#im actually so mentally ill over these damn comic book characters this is insane

[boywonderasnf]

its that time of day again where i get sad about Dick Grayson (and Wally West)

this happens about 2739 times a day lmao.

i dont even know why im sad

i think its happy sad where im just So Fucking Happy and then i happy cry but then i get sad cause i got no lover..

but oh well yk?

[jcmorgenstern]

Hey kid wanna cry Remember that kiss between Clary and 'Sebastian' in s2, after Clary says that Jonathan deserves to be saved? How desperate that kiss was. Now knowing the that for years Jonathan was clinging to the idea that somewhere out there theres a person who will save him, who will not hurt and abandon him puts the whole scene in different perspective 😢

you’re very right and you should fucknig say it anon!!

I’m trying to get over my annoyance with how much they’ve fucked Jonathan’s storyline (and my god, the timeline)–the demon clary kills in s1 at the EARLIEST appears at the most 2 months ago, which means Jonathan only learned she existed 2 months ago max. He then, in that time, made a deal with Azazel to get out of hell, walked to Paris, kidnapped Sebastian at a cafe, moved to New York, rented an apartment, knew enough about the goings on at the institute to steal the sword (Genuinely blanking on how he got the Cup to summon Azazel–i knew at one point but rn im anxious and caffeinated), summoned Azazel, infiltrated the Institute….like this is fucking insane on so many levels, and now he can’t even find a sword? ??? ?? ? ? ? like damn need me that kind of motivation on my finals

(also im pre sure aline mentions sebastian dissapeared more than two months ago but lmao what’s consistency)

I actually really liked the prince/princess thing, because it flips the very gendered script by having Jonathan wish for Clary to save him. and Clary IS that figure–she goes to insane lengths to protect and save Jace. I don’t think Clary’s horror at realizing she could have but didn’t save Jonathan is her being like “oh damn im a woman therefore it’s my job,” it’s that being powerless or failing to save a life is one of her worst fears, and she’s upset that yet another family member is “lost” to her. Her entire arc is unified by the theme of finding and wanting to keep her family and loved ones (both family by blood or by familial love) safe. It’s also a callback to the books (a thread that is completely dropped) where she writes a comic about a dark prince that she interprets to be “Sebastian.”

When Jonathan calls “you were supposed to be my princess” after her, he doesn’t mean “I was supposed to carry u away at the altar and we’d make babies in heterosexual union,” he means “you were supposed to be my knight in shining armor and rescue me from the dragon/evil stepmother.” In the context of the story as it’s told–Jonathan as Rapunzel (or Fiona LMAOO) in the tower crying for help, and Clary the knight with the sword only the chosen one can wield riding to his rescue–I feel that meaning is fairly obvious if you understand his character beyond “ew incest lol.”

To put it more academically: in the terms of a feminist reading of the fairytale, Jonathan understands himself not as Clary’s possessor, but the “princess” she as the (traditionally male) knight rescuer is entitled to after the rescue. It may actually deliberately echo the book line where Clary asks Jonathan “who do you belong to.” The script of Jonathan as the hyperagressive, masculine aggressor stalking the (artificially) agency-less woman is complicated by his dual role as the traditionally female victim of abuse waiting to be rescued by the traditional male rescuer. In just a quick few minutes we get a whole different dynamic where we realize Jonathan doesn’t feel he is entitled to her–from his (warped) point of view, he feels she is entitled to him. Jonathan views the act of receiving love in terms of his usefulness or how his identity/abilities/whatever can be exploited by whoever loves him (see: his speech to her about Valentine)–his confusion about why she doesn’t “want” him is because well, she defended him once as anon says, she saved him by giving him hope, she must love him–why won’t she take what’s hers?

This is the dynamic I’m fascinated by–I’ve always read Jonathan as an oddly feminized villain considering his other position as a hyperaggressive rapist–if I were to go full batshit on yall I’d bust out a “queer-coded men presented as often ineffectual rapists” reading but. ill leave that for another time.  or never. I feel the books made that reading very available by sexualizing his abuse by revealing his whip scars in a situation where he takes his shirt off and Clary is uncomfortably thirsty (and the audience is VERY comfortably thirsty). It’s also very surface-level and never really brought up again–something else you’d expect from a presentation of a female character’s abuse.

The show complicates it by presenting the product of Jonathan’s abuse as something to be reviled and horrific, but also kind of pathetically comedic. A male victim of abuse that actually lets the effects show is clearly something to be othered, pathologized, made into something charred and inhuman. The power and agency expected of a male character is restored to him in his rebirth, when the narrative invites you to consider whether he really could change; as that agency is slowly stripped away through imprisonment, a botched matricide attempt, implied (past) sexual assault, it’s paired with his implied descent into irredeemabe villainhood.

I fully realize I’ve jumped so far off the deep end I may as well have started burrowing into the ground of that metaphorical pool, but I think Jonathan’s dual status as feminized victim and masculinized rapist explains why some female fans find Jonathan deeply and fundamentally abhorrent and others find him sympathetic and relatable. Both, I think, are legitimate readings and reactions made available by the text–it’s a question not of whether people think rape is okay or not, but which of his dual gendered positions each person find more salient.

(I’d also argue the same could be said of Jace–do you see him as the typical heterosexual male jock, or the sensitive victim of abuse who struggles with his mental health? Honestly, this model applies to so many other characters–Tony Stark, for example, or Loki). I think it’s important as fans to appreciate, no matter your position or reading of a character, the alternate readings available–I understand why people hate Jonathan and are deeply uncomfortable with him, even if I don’t feel the same way. I don’t take Jonathan hate as a personal attack against my reading specifically, but against the person’s own particular interpretation of him. (I do often get annoyed if people deny the possibility of alternate readings, and probably get pissy in general, but shh).

anyway tldr this was actually just top/bottom discourse in disguise JONATHAN MORGENSTERN IS A BOTTOM thanks for coming to my TED talk haha gotcha