitions of genders and sexualities. This especially comes across in his insistence that Aziraphale and Crowley aren’t gay because they aren’t human men, but they ARE queer. This literally just looks to me like him saying “yeah so no angels and demons fit into these categories so they’re definitely queer from our perspective but I understand ‘gay’ as being two men and i don’t think that fits because it’s narrow” and while I disagree on some nuances here for reasons I’ll get into I think this makes total sense as an author describing how, from his perspective, an audience is intended to view these nonhuman characters.

However, I’m much more interested in a more Watsonian explanation of how A&C are queer, one that’s much more relativistic and honestly not something I expect Neil to go over every time he gets another ask about this???? My opinion has always been that A&C choosing human queer masculinity is significant and that it gives evidence to them being nonbinary, transmasc, gay, ace, aro, anything that people headcanon really. Because they are presenting themselves as queer in a HUMAN way in universe imo, which makes them queer not just by the standards of the audience but by the standards of other angels and demons in the story? I think that the fact that they were created as sexless and genderless and then CHOSE human gender presentations, whether nonbinary or not, that reflected themselves, and then them being in love with each other in a human way IS what makes them queer, not Just the idea that an angel without a gender or sexuality/romantic or other relationship orientation is inherently queer from the average human’s perspective. People who just want them to be Human Cis Gay Men are really missing this idea I think.

The thing is though. And I don’t think this is Neil’s problem to solve or whatever, nor does it mean “stop liking that angels and demons are genderless”. The thing that annoys the shit out of me. Is that fandom, even queer fandom, took Neil’s Doylist explanation of celestial beings’ gender status and just didn’t think any further about it. To this day people insist that A&C MUST be nonbinary forever just because they’re an angel and demon and were made that way. Like literally just inventing Fantasy Biological Essentialism again which is annoying as hell to me, another nonbinary person. Again, the fact that they were created without any sense of gender or biological sex and then chose any humanish gender for themselves at all whether nonbinary or not is what makes them queer in universe I feel. I think the “they’re an angel and demon so they’re inherently nonbinary and can’t be anything else” is shit tbh.

To reiterate, I think Neil is responding about this from a Doylist perspective aka “to the real life audience all angels and demons are queer because they don’t fit into human genders and sexualities” but I am focused much more on the Watsonian idea that A&C are queer in universe bc angels and demons can choose their gender presentations like humans can and everyone else hasn’t figured it out bc they haven’t been on earth to figure out what gender even is. I feel fandom gets weird about this because lots of people still see gender as something solely internal and inherent, when I genuinely don’t think that’s all it is. It’s internal feeling, external projection/behavior, and both of those as a reflection of social experience all at once. The feelings and internal sense of Knowing your gender or lack thereof is inherent to your self identity, but your gender is also informed by what you understand genders as, and what presentations you understand and have access to! Aziraphale and Crowley can be Human Genders because, because they’ve been on earth, they 1)know what gender is, 2)can see those feelings reflected in themselves, and 3)through that understanding choose how to present based on their feelings! They don’t just have to be genderless celestial beings in the sense angels are if they don’t feel like it anymore! They can be like “oh actually I’m a queer man” or “oh I’m nonbinary but in the way that I’m among humans and I’m not a man or woman.” I just feel like only considering them queer from a human or angel perspective but not both is sort of undermining the themes in the text against bioessentialism in favor of the instant validation of “oh they’re angels so they must be nonbinary.” Perhaps having any human gender presentation is queer to the average angel. Our internal feelings and sense of self knowledge as queer people is inherent. How we act on those things and assign meaning and labels to them can be anything! A&C can be anything they feel like! They don’t have to be the classic celestial beings above gender! I feel like they would love and have fallen into human gender customs just from so long on earth, and that doesn’t mean they can’t be nonbinary or agender. It means they, as a part of humanity, saw and understood human genders and realized what gender they were in relation, whatever you headcanon that to be. And that’s more queer than “god made them without sex and gender so I guess their species makes them inherently one thing”!!!!!!

[mxlfoydraco]

Which are the Drarry fic that you have re-read more than any other?

These are from my reread pile! The first four several times over. :)

Around You Moves by ignatiustrout (29k)

Harry knew Draco was gay when he invited him to move in. He’s never had a problem with this. So why does he feel so weird about Draco bringing men home all of a sudden?

Number Seven by sara_holmes (253k)

Harry already has small children, an ex-wife, annoying colleagues and an international crime ring to deal with. So when Draco Malfoy reappears after eight years AWOL in France, of course Harry is going to leave him well alone… Right?

Away Childish Things by lettered (153k)

Harry gets de-aged. Malfoy has to help him.

(The Piece) I was Missing All Along by lauren3210 (30k)

Draco and Harry have been flatmates and best friends for years, and Draco thinks life is just perfect that way. But when something comes along and threatens to take all that away, Draco has to decide what it is he really wants, and just how hard he's going to work to get it.

Temptation on the Warfront by alizarincrims0n (180k)

Draco Malfoy is forced into hiding with the Golden Trio and dragged into their search for horcruxes. What ensues is a journey of redemption, unexpected friendships and an unwanted, turbulent romance with Harry Potter. Warnings for swearing, sexual content, and dark themes.

Chaos Theory by Tessa Crowley (102k)

Chaos: when the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future. One gene varies, one neuron fires, one butterfly flaps its wings, and Draco Malfoy's life is completely different. Draco has always found a certain comfort in chaos. Perhaps he shouldn't.

Hermione Granger's Hogwarts Crammer for Delinquents on the Run by waspabi (93k)

'You're a wizard, Harry' is easier to hear from a half-giant when you're eleven, rather than from some kids on a tube platform when you're seventeen and late for work.

Far From The Tree by aideomai (112k)

The arrival of Harry Potter’s children—snapped back in time, the children themselves guessed, twenty or so years—was the most interesting thing to happen at Hogwarts for years.

Grounds for Divorce by Tepre (122k)

Malfoy finds a coin. Harry finds a letter. A story about histories, a story about families. A story about a lemon tree somewhere in Upper Egypt.

All Our Secrets Laid Bare by @firethesound (2014, E, 150k)

Over the six years Draco Malfoy has been an Auror, four of his partners have turned up dead. Harry Potter is assigned as his newest partner to investigate just what is going on.

Foundations!verse by Saras_Girl (364k)

Harry is about to discover that the steepest learning curve comes after Healer training, and that second chances can be found in unexpected places.

All Life is Yours to Miss by Saras_Girl (114k)

Professor Malfoy’s world is contained, controlled, and as solitary as he can make it, but when an act of petty revenge goes horribly awry, he and his trusty six-legged friend are thrown into Hogwarts life at the deep end and must learn to live, love and let go.

What We Pretend We Can’t See by Gyzym (131k)

Seven years out from the war, Harry learns the hard truth of old history: it’s never quite as far behind you as you thought.

Here’s The Pencil, Make It Work by ignatiustrout (49k)

Harry thinks “Why is Malfoy working in a coffee shop in muggle London?” is a much simpler question than, “Are you going to accept that auror offer and, if you don’t, what will you do?”

Turn by Saras_Girl (306k)

One good turn always deserves another. Apparently.

Running on Air by eleventy7 (74k)

Draco Malfoy has been missing for three years. Harry is assigned the cold case and finds himself slowly falling in love with the memories he collects.

Such Great Heights by aideomai (93k)

Draco Malfoy, wide-eyed and pale and in a decidedly ragged shirt, was crouched next to the pile of whatever the dragon had been eating. Harry threw himself to a halt and yelled, “Merlin, how many times do I have to save your life?”

Dwelling by aideomai (83k)

Curses, James and Lily Potter ride again, several Ministry balls, a teenage Summer of Love, a grim young adult dystopian winter, a few different Draco Malfoys, secrets and the problems re: not having any, alternate lives, impossible lives, real lives, allusions to Dirty Dancing, and just because it's not called the Mirror of Erised doesn't mean you shouldn't know better.

In Pieces by dysonrules (85k)

Harry returns to Hogwarts as the new DADA instructor, only to find his teaching efforts thwarted by a very familiar ghost.

An Issue of Consequence by Faith Wood (20k)

Draco has woken up in an alternate universe. Or he has woken up utterly insane. Nothing else can possibly explain why Harry Potter suddenly seems to think he's Draco's boyfriend.

Save My Wonders by sdk (21k)

Immediately chocolate assaulted Draco's senses. Warm melted chocolate mixed with his mother's roses and... something else. Something new. Freshly scrubbed skin and maybe a faint sheen of sweat. It was so familiar... And it only intensified when Potter came up behind him.

The Devil's White Knight by AngrySpaceRavenclaw/orphaned (64k)

When Harry wakes up in an alternate timeline--a timeline where Voldemort was defeated long before the first war--he discovers everything is different. His parents, his godfather, his friends--and him. Harry must deal with the consequences of who he would have been if he had been raised by his parents, and figure out where he stands with his casual hook up, Draco Malfoy.

What I thought by bafflinghaze (7k)

Draco thought they were in a relationship. Harry thought it was just sex.

The Little Marauders Nursery and Day Care by @digthewriter (9k)

Harry Potter is the proud owner of The Little Marauders Nursery and Day Care and his favourite student is Scorpius Malfoy. Scorpius’s dad might be okay, too.

A Broken but Happy Sound by thusspakekate (7k)

Sometimes we do terrible things for no reason. Other times, we have terrible reasons.

Packing the Flat by marguerite_26 (6k)

Months after their explosive break-up, Draco insists Harry return to their flat to remove his belongings.

[hikarry]

So you are turning Aziraphale and Crowley straight in the au? Whatever it's just for one chapter, but don't you think that toutches on the homophobic? They are gay, yet somehow you had to find a way to turn their relationship straight? I didn't expect that from you spencer. Disappointing

By that logic, whenever I'm masc, I'm straight? I'm not a lesbian? I'm 90% of the time straight? Dear me. Maybe I should start a podcast

There's nothing in this universe I could possibly do to turn Aziraphale and Crowley straight. They are genderless beings, which makes them queer by default. Just because I choose to present Crowley as male and Aziraphale as female in one chapter that doesn't make any of them straight. Not even close

Aziraphale is genderless

Crowley is genderfluid

It's impossible for them to be straight doesn't matter what any of us do

I'm genderfluid. For as masc as I might feel, just because I'm still attracted to women, that does not mean I'm straight. Not here nor in Hell

So, no. I'm not turning them straight at all. Regardless of their physical presentation, they are still as queer as one can be

[nandorelentlessdelacruz]

It doesn't matter if Crowley and Aziraphale are presenting as man/man, man/woman, woman/woman, agender, fluid gender, two snakes, two plants, two bacteria that divide by binary fission... Their relationship is taboo because they're Angel/Demon, natural enemies.

I also remember well that when the archangels go to the bookshoop to investigate whether Aziraphale is hiding Gabriel or not, Aziraphale justifies the 25 Lazarus miracle as:

"I made a big HUGE miracle to make Maggie and Nina fall in love"

And Michael's reaction was: "Did it worked?"

Later, when the archangels see that Nina and Maggie are two females, they don't even blink about it.

They. Don't. Care.

Angels are not homophobic, Neil is not homophobic for saying Aziraphale and Crowley are not gay. Please give me a break. They're whatever they feel in the moment or is convenient with the plan. Crowley in a dresses and skirt wasn't supposed to symbolize a man in drag, you know?

Now, I am aware that none of the times Crowley presented himself as female in the TV show the production did care with passability. I understand that choice, I always want David Tennant as Crowley too, but it confuses many people. But a little reflection helps, guys... Of course "Nanny Astoreth" was presenting as cis woman back them, she was a politician's employee, for God sake.

[mwagneto]

re your weird about gay sex post....

I still feel like the unsaid truth behind all of it is that people Still think being penetrated is demeaning in general (misogyny win!)

and being anally penetrated is like Double demeaning, hence the porn weirdness around women who do anal and the more general weirdness around men who bottom

(also gomens előtt sose mertem volna ilyen askot küldeni, nem tudom hogyan bont le minden inhibitiont ez a show)

no yeah that's definitely part of it although less now i thinnnk but mostly coz people find the idea of crowley bottoming (or just yknow. being a woman and having straight sex) hot coz they can project onto him😭 so we went from like the weird 2010s homophobia of Tops are big confident dominant men and Bottoms are small shy uwu baby women little boys to whatever the fuck we have now where they're Still weird about gay sex but Woke this time coz "oh they're genderqueer so they just prefer to have piv sex coz it's easier😊" or "well they're genderfluid and i just prefer it when one of them is a woman/"femme presenting"" or whatever the fuck. like ohhhhhhmy god the way fandoms hate gay men is so specific and so miserable it literally makes you feel like you're going insane like how am i legit going online to argue that these 2 men played by men are men & that gay men like having anal sex regardless of agab & it's weird and homophobic as hell to genderswap a gay couple to make them straight like WHAT. how is this my fucking life

[touchstoneaf]

Tl:dr... People online can convince themselves of Literally Anything. Even that Aziraphale is *straight*. Which is seriously unfathomable to me.

So, I was watching a clipshow last night about these two on YouTube, and some clearly deluded individual who is obviously an incompetent thinker showed up in the comments to complain that Aziraphale is Not Gay, because he was "not written as such in the book", blah blah blah angels aren't built that way (though he didn't make the same claim for Crowley because, I guess, demon? Doesn't that kind of undermine your point, my man? Because he specifically says in his post that he *does* believe Crowley is in love with Zira).

1. Though I haven't finished reading the book yet, I understand this interpretation is false, or at least kind of open to various interpretations? Which, whatever, people get what they get out of books... or anything for that matter, I guess... And I'm coming to understand from a few posts on here that there's been a lot of back-and-forthing from Neil/Terry on the subject over the years, and thus some people are pissed off about their interpretations from earlier being messed with or whatever?

I definitely understand that, as a person on the ace spectrum. But at the same time, I'm not exclusionary in my thinking, so IMO things can be mutually true at the same time, and don't have to cancel each other out... but that's another discussion.

I also get the annoyance over authorial waffling, and clinging to things you've loved in the past when they're being altered... but that stuff usually doesn't bother me because of the time span involved and the changes in culture; but also because a lot of answers can be both-and, not either/or... especially with characters like these. I'm just happy to have them in a new interpretation wherein I can Feast Greedily upon them and find myself represented in ten different ways. So

Codicil A: I'm sorry if you don't feel represented anymore by these characters, my dude, but frankly, you have enough of those already, and we don't have very many, so shut up and get back in your lane.

Summary 1: let's just be real, here. They're Neil's character, and he's writing them for the show the way he is now for a reason, so your argument is already pretty much not valid, bro.

Obvs there were so many replies to make to that that I couldn't even figure out how to respond to it, LOL. Luckily a lot of people beat me there. But;

Codicil B: I repeat. That book was written 30 years ago, and things have changed a lot. Neil has been writing the show, so you'd think that he knows what he wants to do with his characters. Also, if you're complaining about it based on novel purity... they are two different enterprises, so what even is your point in the first place?

2. More importantly, the fact that this guy can watch 2 whole seasons of Aziraphale being Aziraphale, and looking at Crowley like that, and saying the words he says (the Southern Pansy exchange comes to mind. Or the part where he says Shadwell has the wrong bookshop. Or the part where he never denies the boyfriend thing) and think he's straight in any capacity is beyond my comprehension. You must have had serious training in self-delusion, brochacho.

3. Obviously all of the talk about gender / lack thereof, and attraction / lack thereof because of being angels has something to do with it, because let's be real. You could hash around all of these interesting labels and tags and explanations for things like, you know, Crowley is definitely all of the genders (and probably a couple more we haven't even thought up yet. Creativity & style are the watchwords of that character), so you could list them as just about any sexuality/ romantic orientation, sexual orientation or lack thereof, etc (and frankly, that's part of the fun). But in practice, behavior, body being worn at the time, form and function, etc... Zira presents as male and is in love with someone who at least part of the time presents similarly, if one were to judge from top hats and name choice (honestly I think Crowley just loves fashion and looking fly, in any capacity lol, and so dresses according to his mood, and/or how sweet the fashion is for which gender depending on the time period). Aziraphale never dresses/presents otherwise that I recall, tho. (Probably because he's had approximately one suit since 1800, because it feels nice on his body.)

4. "Gay as a tree full of monkeys on nitrous oxide". That is all. I know that portion of the book is being used in both directions, but it can be interpreted about 500 different ways, so if your interpretation is that he's absolutely not, that interpretation stll hinges on the fact that he's not human. See above, and do we have to go back through that whole dance again? Form and function and behavior... book vs adaptation, yadda.

Summary 2: You have been shouted down by the author himself, and thus you should probably just quit while you're ahead.

And dude still comes up at the end of the second season with this theory that the reason Zira responded the way he did to the kiss is because he was NOT attracted to Crowley?!

I'm actually kind of worried about that person, if they truly think Zira is remotely anything other than a total fruit who loves Crowley to distraction.

[crimsun-n-clover]

i get kin assigned characters constantly

“you remind me of crowley goodomens”

“you’re sooo like eddie strangerthings”

“has anyone ever told you that you remind them of jon magnusarchives?”

“you look like dream sandmancomics haha”

“southpark goth kid”

fuckin etc etc with anyone who’s a gay edgelord loser.

you wanna know who i REALLY relate to??

—zuul / vince clortho ghostbusters - evil demon dog muppet thing that’s really horny for sigourney weaver. breathes like it also has POTS and lives in a fridge sometimes. fucks around and finds out. inconvenienced? turns to stone.

—lego batman - loser but funny and deadpan enough for it to be passable. miserable and likes objectively bad music. fuckin bats. lives in the dark and is nocturnal. will adopt some random sad kid that crosses my path as my own and take them to sketchy places because hey, we’re here for a good fucking time kid.

—luke skywalker - gay hillbilly who befriends insane old people. too much like his father. just wants to drive around in his shitty little car and move out. pretty girl says something and he just goes okay that’s my purpose now. will steal shit if necessary. gets bored and overthrows the empire. will make deals at a bar with some rando criminal and suddenly whoops ride or die bestie

—samwise gamgee - so meow meow. so dyke. so hopelessly devoted. loves plants and some light drinking. holds serious fucking grudges. thinks the weird pretty little brunette is hot, snoops on him a little, suddenly is taking the ring to mordor because he knows too much. yeah sounds about right. not to get into his actual character or anything but DAMN that shit gets too real sometimes.

—daria mtvdaria - bitch with one friend. music nerd and total asshole, but in an autistic way. everyone around her either thinks she’s weird or almost admires her ability to just be so indifferent to social norms. parents push her in the wrong direction in an attempt to better her.

list to be continued.

now let me give some counter arguments.

—crowley goodomens - i may be a sunglasses indoors, all black wearing queer, who presents as any and all genders whenever, is kinda evil but in a campy disney villain way, raises bitchy kids, is very attached to their car, drives too fast, is a queen / velvet underground superfan, fucking WHATEVER. my polar opposite oldest best friend i was in love with hates my fucking guts. so SUCK IT. i WIN. and also i’m temporarily banned (self imposed, no one controls me but ME) from the velvet underground and queen because that shit gets too real when you’re gay and heartbroken. don’t fucking look at me right now man i can’t do this shit

—eddie strangerthings - really?? the cult of vecna??? temple of elemental evil is where it’s AT. he may have kiddos like me but he doesn’t LOVE THEM LIKE ME. i simply cannot see him taking sweet sweet lucas sinclair (who has done nothing wrong ever. in his entire life.) to waffle house. i do also have a rivalry with the basketball captain and therefore the whole team, but they only tried to hunt me down once and i intimidated them by chugging condiments. i play bass like a REAL sexy metalhead. and megadeth is better than metallica i don’t fucking CARE what you think. my battle jacket is way more kickass and i would love the smack the shit out of him for making dungeons and dragons “ohh!! that’s the stranger things game!!! the eddie game!!!!” and also people assume i’m talking about him when i bring up EVH. no. NO.

—jon magnusarchives - yeah okay maybe. skeptical asshole who’s that way to cope. you can’t explain it? i sure can. there’s something wrong with you. i’d at least like to think that i’m less of a dick and more sympathetic than him. also georgie is SO my type i would NOT be able to live with her as a fugitive like it’s nothing. rough exterior, cat loving and book nerd interior. but at least i’d be a hunt avatar. put fear into people the way i’ve felt it. the eye is kinda lame unless you’re an avatar and can just know shit. and when i find an author i like i immediately eat up everything they’ve ever written i don’t fucking care i love seeing common themes. also i would never talk shit about poetry it’s so fun

—dream sandmancomics - this one is mostly based on appearance and i haven’t finished the comics so like idk man but i feel like i’m better than him. just because.

[amanda-melly]

I totally agree. It's always meaningful to get shameless, overt queer representation, which includes queer people doing anything that a straight, cis couple would be granted (or even expected to do) in the same scenario.

Were Aziraphale or Crowley played by a woman, they'd be seen by the audience as a straight cis couple (even if they are supernatural beings who don't have gender so they're technically always a queer couple no matter who plays them). And, if that was the case, I could almost bet there would have been a kiss as soon as the finale of season 1 at the ritz. Or at least the public would have demanded it universally no questions asked.

I only hesitate to say this because I don't want in any way to accuse Neil Gaiman or Terry Pratchett of discrimination - on the contrary, their work in good omens and beyond has been pushing forward for LGBTQIA+ representation for decades and they are nothing but allies of the cause. I think that perhaps if Aziraphale and Crowley were a straight couple, even the editors and the TV studios might have tried to push for a romance because it sells.

Still, I wonder if Neil Gaiman had to struggle to make Aziraphale and Crowley a romantic couple in canon by showing The Kiss, if he faced resistance within the industry.

Fortunately Neil Gaiman has chosen time and time again to do what he felt was right (artistically and ethically) and portray queer couples - and, what's even more amazing, his queer couples are not the cautionary tale, the "bury your gays", nor the "token LGBTQIA+ couple in the background who don't have any relevance in the plot and who are bidimensional characters", or the "LGBTQIA+ character whose only character development or plot point revolves around their conflict about being gay".

What is so wonderful about the way Neil Gaiman portrays queer couples or queer people in general is that they are just people. They have character arcs that go beyond their queerness. But without hiding their queerness. They can have tumultuous relationships, or happy relationships, they can have personal issues, they can be good or bad or basically anything. Like any character. Why is it that straight cis characters get to be "normal" onscreen and LGBTQIA+ don't? The first time I have seen an explicit gay sex scene in TV that resembled the way straight sex scenes are often portrayed was in American Gods. Neil Gaiman talked about it (I don't remember the details) saying it was important to show that a sex scene between men could be romantic and normal and not... Whatever else they are usually portrayed by Hollywood.

In good omens season 2 we have a plethora of amazing LGBTQIA+ couples. Maggie and Nina have personalities beyond their potential romance. Unfortunately they don't get a lot of screen time, which could have helped develop them further. There is also the owner of the magic shop in present day soho and his nonbinary spouse. They/them pronouns are used for several characters without it being "a thing". It's as natural as it ought to be, and it's thrilling to watch. And I haven't even mentioned Aziraphale and Crowley's relationship.

I think the difference of this sort of representation and the mainstream queer representation of the last decades is that, while there had been advances in at least showing that queer people and queer couples exist, they could never be allowed to cause discomfort to straight cis people's sensibilities. That meant that the gay character died or suffered or had their presence in a story be reduced to "the gay" and nothing more. Step a bit out of that framework and the character just had to be straight or it'd be weird, uncomfortable, advertising "bad models", or bad morals, or undermining western values and threatening the "family" and "the children"... Then I suppose things started to get a little better and people started to demand diversity in movies and TV and that's when we got the "token gay character", who needed to be there to prove how the people and the companies behind a certain projet were "good guys" but funnily enough it just never happened to be the main character. And people still think that if a main character isn't straight and cis, and the plot doesn't revolve around their sexuality, then "why" did they make this character queer "if there was no need for it"? And that's the problem. There doesn't have to be a "narrative need" for a main character to be queer to have a queer main character. Straight cis characters get to have other plots than the fact that they are straight and cis. Queer characters also need to be allowed to have other plots than the fact that they are queer. Aziraphale and Crowley have a plot. They drive the plot forward. The plot (at least in the book and season 1) is not about their romance. Then here comes season 2 and they share a kiss. And some people are freaking out. "Why are they kissing? They didn't ""need"" to kiss."

As it turns out, yes, they needed to kiss.

Like Neil Gaiman said, the kiss is not the proof that Aziraphale and Crowley are in love - if you hadn't noticed they were in love before the kiss, it's not the kiss that will change your mind. The kiss had a lot of narrative importance, it was in character and compatible with the events of the scene in which it happened. It was perfectly placed in the story to develop each of their character arcs. However, according to what Neil said, the kiss was also important to make it clear, unequivocally clear, that their story is a love story, that these characters are in love, and that it was important to have this kiss in season 2 to make it very clear. That it was necessary to have the kiss in season 2 for us to live in a world in which the kiss happened, and it has consequences for the public's relationship with good omens. The public needed to be shown the kiss so that it would stop denying that these characters portrayed by two men were, indeed, in love, Official Romantic Love.

Now the new question is: do they need to have sex? Like, should season 3 make a point of showing something that proves unequivocally that they are having sex, or should season 3 make a point of avoiding it for the sake of ace representation? Or even perhaps there are people who haven't found The Kiss very lusty and are interpreting that they weren't gay after all, since they didn't kiss for real and it was Just An Awkward Moment Between Very Not Gay Buddies.

Heck, I even see people in the good omens fandom (the hardcore fandom of people who do believe that Aziraphale and Crowley are in love with each other romantically and who are LGBTQIA+ themselves or just big supporters of the cause) saying they'd be perfectly fine with they not sharing any other kiss in the entire series, that they don't necessarily want to see them kiss in season 3.

That one is easy: they absolutely need to kiss in season 3.

The kiss in season 2 was sad, desperate, painful. Tragic, even.

LGBTQIA+ representation, as I pointed out above, includes making a point of showing that queer people can be queer without the plot "making them pay for it". Queer people who end up "punished" by the plot are more comfortable to a conservative audience and thus it's become a trope in movies and TV. No queer deeds go unpunished. "If 'The Gays' are already having this big 'privilege' of existing onscreen, what else do they want? They've had their cake, don't tell me they want to eat it too?"

It's important to fight that trope. Queer people need to be allowed to finish a story in a giddy bliss of happiness.

Aziraphale and Crowley need to share at least one happy, romantic, all-out kiss portrayed in the same cathartic way of their sad kiss in s2 - I'm talking about a long kiss, the soundtrack goes up, the camera closes up on their faces, and they are unapologetical. They get to have their cake and eat it too. They can't just kiss to be miserable, they need to get at least one kiss without a terrible heartbreak right afterwards. They need to kiss spectacularly and not be punished for it.

Now... For a more difficult question. Should they have sex in season 3 or would it damage ace representation?

My take on this: they should have a sex scene. If it should be more or less explicit (not explicit as in explicit sex but as in "unequivocal"), I'm not sure. If it should show the characters as happy and lusty or romantic or confused with the whole thing or having difficult emotions (for example Aziraphale's religious trauma) is all up to debate as well. I have the impression that a lot people in the fandom think they should be very naive about it, not even knowing what happens when people have sex. I think they would probably be clumsy in their first time, but not stupid. Both of them know humans very well - Aziraphale reads ALL the books, Crowley watches a lot of TV and movies and whatnot. It just doesn't make sense that Aziraphale and Crowley would never have come across descriptions of sex. You can hardly convince me they don't know what happens in sex. Ok, fine, Aziraphale doesn't know that his neighbour runs a brothel and that is pretty naive of him. But Crowley seems to be perfectly aware that it's a brothel. And Aziraphale seems to know, at least in theory, how babies are made. He obviously doesn't know what grindr is but he doesn't know what twitter is either so he's basically living in his own little universe if he never heard of twitter. But I digress.

Regardless of how much they understand what sex is, they want it real, real bad. Especially Aziraphale. (thank you, Michael Sheen, for giving us the thirstiest, lustiest angel in the history of TV. Heck, perhaps the thirstiest, lustiest character in TV. I dare you to show me that an actor in an actual sex scene, an explicit all out sex scene, that can showcase such desire as Aziraphale especially in season 2).

Would it hinder their character development? On the contrary, it'd be not only compatible with their character development but it would help develop it further in very interesting and important ways. These beings have a very long relationship with each other and with earthly pleasures and their sharing a sex scene is the opportunity to have them confront their own self identity as supernatural beings in human-like bodies, it can show them having new things to explore in their relationship with themselves and with each other. Especially since they never had a chance to discover an earthly pleasure together up to this point. When Aziraphale got to eat and drink, Crowley had already been doing these things for a long time. Crowley sleeps because he likes it, Aziraphale doesn't sleep. Of course, they have enjoyed food and drink together for thousands of years by now, but they didn't get to discover it together. Their romantic relationship provides this opportunity.

What could be negative, plot-wise, about them having sex? I don't see anything.

Now... As for the matter of "Aziraphale and Crowley have a sex scene in season 3" and ace representation.

I'm in the ace spectrum myself (demisexual) but to be totally honest I don't know in detail what the ace community advocates for when it comes to representation. I can't speak for those who are farther in the ace spectrum. I'll try to be reasonable and respect different points of view. I have read several ace people in the fandom pointing out that portraying ace characters as people inherently averse to sex is something pretty misleading and problematic.

Then there's the eternal problem of "sorting out when it's ace representation from when it's just plain queer baiting". This question doesn't apply to good omens anymore (thanks to Neil Gaiman). But I wonder if we've grown so used to queer baiting in so many of our favourite stories that we started to romanticise these relationships as if they were good ace representation, when they're really not.

From what I know from my experience and from what I can interpret about Aziraphale and Crowley, they will want, at the very least, to experiment. I can totally see them as a couple with a very low sex drive compared to non-ace human beings. But I can't imagine them never wanting to do some experimentation with each other. They like being together, they like holding hands, they are in love, they crave for proximity (think of Aziraphale's hands in several scenes). And yes they seemed to have really liked the physical sensation of the kiss, despite being devastated by everything else that happened in that scene. So how could they POSSIBLY never even try, even once, to have sex?

And, if they will have sex, at least once as experimentation, is it good or bad to show it? Once again: I believe it's good.

Does it erase the ace representation in good omens? Not really. They have been in love for centuries without engaging in sexual activity. I really don't think the series would ever portrey their love as defined by their sexual relationship than the immense bond they have built for aons. I think that's the final argument: it makes more sense for them to experiment than to never experiment, and, if s3 decides to show it unequivocally onscreen (and I really hope it will), it will never be a defining factor in their relationship just like the kiss wasn't the defining factor of the fact that they are in love. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see how that could undermine ace representation.

Also, I couldn't possibly fail to address something very important in all these representation matters.

Aziraphale and Crowley's romantic relationship is not just ANY queer representation.

It's two very respected actors with brilliant careers.

It's two characters played by middle aged men.

One aspect that makes queer couples sometimes more "acceptable" for the general public is when their sexuality is present in a movie or show not for their own character development or for their own tridimensionality but because it will please the gaze of the audience. That's the good old "men like to watch lesbians when it's for the man's pleasure but they will deny lesbians respect or basic human rights and be offended when lesbians don't want to sleep with them".

So sometimes a movie or show will show queer couples having sex, but it's not ANY queer couple: it's gorgeous young lesbians who look like Victoria secret models, or gorgeous young men, in gratuitous scenes that do nothing whatsoever for the plot.

Compare that with good omens. The Kiss between Aziraphale and Crowley. These characters don't kiss to please the audience's gaze, as if the characters didn't matter and they were only kissing because the audience wanted some soft porn and those characters were mere objects serving external desires. They do it for themselves. Of course most of the fandom really wanted them to kiss. But we wanted these characters to kiss because we could see that they loved each other and we wanted them to be happy. So yes it's a bit of fan service... Fan service or not, the kiss was not gratuitous and it absolutely served the characters, the plot and was not using a queer couple as soft porn.

Even in the sex scene from American gods, which is an utterly explicit sex scene with frontal male nudity and all you can imagine, I didn't feel like the scene was there to give the audience some sexy excitement. It felt like that moment served the characters and we as the audience only got to see it in such an explicit way because the specific way in which it happened served the plot and the character development.

Similarly, it's a powerful thing to not only see this queer couple played by two middle aged men with outstanding careers share a Truly Happy Kiss, but also have sex in a way that showcases and affirms these character's unapologetic freedom and desire and satisfaction. And finish the story perfectly safe and happy.

All in all: for the time being I'm convinced there should be an unequivocal sex scene between Aziraphale and Crowley in season 3. Exactly how it should be portrayed in light of ace representation is up to debate. What's not up to debate is the fact that we lack representation of queer couples getting to be queer and have a happy ending. That's why I believe it's very important that they get to kiss again in a wondrously happy kiss. Or several. It'd be really bitter if the single romantic physical exchange between these characters would be of desperation and sadness.

I NEEEED people—especially those with unfathomably large platforms???—to start doing just a tiny bit of internal evaluation before they log onto a blue website and say “I don’t want these queer characters to fuck in canon” or “I’d be fine if these characters never kissed again” or whatever.

This is a post about Good Omens and the prospect of Aziraphale and Crowley potentially having sex in season 3. It's a response to a tweet that I'm crossposting, but let it be known the above statement and this topic applies broadly across multiple fandoms too.

But anyway, in regards to Good Omens specifically:

I am seeing this take that essentially boils down to "Canon has now made it clear that these characters want to have sex with each other through subtext (i.e. Aziraphale and the ox), but I don’t want that to reach narrative completion because the idea of them having sex makes me uncomfortable or isn’t my personal preference” and it is, to put it mildly and delicately, A Very Bad Take.

This is rhetorical (and I do not expect or particularly want an answer), but: explain to me how and why queer characters who are unavoidably visibly queer (aka 2 "man-shaped beings") fucking on screen wouldn’t be a net positive, especially when you can indicate how canon has set it up.

Presumably, some people say things like this because ~they want to see them as visibly ace.~ Okay. But by some of these people’s own admission, there IS more evidence in canon now to indicate these characters crave sex with each other (vs arguing otherwise)... yet people would rather that be ignored/erased all for the sake of them feeling comfortable or feeling better about what canon shows or doesn’t show explicitly??

I’m sorry, but—speaking as an ace person, to be clear—your personal preferences for the story shouldn’t / don’t affect anything here. There’s too much in this.

Yeah, I understand on a personal level not having “representation.” I almost never see myself or my unique experiences and identity reflected in stories. And yet, I also understand that that doesn’t change any story or the world in which we live. Things like this are not said in a vacuum.

Any queer characters having sex on screen IS a net positive. It is rare and impactful, and openly calling for or hoping for otherwise when canon points to its potential is a detrimental alliance with purity culture, whether intentionally or accidentally. Because we live in a Goddamn society!

Who knows (other than Neil Gaiman) whether Aziraphale and Crowley ARE going to fuck on international TV. None of us do! But the subtext right now blatantly says they’re starving for it. And you don’t have to like the prospect of that, but honestly? We SHOULD get to see it play out. There’s no truly legitimate reason we shouldn’t ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Whether you "prefer" it or not.

And my ultimate hot take is… if someone balks at the idea of that or doesn’t understand the importance of it, despite even seeing the subtext… then they should perhaps unpack that? Just a thought.

Truly the way fandoms are managing to hit either “subtext doesn’t count :/ ” or “let’s keep it to subtext so it’s ‘open to interpretation’ :) ” nowadays depending on what corner one visits is MADDENING. Whiplash-inducing. Surreal. And so much nonsense you can’t pick where to start.

So! I do genuinely hope I'm not kicking off discourse but I felt this Needed To Be Said (and on more than one site). Because posts like “even if they never kiss again, we’ve won <3 “ make me want to be like…

These characters are YEARNING. Do not doom them and us to it. For once, we can reach for the stars and maybe–against all odds–pull them down. Embrace it!

[ray-just-ray-thanks]

Part 2 - Queerbaiting Discourse in the Good Omens Fandom

Master post here

Why do I hate so much when people call Good Omens queerbaiting? How I understand the sentiment (again context matters), but also don't agree with it.

First Better essays than I ever will be able to do:

Good Omens: An Exploration of Internalized Acephobia (@ashs-slut-hut)

The beautiful of the unlabelled things (@solreefs)

I read many interpretations of this discourse, many are angry at Neil Gaiman because he doesn't draw a line whatever Aziraphale and Crowley relationship is romantic or not. His most famous response is: "Wait and see."

See he already answered:

This is his answer. Critical thinking is free. If you ask something in this regard, he has already answered. That's final and you are not entitled of more than this, he's the author, it's not a romance novel, he cannot change the source material because it would be violate the work of Sir Terry Pratchett and his memory. I would hate if he changed anything, I would hate him to make them conventionally gay in the human sense.

It's a love story, no they aren't gay in the sense of the word. Just like that.

Since the first time I read the book, I knew they love each other.

There are many types of love and Good Omens, because its ambiguity, open the access to interpret their love in every way possible. Romantic or Platonic or even sexual (even if I don't really like the interpretation, it's there, if Aziraphale and Crowley can do an afford so can I). It's a book and a Serie TV for everyone.

I don't have problem with people saying they see them as best friends, I have example in my life of old people that treat their oldest pal as if they were married for several years. As an asexual and aromantic I say we need also more healthy platonic friendship same sexes and non in fandom spaces.

As in context otherwise I understand that the penury of queer and LGBT+ content makes really difficult to let go of queer characters.

Because I believe Aziraphale and Crowley are intrinsically queer, in every way you want to see, they are marginalized people of their respective factions, they are una ostracize by their peers and they need to lie to appear "normal" to them, masking and putting up a façade anytime they need to be in public meeting. Their peers don't understand how and why they want to live like that, not understanding they are like that, they are just different. Not bad, not good, just different.

They feel love (whatever type you headcanon they to feel), both of them and cannot express it in public because it's not the right kind of love.

Aziraphale loves sushi, loves his books and loves his life with Crowley, but it's not proper for him he should just love as general concept. He’s soft, the way he’s presenting is not proper for an Angel.

Crowley cannot love. He's a demon, he cannot love anything if not chaos and bad things, but he loves his car, he loves his plants and the life he built with Aziraphale.

Both of them don't feel the right love, the appropriate type, what their society want them to feel or respect the way they should presenting.

This is intrinsically a queer experience, I felt nearly any of this thing in my life, from relatives, friends and even strangers. This is why I hate when the debate is reduced to "they don't kiss, they don't fuck".

Also, they are not human and don't have biological sexes, they are presenting as males, but in a canonically way Crowley presented as female and she was still Crowley, nothing has change if not the way of presenting themselves. That's queer as fuck.

[Or not, since you could argue that they are not human in first place, but the translation of their actions are still what we human would call a queer fight to me.]

On a personal note, to me, even Aziraphale who doesn't change anything (even his sex) because he's a lazy bastard is still queer behaviour.

When people have the impression that he's English, that he's intelligent, and that he's gayer than a treeful of monkeys on nitrous oxide, after in the book was said that they're genderless and they only make an afford sometimes, makes the punch line the humans who don't understand jackshit, but still judge his character by the way he's presenting, while Aziraphale, the lazy fuck, doesn't give a shit how he's presenting (he did not change his style since Victorian age, because it's comfy and he think tartan is the peak of stylish, tell me that he care what others think, except, maybe, Crowley, but even him has no saying in how he can or cannot present).

I would say Aziraphale doesn't care about humans in general and he would be fine with them disappearing, but don't want them to do so, because otherwise he wouldn't have books and food anymore. But enough of this, I'm going even more off target than I'm already am.

So, I understand the sentiment of wanting something more, the need of more LGBT+ characters and stories, but this is not it. This is not a story you can change and harass the author to make it more yours, because it's not.

The story is for us, not ours. Every story is made for someone, but it's not owned by anyone else if not the author(s). It's not your story to tell. I can see the story as queer, I love the interpretation of the story as queer, Neil Gaiman gave us the green light, do what you want with your interpretation! But at the end of the day, it's an interpretation.

The queerbaiting discourse miss the point of the story. Just because it's not the flavour of queer you wanted it to be, it doesn't mean it's not queer or cannot be interpreted as such. My, yours, everybody else interpretation is valid and can coexist, because it's a love story and everybody can express love and feel love in many ways.

Therefore, I can say it's queer, another person can say it's just friendship and another again can say it's clearly LGBT+. It's an open interpretation of the word "Love".

Queerbaiting is not contemplated. It was not market as queer (even if the very linguistic old fashioned term as strange, unusual or unexpected, would have been quite correct marketing for this work of art.)

The author delivered what promised. A story, a comedy, two entities more human than not, who love each other very dearly and the Apocalypse. From my knowledge it is not queerbaiting.

Again, I understand the sentiment, but you need to search for a better target, because right now you're just biting in the air, getting frustrated because there is nothing to bite, it's just...air.

Part One

Part two(You're here)

Part three

Master post

[hadit93]

Thelema on my Terms.

I have rejected Thelema a few times throughout my magical career, it was ultimately what lead to me resigning from the A∴A ∴ in the end. I have always changed my mind later on due to the current truly resonating with me on a deep level. It is only recently that I have realised what I was rejecting was not Thelema as a magical system, but what Thelema has become in the modern day due to a small group of people that hold power within O.T.O. and affiliated lines of A∴A∴. They call the shots, they influence what beginners approaching Thelema learn and subsequently believe, and it often does not reflect what Crowley wrote, and certainly not what Crowley wrote in later life. Which is surely more important than what a younger Crowley wrote!

Furthermore, I no longer believe in the Thelemic orders out there today. They are failed experiments, sometimes with good intentions, but a lot of the time with hidden intentions too. Thelema has become an ‘old man's club’ and it is clear to me from conversing with such individuals online and in person that whilst they present themselves as liberals, feminists, and allies of LGBTQIA people that they are far from it. Not all of them, I am not making a sweeping statement, but there is enough of a problem for me to call a problem. I have had to tell Thelemites to not be racist, to not be homophobic, to not be transphobic and usually I get the response “Man has the right to say what he Will”. This is a gross misinterpretation of Will and Liber Oz.

As a gay person I can honestly say I feel isolated within Thelema. I can imagine women may feel the same, I know some do. I also know some people of colour feel the same, again I have been told they do. These are issues, the law is for all, but just like in regular society, minority groups are under-represented, often silenced, and typically degraded and silenced. This is certainly not the message of Thelema I have received, and despite Crowley’s shortcomings in his personality, it is not his vision of Thelema either. In official magical contexts he was clear, the Law is for all, and every man and every woman is a star.

Initiation can be useful, but joining a magical order and operating under the Will of someone else is not what Thelema is about. Thelema is quite simple. Thelema is about doing the work and attaining knowledge and conversation (which means union with, not mere communication with) the Holy Guardian Angel (See my post about what I believe the HGA is) which subsequently leads to knowledge of the True Will. Which is not “whatever I want to do, I can do because daddy Crowley says so”, it is your life’s purpose, living in tune to the current of the surrounding universe. That is all, and you can accomplish it on your own. The materials are all publicly available, there are few secrets left, and what are left can easily be uncovered with a little work and a little thinking.

So I have rejected Thelema multiple times because I have felt underrepresented, degraded, and unimpressed by the work of so-called experts and members of magical orders (my own ex A∴A∴ lineage are excluded from this statement). I have also rejected it because the majority of Thelemites love to quote 18 year old atheist Crowley and Regardie and have made magick into nothing more than a mere psychological exercise. It is so much more, and if you don’t believe in subtle energy, or spirits, or anything metaphysical, it is my humble opinion you are not doing magick at all.

I also hate that people only read Crowley, as though he is the only source out there. Crowley did a good job at collating information he had access to at the time to make a coherent and workable system. But we have so much more information available now. We don’t have to use Crowley’s system to the letter anymore. It is like using a bicycle to cycle from Manchester to London when you have a car on your drive. You will get there, it will be harder work, and you may get there quicker if you use the updated tech available.

Speaking of Crowley, another reason I have rejected Thelema is because modern Thelema has taken on a form of Crowleyanity. He is revered, he is loved, he is praised, and not even due to his magical career, but because of his shocking statements and character flaws. Crowley didn’t even want Crowleyanity to happen, he expressly warned against it. But it has happened anyway, he has celebrity status in the occult world and people seem to idolise him. He was a piece of shit. There is no getting around that. He was not a nice person. A good magician, a good author, a brilliant writer in general. But a pleasant person he was not. Complicated, mentally ill, abused as a child- yes. But a person you want to be around and revere as a saint? No.

What drove me back to Thelema was the core message set out in Liber Legis and the other Holy Books and the system of A∴A∴. It works, it does what it says on the tin, albeit with a bit of updating. I have found the system works for me, and has been a true calling for me. A great tool to use in my spiritual/initiatory work. I have also found some people who are true Thelemites doing the work and exploring areas that have not yet been explored. True magicians attempting to discover their Will and live in accordance to it. When Thelemites work on their own, share a common bond, and just get on with it Thelema really works well as a magical framework.

I don’t much consider myself a Thelemite by the standard that has been set out by O.T.O. and others associated with them. But I am a Thelemite by Liber Legis standards and my own. I always will be. I usually just say I am a magician with Thelemic tendencies these days. And it is true, but what is also telling is people’s reaction to that statement. They automatically believe I want to have sex with every woman around, I’m racist, homophobic, addicted to drugs, and I have an obsession with semen. It is telling that these knee-jerk reactions exist. It is not a ‘they are discriminating against Thelemites’ situation. It is because these types of Thelemites exist, and I believe are the majority. Let’s call them the ‘Thelema bros’. I am not of them, I spit on their crapulous creeds.

So to summarise: Thelema works, organised Thelema is a mess, the only thing you need to live by is “do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law” and “love is the law, love under will”.

[gates-keeper]

Part 1: “Words of Affirmation” Destiel Quotes & Parallels

I’m sure someone’s done this before me and done it better, but I’m compiling a huge Destiel evidence docket for no reason. Anyone got any quotes to add?

Comments From Outside Characters

To Dean

Uriel: “He has this weakness. He likes you.” (4x10)

Balthazar: “You have me confused with the other angel. You know, the one in the dirty trench coat who’s in love with you.” (6x17)

Hester: “The first time Castiel laid a hand on you in Hell, he was lost.” (7x21)

Meg: “He was your boyfriend first.” (7x23)

Charlie: “What about Castiel? He seems helpful. And dreamy.” (8x20)

Marie: “Although we do explore the nature of Destiel in Act 2.” (10x5)

Sam: “Shouldn’t it be Deastiel?” He then goes on to tease Dean with “Sastiel” which Dean takes negatively. (10x5)

Dean: “This Cas is looking at me weird.” Sam: “So like the real Cas then.” (15x14) 

To Castiel

Hannah: “We gave you our trust. Don’t lose it over one man.” (9x22)

Metatron: “His true weakness is revealed. He’s in love…with humanity.” (9x22)

Metatron: “Oh, that’s right. To save Dean Winchester. That was your goal, right? I mean, you draped yourself in the flag of heaven, but, ultimately, it was about saving one human, right?” (9x23)

Ishim: “I’m going to cure you of your human weakness [i.e. Dean]” (12x10)

The Empty: “I have tiptoed through all your little tulips. Your memories, your little feelings, yes. I know what you hate. I know who you love…There is nothing for you back there.” (13x4)

Demon: “I thought you were joined at the… (looks down) everything.” (14x01)

There are also several instances where other characters try to poke at insecurities regarding their relationship.

Naomi: “You're hoping Castiel will return to you. I admire your loyalty. I only wish he felt the same way.” (8x19)

Casifer: “There comes a time when every relationship has run its course.” (11x18)

Michael!Dean: “You only tolerate the angel because you think you owe him, because he ‘gripped you tight and raised you from Perdition.’ Or whatever.” (14x10)

Comments From Dean

To Cas

“There are two things I know for certain. One, Bert and Ernie are gay. And two, you are not going to die a virgin.” (5x03) 

“So what? I’m Thelma and you’re Louise and we’re just going to hold hands and sail off this cliff together?” (5x03)

“You know what? Blow me, Cas.” (5x18)

“Cas, not for nothing, but the last time someone looked at me like that, I got laid.” (5x18)

“Look, I don’t need to feel like hell for failing you, okay? For failing you like I’ve failed every other godforsaken thing that I care about! I don’t need it!” (8x07)

“We need you. I need you.” 

For more on this quote see the “We vs. I” section.

To Other Characters

Bobby: “I think maybe it’s time you made a call.” Dean: “Why does it always gotta be me that makes the call, huh? It’s not like Cas lives in my ass. The dude’s busy.” (Cas appears) Dean: “Get out of my ass.” Cas: “I was never in your… (head tilt)” (6x19)

“On my car…. He showed up naked… covered in bees.” (7x23)

While Cas suffered from some mental issues at the time, it seems somewhat significant that he sought Dean out under the circumstances, not Sam, etc.

“There’s things… people… feelings that I want to experience differently than I have before, or maybe even for the first time.” (10x16)

“My shy but devastatingly handsome friend here” (12x12)

“He came into my room and he played me.” (12x19)

“Let’s see. Crowley’s dead, Kelly’s dead, Cas is—Mom’s gone.” (13x01)

Dean’s inability to list Cas’s death singles him out as the most devastating of the losses.

“We’ve lost everything. And now you’re gonna bring him back.” (13x01)

While some people have heard this as “bring ‘em back”, the Netflix captions and transcripts I have been able to find say “him.”

“And Cas bought it. And you know what it got him? It got him dead! Now you may be able to forget about that, but I can't!” (13x03)

“I have a family.” (In response to John Winchester lamenting Dean doesn’t have a wife and kids) (14x13)

Comments From Cas

To Dean

“I was getting too close to the humans in my charge. You. They feel I've begun to express emotions. The doorways to doubt.” (4x16)

“I’m hunted. I rebelled. And I did it—all of it—for you.” (5x02)

“I gave everything for you. And this is what you give to me.” (5x18)

“I do everything that you ask. I always come when you call.” (6x21)

“So you will bow down and profess your love unto me, your Lord.” (6x22)

Before taking on the role of God, Cas seemed very concerned with Dean’s forgiveness/acceptance/love. It is interesting that, as God, that was the first thing he asked for, turning from Sam (who had just stabbed him) to Dean to ask for love.

“Sam, and everyone you know, everyone you love, they could be long dead. Everyone except me.” (10x22)

“I love you. I love all of you.” (Arguably to the group, but the first “I love you” can be seen as Dean-specific, especially since it cuts to Dean after being said.) (12x12)

“You mean too much to me. To everything.” (12x9) (To Mary, Sam, and Dean. However, the camera immediately cuts to Dean specifically, even though he is in the back of the group).

“I’m your Huckleberry.” (13x06)

Cas love confession (15x18)

To Other Characters

���Dean and I do share a more profound bond.” (6x03)

“I won’t hurt Dean.” (8x17)

This is said as Castiel is breaking away from Naomi’s mind control—mind control she fostered specifically by having Cas kill a thousand versions of Dean. This implies she knows that Cas’s strongest loyalty is to Dean, not Sam, or humans in general.

“The point is that they [Dean & Sam] were here at all and you got to know them, you -- When they're gone, it will hurt, but that hurt will remind you of how much you loved them.” (14x14)

“You know, Dean, he... he feels things more acutely than any human I've ever known.” (15x13)

Other Comments

Reaper: “How do I start looking for this... Castiel?” Bartholomew: “I got one word for you. Winchester.”

Rowena: “An Angel of the Lord, shattered at the altar of Winchester.”

Use of We vs. I

In the crypt scene in Season 8, Dean tells Cas, “We need you.” This is not enough to stop Cas’s actions. When the language switches to “I need you,” Cas drops the angel blade.

We can clearly see that Dean tries to put up barriers about how he really feels about Cas in his use of “We.” For example, after showing the audience many scenes of Dean, not Sam, frantically trying to call Cas, we get the following lines:

“So not only were you ditching us, but you were also ignoring us?”

“With everything that's going on, you can't just go dark like that. We didn't know what happened to you. We were worried. That's not okay.”

It’s clear that these “we’s” are really “I’s”

In the alternate future presented in 15x9, Sam asks Dean, “What’s happened to you Dean… ever since…?” to which Dean responds, “Ever since what? We lost pretty much everyone we’ve ever cared about? Ever since the Mark made Cas go crazy and I had to bury him in a Malak box… ever since then?” While he acknowledges Sam’s losses as well, his switch to “I” in reference to Cas implies that Cas’s loss belongs especially to him.

(Mostly) Verbal Parallels to Other Couples

In 1x01 (start at 2:27), Dean pulls Sam away from a dead Jess in a direct parallel to how Sam pulls Dean away from Cas in 12x23

Following Jessica’s death, Sam keeps seeing glimpses of her as he and Dean travel around in the Impala. Dean does the same in Season 8 following his return from Purgatory without Cas.

David from “Bloodlines” (9x20) tells his love interest, “I was there. Where were you?” which is the same thing Dean says to Cas in “The Man Who Would Be King” (6x20)

When asking Dean whether he’s in love with Cassie, Dean gives a similar response to what he will say in 10x5 when asked about Destiel.

Destiel is paralleled with their counterparts from the Supernatural play who are “a couple in real life” (10x5)

Cain compares himself to Dean in Season 10. He describes the significant kills of his life (The Knights of Hell, his wife Collette, and his brother Abel) and tells Dean that he will follow his same pattern by killing the King of Hell Crowley, Castiel, then Sam. It is also mentioned that all Collette asked of Cain was “to stop,” which is the same language Cas uses with Dean in 10x22.

Dean explains how his parents fell in love to prove his identity to Mary in 12x1, “He was cute and he knew the words to every Zeppelin song, so when he asked you for your number, you gave it to him, even though you knew your dad would be pissed.” Later in this same season (12x19), Dean gives Cas a homemade mixtape of his favorite Zeppelin songs.

Ishim fell in love with a human named Lily Sunder who ultimately left him for someone else. When trying to recruit Castiel, he compares Dean to her.

Dean questions how much of their life has been controlled by God. Cas states, “You asked, ‘What about all of this is real?’ We are.” (15x02) Later, they find out that God has been using Eileen to spy on the Winchesters. She says, “After what happened, I don’t know what’s real anymore.” Sam kisses her, stating “I know that was real.” (15x09)

PART 2 “Physical Touch” Now Finished

[gaysidneycrosby]

WAIT okay okay okay okay okay. here’s my take on how supernatural should have ended.

we start our journey with the season 12 finale

crowley doesn’t die. he decides to just go be some guy on earth, for whatever reason the gates of hell don’t get sealed. he is present for season 13

mary doesn’t get trapped in the apocalypse world either 

lucifer does still kill cas before getting trapped in apocalypse world. the rift closes. that is all for apocalypse world society has progressed past the need for apocalypse world.

we then do season 13. in secret good SPN, season 13 is the last season.

s13 is entirely monster of the week. the only overarching plots are emotional, character-based ones.

dean has lots of conflicting and complex feelings towards jack. he is wary and maybe a bit cold for the first...one to two episodes of s6, but he is ultimately kind to him because dean is always kind to children. when jack is scared that he’s evil and that he’s actually a monster, dean sits him down and talks to him and they start to bond. 

around episode six, dean and sam and mary take jack up to meet jody and the girls. they all get to talking about good memories and some of the people they’ve lost, specifically cas, bobby, charlie, eileen, and kevin.

that night jack is thinking about the conversation. same as canon, he wakes cas up in the empty on instinct. he also resurrects bobby, charlie, eileen, and kevin, all of whom appear in the bunker. 

at the same time cas wakes up in a field and dean and sam bring him home, and we get all of the tearful reunions. there is a heartwarming scene of everyone having a family dinner.

for the rest of the season, as they deal with cases, sam starts to develop a network of hunters. he dispatches cases to people in the right area as they come up and the system works well. the bunker becomes part-dispatch center part-hunter lodge. people often crash there if they’re in the area. 

rowena is also around teaching him witchy stuff. you start to think there’s going to be a love triangle with rowena sam and eileen but then it’s actually just increasingly hinted at that they’re all together.

dean and cas continue to dance around the elephant in the room. there’s an episode where the b-plot is jack and claire trying increasingly convoluted plans to push them together but it keeps failing because dean and cas are extremely stupid.

there IS a scene of cas and dean taking claire and jack out for ice cream. claire is like “lol you guys are like our gay dads”

there’s also a scene where claire makes a gay joke about dean and cas and crowley high-fives her

there’s a very very close call on a hunt and dean almost dies but ends up being fine. that night cas goes to dean’s room and says that understands that dean may not return his feelings but he just wanted to say it so dean knew it, confession is similar to the actual 15x18 one without the “i’m about to sacrifice myself for you” stuff. next scene dean finds cas sitting on the roof and sits with him, tells him he feels the same way. they have a long forehead touch and a kiss against a backdrop of the stars because i think it would be pretty. 

a few weeks after that, dean sits down with sam and says he and cas and jack are moving out of the bunker. they have a really long conversation and sam expresses surprise that dean is willing for the two of them to be separate given how they’ve operated for most of their lives and dean says something about it finally being time to grow up “and besides, we’ve got jack, it’s not like i’ll get empty nest syndrome.” 

the finale is narrated by mary, because her character is basically the inciting action of the show--she makes the deal with azazel which is how she dies originally etc. it’s about how there’s no more apocalypses on the horizon and how even though she wasn’t there for a lot of it her boys did a good job raising themselves and stuff. last scene is big found family dinner

[shoplifting]

I'm only going to post about good omens once ever, but I'm genuinely enamored with the promo for it. The poster for season 2 looks like this, right.

[Start ID. The poster for Good Omens season 2. Aziraphale and Crowley are standing close together on a street under a plaid umbrella Aziraphael is holding. It is raining quite hard, and the rain is at an angle. There are clouds on the horizon and a few bright stars in the dark sky. The buildings in the midground look Western European. End ID.]

And what Neil Gaiman had to say about season 2 disclosed this little detail!

[Start image transcription. Season 2 finds the angel and demon living among mortals in London's Soho "when an unexpected messenger presents a surprising mystery," according to Amazon. Season 1 was released in May 2019. End transcription.]

And if no one else is going to make the connection to this song, I will. English band The Pogues wrote a song in 1985 about a deep, awesome, and essentially human love. It ended up being one of their most popular songs, and it's called A Rainy Night in Soho. These are the lyrics.

[Start image transcription. I've been loving you a long time, Down all the years, down all the days, And I've cried for all your troubles, Smiled at your funny little ways. We watched our friends grow up together, And we saw them as they fell, Some of them fell into Heaven, Some of them fell into Hell.

I took shelter from a shower, And I stepped into your arms, On a rainy night in Soho, The wind was whistling all its charms. I sang you all my sorrows, You told me all your joys, Whatever happened to that old song, To all those little girls and boys.

Sometimes I'd wake up in the morning, The ginger lady by my bed, Covered in a cloak of silence, I'd hear you talking in my head. I'm not singing for the future, I'm not dreaming of the past, I'm not talking of the first times, I never think about the last.

Now the song is nearly over, We may never find out what it means, Still there's a light I hold before me, You're the measure of my dreams, The measure of my dreams. End transcription.]

I'm not nearly invested enough to unpack that parallel, but here's the simple facts.

It was likely not an intentional allusion.

The details do line up strikingly well.

The song came out 5 years before the book was written and in the authors' home country.

If these promos were a reference to A Rainy Night in Soho, that's fucking stellar, that's great, that could be the tiniest sliver of queerbait for a very narrow audience but that's fine because I am the very narrow audience. If the promos were a coincidence, it's still a beautiful parallel.

[Start ID. Image 1 is the in conclusion meme. Under the words "in conclusion" is the rainbow pride flag.

Image 2 is the which is gayer meme. On the left is the words "being gay" under the rainbow pride flag. On the right is the words "whatever the fuck the good omens season 2 poster has going on" under the Good Omens season 2 poster. End ID.]

[transfagholmes]

(slightest bit of enabling) OKAY SO my thoughts on angel gender is that they can be queer. who would've guessed.

most pressingly, i think that s2 of the show raised some questions, especially with the introduction of muriel, an angel using they/them pronouns, and beelzebub's form change.

this is more gender questions than gender thoughts but since other people are interested and i enjoy gender discussion. can angels have gender?

there are a variety of gender presentations, human and otherwise, in the show now, and different approaches to them. Beelzebub changes their form on purpose. Gabriel, Uriel and Michael and so on are never shown to be that different in appearance throughout time, they roughly stay the same shape. and we never hear their pronouns change.

why? if you'll ignore doylist explanations (i am simply having fun here), how did they decide to present the way they do and use the pronouns they do? did god design them that way? if so, how is that different to an assigned sex/gender presentation? is it purely aesthetic? do their presentations indicate that angels have a capacity for gender preferences? is it purely to mimic humans? to what degree do they choose their own appearances? do they make their bodies from scratch?

i would have said angels and demons don't really care as a rule, their form and pronouns are just aesthetics to fit in when they visit earth, they weren't designed for gender, HOWEVER. they all rarely visit earth. and we know that they can change the forms they take. and beelzebub does, because they wanted to. they demonstrated a preference for how they appear. and they use they/them pronouns, while other demons and angels also use he/him and she/her.

why do angels and demons go by different pronouns? do they care at all? how else do they decide what pronouns to use if not by a preference? are they assigned pronouns based on their forms? is it just randomly done? when they use these forms and pronouns while in their home bases of heaven/hell, is that just from habit? how is a habit like that different from gender? does any of this mean that angels could have a capacity for gender?

the discussion of Aziraphale and Crowley's genders is unavoidably different from that of the rest, seeing that they have have spent so much time on earth that they're described as 'gone native'. Aziraphale is in the shape of a man in Eden all the way to present day, which i do believe means he IS a man for all his choices (i am far from the first to point this out), specifically and deliberately a gay man. in the book, Crowley shows just as much preference for a single form as Aziraphale (he explicitly has a favourite shape that he hates to change from), though it's been argued that the tv show gives him a degree of fluidity, which would be interesting if they explored it more.

but how quickly would other occult and ethereal beings demonstrate a preference for specific gender presentations? if they had to change their form, would they miss it? if someone used different pronouns for them, would they care? if not, why would they stay consistent?

i know a lot of this is sort of explained by 'well the show needs to have actors and honestly whatever you're saying could get confusing' but. shh. quiet.

and also. on this topic i have to say i'm still annoyed by the argument that angels and demons in good omens are genderless because they are 'sexless unless they make an Effort'. first of all, this has been used most often to discredit certain queer readings of the book and show. i've seen that sentence taken at face value and repeated without actual engagement of what it means in the context of the work. and the argument doesn't make sense because sex =/= gender, or rather, sex = gender in that they're both socially constructed and changeable, or rather, assigned sex =/= practiced gender, or whatever, you get it. so for example if someone used only that 'sexless' argument to say an angel couldn't be a gay man because he wasn't designed to be, i could accuse them of transphobia and more importantly of entirely missing the point. not to mention there is an 'unless' in that sentence that has no reason to be ignored.

anyway there is just, i feel, a lot of potential for different and interesting interpretations here.

I'm thinking abt angel gender in gomens. idk if I'll post those thoughts. but if anyone wants to talk to me about angel gender, I Am Thinking