#thabk you tumblr user 'sonicismyboyfriend' for knowing anything st all abour DR

[assignedgod]

Come the fuck on, literally upon being granted an example of what about that being said was reactionary and explained exactly why, this person turns around and does the exact same thing! The 'solution'being posited by both the person who pit forth gwyndolin as trasmasc and chihiro as transmasc is that one can avoid a reactionary statement in a transmasc interpretation by reading into a character that is in and of itself a reactionary statement on trans women! "Look at how this MAN is FORCED to dress as a WOMAN! Look how this *Tranny* tricks you with his illusion!" Or "Look how this TRANNY dresses like a WOMAN! He deserves to be killed for this!" Like. How is not either of those painfully obviously reactionary. These tags said it really well:

In many cases, 'headcannoning' a character that has transfeminine subtext as transmasc leads to a weaker or in some cases, hateful, transgender narrative overall. For example, Miquella from elden ring. In the case of transfeminine miquella, you have a narrative in which miquella seeked to give up her heart, burying and hiding her heart, her love, everything that was feminine so far down that nothing could ever reach it, hoping it would either and die, and this ultimately leading to her downfall because she could not ever hope to succeed without her heart, her love. She throws it away, and it destroys her. The story is obvious in a transfeminine reading of the story: By not embracing herself as a woman, miquella threw away her heart and her love and all joy she could have felt. It's a beautiful, tragic, heartwrenching tale about how the choice to never transition will slowly eat away at you, leaving you a loveless, joyless shell of a person. On the flipside, we have the case of a transmasculine reading of the character, and the exact *opposite* narrative: By transitioning, miquella loses any chance of joy and happiness, becomes an incomplete being, and is doomed to fail because he could never hope to be a god since he threw away saint Trina. By choosing to interpret the story this way, you make an implicit reactionary statement that being transgender is a curse, something that holds you back. It's a cruel and hateful reading, so that begs the question, why would anyone interpret the text that way? Or did they perhaps not engage with the text to see the implicit meaning, choosing a shallow desire for 'representation' over proper literary analysis?