#not to say there isn't any merit in applying queer optics to religious texts or art etc. i'm all for that in fact. but i digress

[merrymorningofmay]

i mean you really don't need to dig deep to "prove" that malevolent is a queer story. loving a disembodied entity to the point of bodily self-sacrifice is queer. loving while disembodied/existing in another person's body is queer. arthur and john are friends canonically but that's not the kind of relationship you, a real person, have with a friend, or a lover, or family; it's a different dynamic, different kind of intimacy, etc (key word "different", not "more/less")

it's not even a matter of either one's gender or of whether they ever kiss or not. their love already doesn't fit into any paradigm or mold. it's already queer