#is it necessarily queer coding

[aroaessidhe]

2024 reads / storygraph

Pluralities

sci-fi novella

a burned out 20-something with premonitions has a gender-questioning journey, after quitting their job and becoming friends with benefits with a trans guy

with a parallel narrative about a runaway alien prince in a space empire and his complicated friendship with his sentient spaceship friend

audiobook arc from netgalley!

[bibuckaroo]

not the eddie diaz is not queer coded allegations, end me now. he’s the most repressed man of all times, he has catholic guilt, had to unlearn toxic masculinity, failed marriage he idolizes, panic attack with girlfriend, erectile dysfunction with the other girlfriend. i’m sorry, what show are you watching? if he only had one of these factors then fine, but all of them? scream closeted.

[hylianane]

Still not over Oda deciding to have every single male character peep on the girls’ bath in Alabasta- including Luffy, Chopper, (disgustingly) King Cobra, and the fucking camel- EXCEPT for Zoro. In fact I’m pretty sure he’s the only main guy to have never been included in any of the many pervert gags. We talk about Luffy’s sexuality and very deliberate aroace coding a lot, but I think Zoro’s disinterest in women’s bodies is just as important to how he’s portrayed, and just as intentional on Oda’s part. Like, when we talk about the extremely (and justifiably!) popular mlm Zoro HC, it’s usually just our personal readings of his relationships with men like Luffy or Sanji, or (cough) strangely sexy one-liners, nothing we actually believe was intentional on Oda’s part. But this, I do believe is on purpose.

[bean-spring]

"lacy" is about loving somebody a whole lot but despite that love still being jealous of them because they have everything you don't. could be a best friend. could be a crush. it doesn't matter how you see it, but the main topic here is how jealousy can make you loathe someone you absolutely are head over heels for just because you feel so inferior to them it kills you. because you can't actually hate them and you never will.

[several-ravens]

u sound like the kind of person that thinks ocelot would do drag 😭

haha i've never thought about that actually xD

i don't believe he would particularly enjoy doing drag or even think about it, but he is a good actor and also a bit dramatic so he definitely wouldn't be ashamed (he'd do it if he really needed to for an operation, and he would probably complain afterwards)

it would be cowboy themed though, so he feels at least a little bit comfortable

[ranseur]

just fyi in case you weren't aware - brandon sanderson has talked about still being a practicing member of the mormon church despite the homophobia/human rights stuff the church supports

hi anon i wasn't aware of this! i'm surprised actually because his portrayals of queer characters in his books didn't give me the impression he was homophobic or against human rights, himself.

looking into it more- i see that he addressed his relationship w the LDS church in a recent AMA on reddit. to summarize, it seems like he's saying that he is pro-lgbtq+, that while he is still learning how to be better, he stays with LDS with the hopes that the community's stance on lgbtq+ people will change. and how he contributes to that shift is that many members of LDS read his books (i guess because he is a member) and through his books they see his nuanced portrayals of lgbtq+ characters. (https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/vtua7m/comment/ifa50ab/) that said, it does make me uncomfortable to learn his tithes potentially go towards harmful things that I am against. though it seems that based on his comments the homophobia is something he genuinely wrestles with, and openly denounces. I think if someone chooses not to read his books due to his faith, that's a very fair choice. on the other hand I respect Sanderson for admitting that his faith and political beliefs don't always align and for learning the progressive beliefs that he currently holds. i'm atheist and ex-christian; so i can sympathize with people who have complex relationships with their spiritual leaders and their personal faith. (personally I chose to leave and never look back) granted i haven't had a lot of time to think about this; but i'm wondering, and hoping this is fair to ask: if Sanderson's personal beliefs don't align with what other mormons believe, would it be fair to hold their beliefs against him by association? and if it is fair, then would I have to start holding every religious person accountable for any uncouth things that their religious text says or their leaders are responsible for? or could a person denounce those things, and be left to practice their faith in their own way? this is not an easy conversation to have- so its very fair if you won't agree with me but i hope i didn't come across as unfair. i think Sanderson isn't malicious, unlike Rowling who sucks, and i don't think he specifically supports or ignores the homophobia and anti-human rights that the church supports. also, sorry if this was long- im not good at being succinct.

[catnippackets]

disclaimer: as a sex-repulsed aroace person myself--

on one hand, there is definitely a bit of a double standard when it comes to handling canonically queer characters like, from what I've seen in the circles that I frequent (if you've had different experiences then great but I'm just telling it how I see it). for example, you're morally reprehensible if you ship a canon lesbian with a man or refer to a canon bi character as a lesbian. people will be so angry with you. and it's understandable, since there's so little queer rep in comparison to cishet rep that when there IS a rare actual queer character, the unofficial rule is "don't take that away from them when you add more headcanons to them". like, respect that this one is REAL and NOT just a headcanon. I think it makes perfect sense to feel upset when people take that away, even if it is just fiction and not even canon to the original source. and yet, whenever there exists a canon asexual character suddenly it's all "oh well asexual people can still have sex so it's fine if we headcanon THIS canon sexuality as something different". it makes me feel so genuinely heartache-y and depressed to see ppl ignoring that aspect of a character.

and by "canon" I'm also including characters that were never specifically referred to with a label but are very obviously coded as something, because those characters will still get the "even if it's not stated it's pretty obvious!!" treatment when it comes to showing attraction to the same gender, but not when they DON'T show attraction to any gender. like aro and/or ace coding just doesn't count. I understand that it's kind of hard to represent an absence of something, especially when you're only implying it and not even directly showing it, but it's not impossible. there's a lot of characters that you could argue are aroace coded the same way you could argue a character is gay coded. obviously to a degree every queer identity gets disrespected in fandom and it's something you just kinda have to deal with, but it's easier to notice when it's something you personally relate to. I don't think it would bother me as much if we didn't have that unofficial "respect the canon" rule and everyone just went wild with whatever, but the double standard does genuinely hurt me, especially when I see people I thought were cool about this stuff participating in it. so whenever I see someone fiercely defending an asexual character it really makes me feel good, like I'M being defended, not a random fictional character that I might not even recognize the name of. I feel safe, like that person will respect ME.

THAT BEING SAID,

AS a sex-repulsed aroace person who enjoys thinking about the entire spectrum of intimacy and where a character may fall exactly on that spectrum, ALSO as a person who is aware that "asexual" simply means "does not experience sexual attraction" and not necessarily "is violently repulsed by anything sexual", sometimes I DO want to play out scenarios for my own enjoyment. sometimes I DO want to think hm I wonder where this ace character's line is, compared to a different ace character. I wonder if there is anyone who would be an exception for them, and how they could go about dealing with that exception. I wonder if they're favourable, neutral, or repulsed. if those aspects of their character aren't explicitly stated then what's to stop me from playing around with them and working through my own issues in a controlled and non-canon environment? if they have the same identity as me, I am way more likely to want to play around with them like a doll and perhaps play out scenarios that I might have thought about before but don't actually want to do for real. I'm not taking away their identity, after all; I'm just, in this scenario, imagining this ace character as an ace that might have sex on at least one occasion for whatever reason. either just to try it, or because they do have someone they'd make an exception for, or if they got bored enough, whatever the reason. it isn't quite disrespecting their truth unless it's explicitly stated either in canon or by word of god that it's something they're uncomfortable with. and to be honest, if I see another asexual creator headcanoning a character as somewhere on the asexual spectrum and depicting them in sexual situations, it makes me almost happy, to know that they're still acknowledging that character's canon identity and accepting and exploring the nuance that could come with it, even if I personally believe that this specific character would be repulsed instead of neutral or favourable. there's this understanding of "I'm doing a character study exploration thing", and not "I don't care I just wanna sexualize this character"

but I literally feel GUILTY when I want to write what is essentially a thinkpiece disguised as a fanfiction or original story on asexuality and take an asexual character (canon or coded) and involve them in sexual situations to explore different avenues of the spectrum. I feel like I'm betraying everyone who's like me and is frustrated with how aroace characters are treated within fandom. I'm like "am I being just as bad as those other people who will disrespect a character's canon sexuality just because they think that character is hot and want to ship them with someone? do they do the same thing with other types of queer characters? how does this reflect that person's view of people, if they're explicitly told someone feels a certain way and decides to ignore it for their own amusement? or is it just because they're fictional and not real people and I'm being really sensitive and thinking way too much into it? am I not doing the exact same thing? do I have more credence to explore scenarios like this because I am aroace and sex-repulsed myself and therefore have a pass to do whatever I want and it won't come off as a little weird the way it might if someone who's allosexual did it?"

and these two opinions are at war in my mind constantly. like both of them can and do co-exist but I still struggle to accept that lol

[alexwilltellyouthings]

Ok I have so many thoughts about painland ending up canon or not and I. Just.

Listen I AGREE that their bond goes beyond being romantic or not. It's obvious, it's beautiful, I love it and I love them and their friendship and I truly do think it is important that media has this kind of relationship portrayed.

But.

But.

I would be lying if I said I wouldn't be disappointed if it doesn't turn romantic. It involves a lot of things.

1: I want Edwin to have that. He'll still be happy without it, yes, but god can't he have that? He's been through so much. He had a speedrun through his sexuality issues and confessed in hell. Like wtf. Can't he have that???

2. Bisexual Charles would actually be so important to me. And yeah he can be bi and not in love with Edwin but come on lol. The thing is, there's not many bi men in media. Even less bi men figuring out their bisexuality. Even less bi men figuring out their sexuality when they were raised in the 80s and knowing their best friend is in love. Do you see how many layers exist here? How amazing his story could be? Charles has so much we still don't know about him. And yes, I would like that one of those things could be something I relate to. Besides trauma. Call me selfish. And like he's so bisexual coded it would be offensive for him to be straight I'm sorry.

3. They exist in other universes. Let them be platonic there. Let them be romantic this one time.

4. I know falling in love with a straight person is a very common story and I don't think it's wrong for it to happen in a show, but honestly, it's not what I sign up for when I'm watching queer stuff. Think Our Flag Means Death. It probably changed my brain chemistry because anything less than that gets really hard to swallow. I know, we all have queerbaiting trauma, and I know this wouldn't be the case, and it never claimed to be something as queer as OFMD. But I got so attached that... Well, I wouldn't stop watching if this happens, but it wouldn't sit well with me. It's a bitter feeling, you know?

5. They didn't have anything be explicit, but come on, they did set us up. Charles got jealous at Monty, and only Monty, for that matter. I wouldn't say his thing with the Cat King is necessarily jealousy, more like protectiveness, but that can be disputable. And both George and Jayden said more than once that Charles' response to the confession let things open. So I mean if that door wasn't closed, then please don't close it now! The road until things happen can be long, dramatic, tortuous, whatever, there's many ways to tell a love story. But if I'm sitting for it, then I don't want to get shot in the face later on (unless it's for plot reasons which ok).

6. Have I mentioned that bisexual Charles

Anyway I feel kinda bad for wishing so much they get romantic because I see and agree with the whole platonic discourse. But yeah those are all the reasons why I can't stop myself. Have a good day everyone

[sir-ballister-boldheart]

"Having gay characters in media nowadays isn't very impressive, or pushing boundaries because gay people are soooooo accepted by everyone today, but this character from 20 years ago who was once maybe hinted to be gay by one of its actors is revolutionary" sure is a statement. Especially when that statement is made about Nimona, you know, the movie that Disney almost killed for the super accepted gay kiss at the end.

I am not insulting queer coded (actually queer coded, NOT queer-baity) characters that had to exist that way because it was the only way to get their stories told. I am not even saying that queer coding is necessarily a bad way of telling a story. But some of you really need to get out of your fandom biases and give two thoughts about what you are saying

[mousegoesmoo]

Okay I'm sure many of you all have seen this tiktok:

This tiktok has seemingly reached a very broad audience and I'm lowkey beefing with some of the comments. And then comments are stirring some byler doubt in me but I'm just gonna come on here and think through things logically. I'm only going to take into account things that are canon or have been stated by official sources.

Many commenters have stated that Byler will only be one sided, Will in love with Mike. Narratively, this does not make sense. Will's character has been pre-planned to be queer from season 1 episode 1 and in his character description. Additionally, Robin originally was not going to be gay, but that was changed during the filming of Season 3 (Maya Hawke talks about this). So, why would they have the only canonically gay character be used as a plot device to further El and Mikes relationship? It just doesn't make sense for his love to be unrequited. They have stretched out the plot point of Will's sexual orientation and love for Mike for many seasons, it has been slow burned. They could have given Will a sharp rejection in Season 3 during the rain fight, but they didn't. If they did, moving to California would be an opportune time for Will to move on from his love for Mike. But they didn't. Will made an entire painting for Mike and gave him a veiled confession- if it ends in unrequitedness they stretched out this plot line for far to long. It is unnecessary. It would just be unnecessarily devastating for Will to be rejected in the final season. Plus, we have seen it before, entire relationships can form in one season. Mike and El were formed in one season, Nancy and Steve broke up and then Nancy and Jonathan got together, why can't the same happen with Mike and Will?

2. Mike has never been implied or done any actions to suggest he is gay or reciprocates Will's feelings. First of, to quote the byler slides, Mike has more queer coding than Will (slide 7, slides linked). To preface, queer coding is "...when a character’s sexual orientation is implied by significant subtext without being stated outright."(Elizabeth Duarte). So, this doesn't necessarily prove that Mike is in love with Will, but it does imply that he is in the very least bicurious. Personally, I believe that one of the strongest bits of queer coding for Mike is during his initial attraction to Eleven. Eleven was often described to look very similar to Will and boy-ish. A little suspicious if you ask me. To add on to that, the problems in Mike and Eleven's relationship have grown as El has explored her femininity and self. Granted, the problems could have arose due to them both aging, but, it is still another common denominator. But, the byler slides have many instances of queer coding for Mike (some probably better than what I presented), so I would suggest looking into those rather than having me repeat them here. But queer coding implies queerness, therefore, Stranger Things has suggested that Mike is not straight.

2.5 Mike's feelings have never been reciprocated for Will. Now this is a trickier one. We haven't had a scene from Mike's perspective in a while, making it very difficult to have hard evidence that he is into Will as well. However, we can prove that Mike is heavily queer coded (because he is). So, if Mike were gay, who would he direct his affections towards? Lucas, who is trying to rekindle his relationship Max, Dustin, who has had a steady long distance relationship with Suzie, or Will, who has never shown interest in any girls despite having many opportunities (arguably, more opportunities than the other party members)? They would not put Mike into a one sided pining with Lucas or Dustin for the final season, it simply does not make sense. But Will, who has already had a developed crush on Mike for several seasons, the pieces start to click together. Mike liking Will is very dependent on Mike being queer, which we have proven through the fact that he is heavily queer coded. So, the only same sex individual that would make logical sense as his love interest is Will. Also: a huge point about not having a Milkeven endgame is that Eleven was supposed to die and, consequently, so would their relationship.

3. Unlikely for the time, so it will never happen. Girlypops. It is unlikely for someone to be dating someone with superpowers in the 80's. It is unlikely for a parallel dimension to take over and infect this one random town in Indiana in the 80's. ITS FICTION. Additionally, it is know that homophobia exists in the fictional Stranger Things universe (Lonnie, Troy, Robin's extreme hesitance to come out, etc.), ,but on the other hand, the Duffers are actively pursuing a relationship between Robin and Vickie. As of our knowledge right now, Vickie's sole purpose in the show is to be a love interest of Robin's. If they don't end up together it is most likely because Robin either gets a new love interest or one of the two dies in the final season. Ultimately, I do not think that Stranger Thing's taking place in the 80's will have an impact on whether or not byler becomes canon.

So those were the main three points made in the comment section of that tiktok.

I just want to also state that if Byler isn't canon, I would want to consider this to be a case of queerbaiting (but, this still depends on how they wrap up Season 5). Also, I would consider slapping a new love interest for Will to wrap up the season as very sloppy and lazy writing. AND, I think using Will's love for Mike as a stepping stone to progress a heterosexual relationship deeply offensive. If they were going to have Will be rejected, they should have done it way earlier in the series.

Thats all I have to say xx

[youssefguedira]

like the thing is i DO think misogyny is a major contributing factor to a lot of older 'bro' movie homoeroticism. sure sometimes it's queercoding and deliberate subtext. other times it's the base assumption that the Love Interest will fall for the Hero because that's just how things work, the hero saves the day, the girl is his reward. there's so little effort put into the writing of the intended love interest because she is ultimately there to fulfil the role of hero's prize and therefore their relationship doesn't need development because it will simply happen. she's not a real person she's decoration. but the hero's sidekick, or best friend, or rival - more time is invested into these relationships because they are both men, and therefore permitted to be more complex characters by the film. they are not necessarily written well, dependent on the film, but they will get more to work with than the women in the film. and so of course their relationships will be deeper and get more screen time, because they are not a foregone conclusion. which lends itself to queer readings and homoeroticism.

this isn't confined to bro movies or action movies either! like the examples i cited in the tags earlier were the lost boys, dead poets society, and die hard, which are different types of film but have the same issue. both the lost boys' and die hard's love interests are so woefully underdeveloped that the more compelling relationship is with another man, the villain and the cop respectively. those are the relationships that get developed. die hard's wife is just kind of there sometimes, and the lost boys' is just a generic damsel in distress with nothing going on for her beyond standing there and looking pretty.

dead poets society is a different beast, more drama heavy. there's barely any women in it! one subplot with one romantic interest that involves repeated overstepping of boundaries despite the girl telling the guy to stop, but it's fine because she wants him really, she's just trying to protect him of course, and she needs rescuing. the rest of the film is easy to read through a queer lens because of the exclusion of women from the environment entirely, partially because it's an all boys school, but also because women are simply there to be looked at and pursued but not intellectual equals. when they're brought into the cave it's a threat to the space, and of course they've never heard of shakespeare, because dead poets society's idea of culture and intelligence is reserved for men near exclusively. there's a campaign to bring girls into the school but it's so they can fuck them. so of course it feels like they're all gay because women are deliberately excluded from the film's spaces.

like i get the point about intricate rituals and queer coding and all that. but i DO think misogyny is an important factor here

[renthony]

I can't stop thinking about Arcane. I've never been so obsessed with a piece of media that irritated me so much. I can't put it in my "I love this, it's my favorite" category, but I can't put it in my "I hate this, it sucks" category. It is the ultimate mixed bag that I will be obsessed with forever.

Season 1: This is an intensely political story that invokes real-world systemic injustice, and the core conflict is between the oppressed undercity and the privileged upper city. It's a little messy and doesn't necessarily handle everything perfectly, but the plot is wrapped up in ideological divides and poverty vs privilege.

Season 2: Actually we want to go play around with other worldbuilding stuff that we haven't set up very well, because none of that political stuff matters as much. We aren't going to explore how fucked up it is that the city fighting for its independence gets absolutely nothing they wanted and the last character who seemed to actually give a shit about that conflict is not going to get a single speaking line in the final act of the show. We are not going to explore what actually wound up happening with the political situation. Also, the only happy canon queer couple are cops, a gay-coded character got word-of-god confirmed as ace in the most homophobic AND aphobic way possible, and nobody from the undercity got an actual happy ending. The working class is going to continue suffering while the rich cop lesbians get their happy ending. Fuck you.

Like, I really cannot get over the fact that the show's marketing did a big "Sevika's story ends in act 3!" and then she didn't even speak. What the fuck.

Also, we're supposed to accept that Jinx has an ambiguous ending because of her pink shimmer dash, but all that makes me think is, "babygirl, why couldn't you do that for Isha?" It feels weak. She's a superpowered machine who can defy the laws of physics, but not when her kid is in danger???

This show makes me want to chew glass. It's so fucking beautiful. The soundtrack is fire. I find most of the characters deeply compelling. I am going to be unhinged about them for the rest of my life. But the plot...augh.

[lemmeaskthedevil]

How to write 911 characters: Black women

since its black history month, here's how to write Athena, Hen, and Karen. I want to do this because I see really offensive things in fanfic when people write them and that usually goes unnoticed.

Athena:

✨ reference the source material (for everyone actually) ✨

Athena is a very kind and affectionate person with her friends, she's a great listener and always willing to help others out. She's stubborn when it comes to herself and taking breaks. She's a great mom and partner, though conflict has arisen when it comes to letting people in.

2. her relationship with Buck is not necessarily motherly. If you like to write her that way, it's your story but be careful you aren't falling into the mammy trope.

that would include, treating buck as though he's a child that needs protection from everyone, a cartoonish fondness and exaggerative movements, mainly as a character just to prop up Buck.

3. do not write her speaking voice different from the rest of the characters. I've seen things like: "A' course sugah!" Not only is that inaccurate, it's inappropriate.

4. Athena's relationship with being a cop, being in an interracial relationship, and being previously married to a gay black man are all very complex issues in the black community that require research before speaking on. I haven't seen people ever go in depth with this in fics but the show can only encapsulate so much about it without offending viewers so if you'd like to be more candid, please take the necessary steps.

Hen and Karen:

✨black queer love, especially wlw, isn't just to support your main ship please appreciate them ✨

hen is very driven, very caring, very intuitive. She's always been a listening ear for others, and finds comfort in her friends' advice. She's a great parent and a great partner.

Her relationship with Chimney can be silly, serious, protective, and everything you need in a best friend. They both look out for each other and aren't afraid to call out bs. Her relationship with Athena is also really great and balanced.

Hen can be a older sister to Buck, but it's a lot more light hearted. They also can be idiots together and Buck holds a lot of respect for her. Again, do not reduce her to this, that will be insensitive.

While we don't see Karen a lot, you see how much she cares about her family, how she does trust Hen but has been concerned about losing her loved ones. She's a brilliant woman and she often hangs out with Athena and has been friends with Chimney before she was with Hen.

again do not write any of their speaking voices differently. most of the time, Hen code switches and rarely uses any slang so stay away from that.

[sexy-sapphic-sorcerer]

1: Magic is a Metaphor < 2: Morgana is a Lesbian < 3: Merlin is Gay > 4: Arthur is Bi

Again with the whole metaphor thing, Merlin's entire character is about having to hide his identity and wishing that he could be free to be himself so that he wouldn't have to lie about how much Arthur means to him. So that's all very gay, but he's also just very queer-coded generally. There are so many jokes about him being more effeminate or wearing women's clothing, most notably in this episode where he dresses in full drag and then takes the opportunity to shamelessly flirt with Arthur. Unhinged.

Basically every other character seems to just assume that he's gay, at least towards the end, because Gaius and Arthur are in utter disbelief that Merlin would be 'seeing a girl'. And of course he isn't, he's actually sneaking around with that druid guy, leading Arthur to question how courting a girl would leave him 'walking with a limp.'

I also think it's very interesting how often Merlin has to pretend to be attracted to women to avoid people discovering his secret, like with Gwen in Series 1 or Morgana in Series 2. Or this scene, where Gwen and Merlin are the only people not affected by the Lamia's seduction charm and they're trying to figure out why. And Merlin says, 'it doesn't affect you because you're a woman'. And firstly, Gwen is like, 'so what?' So, bisexual queen. And then Merlin says, "it only affects men," and Gwen says, "so then why haven't you fallen under her spell?" And Merlin is just like, 'oh shit, I don't know. I can't think of any reason why I wouldn't be seduced by a woman.'

Now, you might be saying, "but Merlin is attracted to women! what about that one female love interest he had for literally one episode who immediately died?" Oh, you mean:

I'm sorry to all of the Freylin shippers out there, but this was so clearly just the writers' last-ditch attempt to make Merlin straight. If you think about it, Freya also 'has magic' if you catch my drift, and that is the only thing that she and Merlin have in common, and the only thing that they talk about. And if you look at their dialogue out of context, it really doesn't seem like it's magic that they're talking about. It's just gay/lesbian solidarity. Also, never forget when Colin Morgan accidentally referred to Merlin's potential love interests as "him or her." So who else could he have been thinking of?

Merlin definitely had a crush on Lancelot. From the moment that they first meet, he just keeps going on about, 'omg, isn't Lancelot so strong and brave and chivalrous? God, I hope he becomes a knight, he would look so good in a suit of armour.' And then he says to Gwen, completely unprompted, "so just for the sake of argument– Arthur or Lancelot?" Why are you thinking about that Merlin? Then that scene ends with Merlin and Lancelot getting drunk and stumbling home together and waking up the next morning having shared Merlin's single bed. So take from that what you will. I don't necessarily think that anything happened between them, not because I think Lancelot is straight, don't get it twisted, just because I think he's a fucking virgin.

But certified pansexual manwhore Gwaine on the other hand, oh they definitely fucked. And it's a very similar situation to Lancelot, Merlin's only flirting technique is just to find some buff guy who's just saved his life and be like, 'oh my god what can I possibly do to repay you? Maybe you could come back to my place and I could tend to your wounds and then we could go down to the tavern, have a few drinks'.

And it works. Merlin literally used his job as apprentice physician to the Knights of the Round Table as his own personal Grindr, and i love that for him. But, of course, these are just side hoes to Merlin's main bitch, Arthur.

You can deny everything else that I've said, but you cannot deny that Merlin was in love with Arthur. And don't even try to say, 'but it's just because it was his destiny'. Because, yeah, like that's any less gay. They're two sides of the same coin, destined to be together, Merlin 'uses magic only for Arthur'. Come on.

Also, it's pretty clear that Merlin cares about Arthur more than he cares about his destiny, throughout the entire show. But it culminates in this scene in series five where, because of very contrived plot reasons, Arthur has to choose between legalizing magic and saving the life of Mordred. And Merlin convinces Arthur not to legalise magic so that he will let Mordred die. He literally enables the genocide of his own people and condemns himself to a lifetime of suffering just on the off chance that he can spend a bit more time with Arthur.

And if that isn't heartbreaking enough, of course, every action that Merlin makes only confirms Arthur's fate. And after he very platonically dies in Merlin's arms, as dudebros do, what does Merlin do? does he go back to Camelot and live a full happy heterosexual life? Of course not. No, he spends the next one and a half thousand years just waiting at Arthur's resting place, waiting for the day that Arthur will be resurrected and they can be together again. What the fuck kind of Greek tragedy, Achilles and Patroclus level shit is that? That is fucking gay.

[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.

[h0bg0blin-meat]

What hindu gods/deities are lgbt (I'm sorry if this is rude or ignorant I just wish to learn as I've heard some are)

Dw it's neither rude nor ignorant. Now before I start I do wanna say that almost all the queerness we see in Hindu mythology is highly subtextual most of the time, which is like pretty obvious cuz these were the ancient times. So this might lead to a varied number of interpretations, and I can only offer the same. But most of them are pretty convincingly queer, so let's get into it cuz why tf not. (This is gonna be a loooooong post so buckle up)

Vishnu

This fella is probably the most pan-coded deity in the entire pantheon. Extremely comfortable with both his masculine and feminine side, Vishnu can sometimes be considered one of the peak genderfluid icons out there. His avatar, Krishna, despite being referred to as the Parampurush (in other words the manliest man in the entire universe), his physical appearance (which is what is considered to be a very feminine body for a man today, i.e., slender and soft) breaks the stereotype of what masculine man should look like. There are paintings of him and Radha where I've stared for like a hot minute trying to figure out which one is Radha (mostly in grayscale cuz otherwise their complexions are a dead giveaway) and yet, he slays it like a badass.

Then we also have Mohini, the goddess of beauty probably the best seductress out there, and the only female avatar of Vishnu. Through her having a union (yk what they mean by that) with Shiva (AHEM subtext amirit), Vishnu gave birth to Ayyappa, and wouldja look at dat he has two dads, which was actually prophesized. Mohini in one of the versions of Mahabharata (not the original one) ALSO slept with Iravan (Arjun's son) the night before he was gonna offer himself as a sacrifice for the Kurukshetra war. Reason was that Iravan had a wish to get married and spend the night with his wife before dying, and wishing his wife would mourn for him after his death. So Krishna felt bad for him, turned himself into Mohini and married him. The next day she held her husband's body and mourned for him like any wife would. We can also go back to the time where he sported (make of that word what you will) with Arjuni (female version of Arjun) as well as the female version of Narad (for a year in the latter's case).

In short, we can see how chill Krishna is with his fluidity with sexuality and gender, so much so that it's hard to put a label on him sometimes, which is fine. But yes interpreting him as queer wouldn't necessarily be a preposterous claim after all.

Shiva

Tbh Shiva is also pretty queer-coded, given his union with Mohini (and yes he specifically ASKED Vishnu to turn into her and hence he KNEW it was his best friend after all), and him turning into a woman to join Krishna's leela that one time, which also denotes that he's pretty confident in his gender fluidity as well, to some extent. He also has a sort of female avatar, who's actually very underrated. I think it's called Shivani. Also no one can deny the tension between Shiva and Vishnu let's be real here. They even have a ship name- Harihar, PLUS that "Vishnu is in the heart of Shiva and Shiva is in the heart of Vishnu" line. Btw this was a joke, but now you know why they're one of the popular ships of Hindu mythology. I personally have very neutral stance to the kind of bond they share, whether you call it platonic or something else.

(Note that I personally do not consider Ardhanarishwar and Vaikunthakamalaja as any genderfluid thingy because I just see them as literal fusions of the two couples, but yes many consider these two fused versions of Parvati-Shiva and Lakshmi-Narayan respectively to be gender-nonconforming, or non-binary of some sort.)

Lakshmi

Why did I add her here? Because I have a feeling she might be bi, given the fact that her husband is also technically her wife, considering we take Mohini into account, who I'm pretty sure she loves just as much as she loves Vishnu. But again, that's just my take on it.

Agni

Now he's one of the more popular queer-coded Hindu gods, specifically known for his implied poly-esque relationship with his wife Svaha and Soma (the wind god). Now many sites on Google have claimed Soma to be his husband, but I am yet to find a scriptural evidence for that claim, so I suggest you to take their words with a grain of salt. But what IS true is that these two guys do share a pretty profound bond. There was also this one instance where Soma went to a mountain and Agni followed him. Then both of them at the top of that mountain, 'became one' (what does that mean? not sure but it sure as hell sounded romantic. anyways). Also Soma is considered the "seed" and Agni the "progenitor" hence releasing the "seed". Now again what does that mean? Idk but that's sus as hell for sure.

Plus, Agni is also very well-known to be the (oral) receptor of Shiva's (and sometimes Soma's but not sure about the second one) semen, which he then flung into Ganga cuz it was too hot to bear for him, and that's how Kartikeya/Murugan/Skanda (Shiva and Parvati's son and a God of war) was born. So yeah.

Mitra-Varuna

These two.... are another pair of popular queer-coded Hindu deities. They're almost always summoned and worshipped together, and you can say they have canonically.... well had a union, and good news is none of them became a woman for the deed. Their union is recorded in the Shatapatha Brahmana 2.4.4.19, where Mitra is said to have "implanted his seed in Varuna" (hmmm nothing homosexual going on here) during the waning moon. Many people consider this a metaphor for the cyclic nature of celestial phenomena so it's upto you to interpret it however you want.

Now they also give off that sunshine x grumpy vibe, with Mitra being the god of friendship, sun, daylight, dawn and stuff while Varuna is the god of the waters, moon, nighttime, dusk etc. Plus, the latter has anger issues but he has a bubbly Mitra (pun intended) to calm him down for dat :D.

They are also known for siring two sages, Agastya and Vasistha after they accidentally released and mixed their semen into a pot as a result of getting enchanted by Urvashi (one of the apsaras or celestial nymphs).

Budh and Ila

Budh is technically an AMAB non-binary (or intersex) deity (and technically the planet Mercury) born to Chandra (who's also synonymous to Soma most of the time) and Tara, to put it simply, and got cursed to be neither male nor female because Chandra had an affair with someone else's wife -_- (Tara was the wife of Brihaspati, or Jupiter, who was also the guru of the gods).

Ila is another genderfluid deity. Some versions of the myth says they were born a woman, some say they were born a man called Sudyumna, while some say they were born a woman, but since their parents wanted a son, Mitra-Varuna (who they preyed to) changed their gender and Sudyumna was born (but then there was some issue with the rituals, which led to the duo to turn him back to a woman, which is when they took the name of Ila. Ik, too much gendershifting going on, bear with me). Anyhoo they got this genderfluidity from Shiva's spell and every month they'd change sex from Sudyumna to Ila and back to Sudyumna and so on. Budh got enchanted by Ila and married her, and bore the Pururavas with her.

Later on, some versions say Ila permanently turned into a man with Parvati's boon. But personally interpreting, Budh was technically still married to Sudyumna so..... idk what happened to them afterwards tho. I hope they were still spouses...