#they're the proof sexuality isn't a choice

[local-demon-in-your-area]

I think every straight married woman should get a cat because :

Cats and husband :

-"Love of your life"

-Baby

-Can't do anything without your help

-Needs attention 24/7 only when you need it, they run away

Except a cat actually loves you

[mycadences]

I honestly believe that Elain would drop Azriel like a hot potato if she were offered a chance to be turned into a human again and vice versa if he were to find his mate. I think they care about each other, but not enough to give up the one thing they each desire the most right now. And a sexual relationship (tbh I won't even call their relationship that lol since all they had was just one almost kiss) can turn platonic (proof: Cassian and Mor, Aelin and Chaol). Elain still misses Graysen and Azriel hasn't gotten over Mor yet. They're using each other as a distraction to mask their pain and longing.

I think Elain is resentful of her bond with Lucien because it reminds her time and time again that she is Fae and no longer human, while Azriel desperately yearns for a mate but believes he is undeserving of one. Again, this is another way their views diverge. Opposites can attract, but Elain and Azriel are so dissimilar that they don't complement each other at all, at least in my eyes.

Elain will feel that she has no say in her own life (everyone infantilizes her, decides what she can or cannot do, dictates her relationship with Azriel, who isn't any better with his "There is an innate darkness to the Dread Trove that Elain should not be exposed to.") and ironically, it will be Lucien who gives her the choice of accepting or breaking the mating bond. The mating bond that she resents so much will become the only thing she has a choice in.

Azriel will fall into despair when he realizes that Gwyn is his mate (not confirmed yet, but highly speculated) because he believes he failed her by not arriving fast enough to stop her from being assaulted. I actually think he may be repressing their bond somewhere deep inside him (which is why his shadows are aware that Gwyn is his mate). He will have to grapple with his feelings of unworthiness and guilt and learn to let them go.

I want to see the four of them grow as characters and couples. I am unconvinced that Azriel and Elain being supposed "true mates" will allow us to see this growth. Azriel will come to the conclusion that indeed, his line of thinking is justified (three brothers = three sisters!) and how he feels about himself will be left unresolved. Similarly, it rips away an integral conflict of Elain's arc (given a mating bond with someone she does not want) because, as I've mentioned above, she currently "wants" Azriel as he is a convenient distraction. She will not be forced to do some inner reflection and realize that her humanity is not tied to her transformation or mating bond.

[la-pheacienne]

Alright I'm choosing violence yet again because that's what we do in this house.

You guys are seriously creepy about adultery. Like. Seriously. It's not even a joke. In the beginning I thought this bizarre attitude was limited to fandom discourse but I don't think that's the case anymore. I think you guys will eventually need to come to terms with the fact that :

1) Adultery is not criminal behavior, at least in the Western world, since... quite a while actually.

2) Married people can and do fall in love with other people and even occasionally fuck them and this is a very real part of human experience that you need to eventually face.

3) Women who cheat on their husbands are not actually whores.

4) Being "the other woman" (funny phrase) does not automatically give you the seal of ultimate shame, depravity and ruined vagina unlike what your grandma may have told you.

5) Nobody is actually going to give you a golden cookie if you're a faithful god-fearing woman in your own marriage.

6) The fidelity of a man is not and should not be a reward for being a "good"/"correct" woman and having a faithful husband is not the Ultimate Badge of a Woman's Worth and Value unlike popular belief.

7) Likewise, having a man cheat on you does not make you Unworthy, Pathetic and Forever Ruined, it just means they wanted to fuck someone else. A man is not and should not be responsible for your value or worth, not even your husband.

8) From the list of all the harmful things a man can inflict on a woman, cheating is actually the least harmful. It is somehow rebranded as the most harmful, for obvious reasons patriarchy, which leads us to the centuries old pervasive mentality of "he's x, y and z (enter abusive, controlling, boring, horrible in bed) but AT LEAST he LOVES ME he's fAiThFuL and has eyes onLY for ME isn't that rOMaNTIC??". No, it is not. A man can cheat on you after years of being a supportive partner, giving you the best sex of your life, being a great parent for your kids, in short, after years of making your life better in all the ways that matter. A man can be blindly faithful to you and also be a horrible lover and a boring, controlling or abusive partner. Fidelity is socially treated as the number 1 undisputed proof of a man's love for a woman and number 1 undisputed proof of his value as a partner and it absolutely should not be so. This is actually a dangerous mentality and you learned it from me today.

9) Marriage vows are not engraved on our skin, they are not the unbreakable vows of harry potter where if you break them you lose your life, they are not the 10th commandments, they are not the vows of the night's watch. Marriage vows are nothing more than an legal agreement between two people and the state, and agreements are sometimes breached. People's genitals are not automatically covered with sealed concrete when they sign the paper, as much as it would like it to be so. People may agree on fidelity for life but they do preserve their bodily and sexual autonomy and free will even after marriage and sometimes they do prioritize that over their agreement because humans are just like that. I get that this very simple fact sucks, I do. But life sometimes sucks, relationships are unpredictable, people change their minds and can't/don't always want to resist on their desires or needs, and things don't always go as planned because as a general rule, you can't control other people's choices. Only your own.

10) Cheating is a morally reprehensible act, but that doesn't necessarily mean that people who cheat are inherently the epitomy of moral depravity or that their faithful partner is the saint in the relationship. Maybe they are, maybe they're not. Maybe they are both problematic, maybe the cheater is the victim, maybe the faithful partner is actually the problem. It fucking depends. In the year of our lord 2024 you need to perhaps acknowledge that this obsession with fidelity in marriage as the Absolute Hallmark of a healthy relationship and the Ultimate Seal of moral purity is actually a by-product of harmful strict patriarchal/religious values, real life is less black and white and the world is not split between faithful partners with a halo over their head and filthy cheating partners that should be lynched. This is bordering on biological essentialism and let's just say that's not the vibe.

11) A big part of the disgust "cheaters" inspire to a certain category of people is simply thinly concealed sex-averse puritanism, rebranded as ethics. Not all of us fall for that.

12) Feeling hurt, betrayed, traumatized, furious or disgusted after being cheated on is a totally valid reaction. Feeling outraged or disgusted on behalf of other people being cheated on isn't a valid reaction. The scarlet letter was published almost two centuries ago. You are still wayy too comfortable talking about other people's sex lives and passing judgment on account of what they are doing with their own genitals. Likewise, you do not have a say on the cheatee's choice to stay in the marriage. Some people do stay in marriages where they have been cheated on, and no, they are not necessarily weak people with no backbone and/or victims and/or financially dependent on their partner and they don't necessarily need saving. A marriage is an agreement between two (2) people and they are free to agree on whatever the fuck they want. You don't know everything that's going on between them.

The sooner you accept the above facts the easier human relationships will be for you, and as a minor but useful side-effect, navigating certain fandom spaces may become less tedious for you and me both. it's a win-win situation.

[egg-emperor]

Eggman had statues of muscular male bodies on the Egg Carrier for no reason. He's one hundred percent sexually attracted to men.

Maybe this is me looking too deep into it but since the statues didn't have any faces, that's probably a sign of something. As in Eggman only shows interest in someone's physical form/abilities because he doesn't care about anyone as a person.

All that matters to Eggman is his own pleasure and if he gets something out of it. Whether it's taking over the world or getting off. It tracks that this would also apply to how he expresses himself sexually.

I imagine Eggman could only be attracted to people in a purely physical sense. He doesn't care about who or what they are. He only cares about how well they can perform.

There's a reason why Eggman only goes after powerful monster men and never wastes any time on like average dudes who can't fight or destroy things. For example, Eggman gets super excited about Chaos and Dark Gaia but gives zero shits about people like Professor Pickle or G.U.N. Soldiers lmao. Eggman also has a very strong passion for bothering Zavok lol.

Basically Eggman is only interested in using people to entertain himself or as tools to achieve something. The thoughts and feelings of the "partner" are irrelevant to him. That's what I think at least.

YESYESYES you fucking get me. It makes me really happy that I'm not the only one who gets it XD

There's no heterosexual explanation for Eggman having those muscular male torso statues in interesting poses, and at HOT Shelter too. The more you try to think of reasons and explanations for why he had them, the gayer it becomes and I love that lol. With that alone there's more proof of an interest in the male form

And yeah the statues being faceless not only proves they're not meant to be some inaccurate depiction of his body, as he's made plenty of statues modelled after himself or defaced others with his visage and it's always with his actual face and/or accurate body- the choice could possibly speak of his character too

It would make sense because it's what's most believable for his character. I can only picture it only bring about the physicality and personal benefits. He has no regard for anyone else as a person. Like all situations and contexts, people are either a tool for his self benefit or obstacle in his way to destroy

There's nothing to suggest that there an exception for this romantically/intimately as it's never something they've depicted and I'm glad. It's much more believable for him to be aromantic/not interested in anyone that isn't himself on a deeper level that isn't simply a pursuit of pleasure and self benefit

Therefore, it would make sense for him to not see and treat them as people with free will or even as faces, just as bodies for his use. Both in terms of business in how useful their abilities are to him in his schemes, or pleasure in a sexual context- and I think more often than not there would be an overlap of the two

That's another reason why him being attracted to male bodies makes sense in particular, it covers all he prioritizes most. The power, strength, and usefulness both in terms of scheming and intimacy. Not to suggest that I don't think females aren't capable of being strong, he's the sexist one canonically XD

People want to imagine there are sudden exceptions to his self-centeredness with family or intimate partners but the former is disproven by canon with all family members + Sage and the latter doesn't have anything canon at all to suggest so. What is canon is that it's always about what's in it for him

I believe it's impossible for him to be attracted to someone in any other form than the physicality of the pleasure and benefit of power. There's never romantic or emotional attraction in it. It's about using them for their worth in pleasure or business until they're no longer useful. It's shallow and self absorbed

His tastes for powerful monsters in the games really speaks for itself. They're simply the perfect combination of both of his most probable tastes, they cover the full scope of his interests and the benefits in both business and pleasure. It makes sense that they're a consistent fixation of his

Especially Zavok, as he's built like the Hot Shelter statues AND he's a monstrous guy with strength that benefitted him for as long as he was under his control. It's no surprise that he's seemingly obsessed with him and even acknowledges that he's always chasing after him. He knows he struck gold with him XD

I can see him engaging with those much physically weaker like common G.U.N soldiers or Professor Pickle but in those cases it would be purely for the domination and power over them, while also getting quick satisfaction. But it's much more likely to be fleeting in most cases as a result of less long term use to him

No relations last as a result, whether it's because he uses them up for all they're worth and drops them, or they want to leave due to his toxicity. But with the latter like Zavok, he'll try to chase after and force them back if they're still useful, to the point he acknowledges Zavok is "always running from him" lol

When it comes to sex for Eggman, I can see his mindset always being "I take what I want for my success or satisfaction" or "I dominate and prove myself superior and enjoy the power" and nothing else. Either way, there's selfish gain and satisfaction in it for him every time as it's where his true interest and enthusiasm lies

It's what drives and motivates him in every aspect of life, no exceptions. He doesn't care about their personal feelings and desires, he takes what he wants and prioritizes what benefits him and that's all that matters. He doesn't see them as people, only as tools for success and/or toys for satisfaction

Luckily for me, I'm specifically into that and would love nothing more than a life of devotion to him with my life's purpose being to serve all of his desires and needs. So I'd know exactly what I'm getting into and it would be one of the specific appeals in the first place for me and would never have any complaints 🥰💜💘

[myragewillendworlds]

"Non-binary girl" history anon. Thanks for explaining and for the links to look through! I've been watching the rise of this on Tumblr & LJ for along time, but it was always at a distance, and of course I thought the fad would die immediately so I never thought it was worth digging into back then. I do remember at least a few users using the word "non-binary" to describe their fashion sense on Tumblr before trans* (remember the asterisk?) activism got big here, but maybe they themselves were appropriating that vocabulary from the LJ & DA crowd? It's so hard to untangle this stuff and really makes me wish I had thought to document it at the time, now that I'm trying to explain to people 15 years later that their "gender" started as a fad on LJ and isn't part of some 1000s year old queer history.

I'm not entirely sure when I saw "non-binary" as a term for the first time. I do remember the birth of words like "agender", "bigender" and such, which came before. In general, it started with girls going "I don't think I'm really transgender… but I don't feel like a girl because I like wearing boxers and hate dresses" and them concluding that makes them neither, or both at the same time, or both but they switch depending on whether they feel like putting on make-up or not. Shoving it all under the term "non-binary" came a little later.

This won't particularly make you feel better, but it doesn't matter. It would have made no difference at all if you had painstakingly documented every single thing, screencapped every relevant quote, created a whole timeline on it. The person accidentally "responsible" for spreading the word "demisexual" outside of its niche forum of origin had documented & screencapped every bit of proof that the word was just made up by a 15-year old girl for her monsterfucker RP fanfic. None of the "demisexual" adults who've seen this care that they're using a teenager's childish made-up fantasy word as a serious sexual identity and continue to use it all the same.

But you don't need a history on the origin of these words. You have 15 years of documented non-stop aggressive, transphobic bullying, suicide-baiting and death threats sent by the "non-binary" community to actually transsexual people. You have evidence by the WPATH that the "non-binary" crowd doesn't experience gender dysphoria, the symptom that's clinically required to be present for a diagnosis of transsexualism. You have a community of people that truly believes gender dysphoria doesn't actually exist, transsexualism isn't biological in nature, and gender is something purely cosmetic, malleable and changeable by choice – the exact same arguments made by the equally transphobic and sexist conservative crowd. These are your arguments.

"Non-binary" is an inherently sexist and transphobic concept, one that has been continuously used this past decade to bash, threaten and intentionally trigger actually transsexual people. All that is still as true in the present as it ever was.

[11-eyed-rook]

We don't owe you proof of being bisexual.

Bisexuals aren't less bisexual regardless of the relationship they're in, regardless of which way their preference leans into (if they have said preference to begin with - not everybody does).

Bisexuals don't owe anybody any fucking explanations about their sexuality, relationship status, sexual history, or feelings in general, nor do they have to "prove how bisexual they are", whatever the fuck that even means.

Bisexuals shouldn't have to hear from bigots about how their choice of partner suddenly makes them "all straight" or "100% gay" in any particular way (often calling them "traitors" or "liars", erasing their bisexuality etc.), and bisexuals shouldn't have to hear how they're not valid for having any relationship at all, since so many people are quick to judge what is or isn't "bisexual enough".

Biphobia is very fucking real, still, and the stereotypes from forever ago haven't all entirely disappeared.

People need to stop being so judgmental, they need to stop shoving their noses in bisexual peoples' business, thinking they can decide who is or isn't bi. Learn to mind your business.

Sincerely,

a bisexual genderfluid trans man

[dollsome-does-tumblr]

top 5 romangerri moments 🫶

i am finally answering this almost one month late!!!! this is the kind of question that requires a lot of ruminating, okay. and oh, i have been ruminating!

this is more a scene than a moment, but! their whole slime puppy phone call scene. i think it's just magic. they're both chilling and having fun snarking at each other! the situation escalates in a way that clearly baffles and delights them both! and i find it really moving for roman how easy it is for him to interact with gerri and have an effortlessly sexy rapport with her, right in the wake of his failed call with tabitha that ended so miserably. not to mention that it's, to me, one of the only times we see gerri choose to do something on impulse for fun. (that's how i read her reaction, anyway, rather than something tactical. i honestly think she just had a shitty day at work and she and roman have been secretly vibing for awhile and that's hot and entertaining to her so she just leans in in the moment.) it's just so interesting to me that she makes that choice, especially knowing that this situation is going to become SO repressed and she's going to take a stance of such denial that it ever happened. they're both just really loose and free and fun with each other in this scene and i think it's a glimpse at what they would be like as a couple if they could ever actually just exist without everything keeping them apart.

gerri doing up roman's buttons in 2.03 -- specifically, if we want to pick a precise moment, when she looks up at him. it's the one moment of physical touch + realization of attraction that they ever get to share, and i think it believably lights the match for the fire that never goes out.

gerri watching roman at the funeral. just, like, getting to see her pain for him all over her face, and in maybe the most public setting we have ever seen them in. especially in the wake of everything that happened in the episodes before and how over their relationship felt. to get that proof of how deeply she still feels for him -- beautiful agony!!!

the moment where roman realizes that gerri isn't actually berating him but is engaging with him sexually in the "tern haven" scene. just, like, the face journey he goes on in that moment. jesus!!! again, i find it really poignant that in the wake of a failed sexual encounter with tabitha, gerri is just like right there totally understanding how to connect with him. they're in a dance now.

it's SO hard to definitively choose one last one when there's such a festival of riches, but i shall go with the "stone-cold killer bitch" / "who says you don't know how to flirt?" exchange, because it immediately set the tone of their dynamic. there's a little fun, a little dryly flirty energy going on there, and the visual of roman flopping awkwardly down on the couch next to her and then sitting lower than her -- it's all just so their vibe, baby. it really impresses me that that first interaction holds so much of what's to come re: their dynamic even though what's to come wasn't, at that point, planned at all. (presumably because j and kieran's chemistry and dynamic was already long-established due to their friendship and that informed the relationship a lot!) basically: meant 2 be!!!!

[maicrowave]

ello

I have some thoughts, but I want to say them in a way that isn't aggressive or patronizing.

obviously a lot of jokes and discourse are newly on the table in the modern dan & phil era, especially in comparison to 2013.

i think the main principle is to follow their lead. ten years ago, they were pretty clearly setting boundaries for things they Didn't Want To Talk About (sexuality, relationships). Boundaries that people (fans, coworkers, interviewers) crossed over and over. It's worth noting I'm not really talking about fanfiction here—banning rpf is futile, and, lest you forget Dan Howell said he has read youtuber rpf for fun—I'm talking about real life speculation. I believe that's what hurt them.

in the modern era, let's learn from that (probably kinda traumatic) time and follow their lead. they're both openly gay—gay discourse is fine! They're pretty ambiguous about their relationship (see: "are we gay? did we fuck?" quote from dystopia daily's 'Dan and Phil Tell the Truth' video), so jokes of that caliber are ok (imo).

On the other hand... Invasions of privacy? Trying to "prove" things about their personal lives that they've repeatedly stated they don't want to elaborate on? Especially posting that "proof" to public websites. Bringing up past content, posts, etc, that they clearly still don't want to acknowlege? Let's refrain.

Obviously dnp have come to terms with a lot of this stuff existing on the internet... then again, they didn't exactly have a choice. but here's my thoughts: tumblr is a public website, literally anyone can make an account. Dan and Phil want to get into the mainstream via acting/writing projects. If they get popular enough, mainstream media outlets will dig, and some of the personal old stuff is not hard to find... and even easier to look for if people are talking about it all the time. And I would hate, despise even, to see some detached popular media outlet make some "tea" article containing personal stuff from dnp's past that they've tried to move on from/delete. So just... keep in mind plz. I don't want to make them hurt/sad again.

tl;dr: if you're older in the fandom, let's set a good example for any incoming or younger ppl and meet dnp where they're at with the jokes & content, and avoid invasions of privacy!

[mermaidsirennikita]

actually i do have anecdotal proof that bton made historical market works. And its the fact that i have friends who did like the show, tried to read the books and realized they were ENTIRELY white(even tho the reprint covers obvs lean toward show cast) and then got mad that historicals are all racist. And i cant even correct them in time to tell them its just that bton is a 2 decade old not exactly top tier series 😭😭😭

Honestly, the thing is that there ARE indeed racist historical romances! And the reality is that for some readers, the fact that historical romance primarily has white wealthy landowning heroes (who probably get their wealth by exploiting people) means it'll be a hard stop for them.

Do I think this is at all the reason why MOST people aren't reading it? No. Do I think it's pretty hypocritical to put all of that on historical romance then pick up books about your friendly neighborhood rich redneck who's definitely not MAGA even though he sounds very MAGA, or billionaire romances, without holding them to the same standards? ... I do. I get where the mental block comes from, and it doesn't mean we shouldn't critique historicals. But I think it's an unfair standard to hold one part of romance to and not the other.

The reality is that there are, and have been, historical romances about people of color, usually written by people of color. As many as there should be? Absolutely not. Did those books get a boost when Bton came out? If they did, I haven't really seen it. I've seen more of a presence, but I also think that we were seeing more of a presence begin before Bton. I'm sure Bton resulted in some books getting picked up, but I don't see much follow-through on that promise in tradpub. Which isn't surprising.

And I'll also say... there are plenty of historical readers who absolutely want the white Jane Austen fantasy out of these books, and they are vocal, and they certainly don't make much of a case for newer readers joining the crowd. So that's not very helpful.

But I've heard about a lot of readers who pick Bton up as an entry to historical romance, and they're a) disappointed by the rep not mirroring the show when the covers do b) not into some of the problematic aspects of the books.

... Which I get, but I also must say.... Are we just gonna ignore the fact that season 1 of the show had That Scene? I do sometimes get a little surprised by how much people pearl clutch over pretty innocuous scenes in the books (like, for example, the recent "Michael pressured Francesca into marrying him by baby trapping her" thing, which... is not how that went down.... and cherry-picking quotes from that book doesn't make it what went down lol; and that is undoubtedly the Bton book where the heroine had the most sexual agency, and it's really not close, so to see "Thank God the show is so much better about consent" being slung around during that convo when the show depicted the a white woman raping her Black husband and then blaming him for it... and never apologizing................ was A CHOICE!) but I get that it can be be jarring. The books have some problematic content. Some it squicks me out, and I have a pretty high tolerance for older books.

And then, the reality is that a lot of classic historicals that people who have been reading the genre for years loooove are older books. Not all the content has aged well. I think that for many people who love historical romance and loved those books... they either grew up on them and therefore are used to it, OR they eeeeeased into it and now kinda forget the initial surprise they may have felt. So we're recommending books that aren't entry level to people who may need entry level books. It's not something I would really hold as AT FAULT for, but it does lead to this idea that the subgenre is one thing when it's many things.

Like... I think a perfect series for people who want to get what they liked out of Bton is Adriana Herrera's Las Leonas series. And I don't think we're really giving that series, or others like it, the flowers it deserves.

But also there are books the same age as Bton that I think would be a lot smoother for readers to get into.

*shrugs*

[brightdown00]

Why Hades x Persephone Isn't The Healthy Couple You Think They Are (Part 1)

TRIGGER WARNING: Mentions of child marriage, sexual assault/abuse, unhealthy/abusive relationships

Oh, holy shit! I went there!

Brace yourselves, folks! You're in for a long, bumpy ride! I'm going to have to separate this into two entries!

Looking around on and offline, it's all too easy to get the wrong impression of Hades and Persephone. With all the fanfic and merchandise (e.g. Lore Olympus, Punderworld, Hadestown, Hades, Class of the Titans, Percy Jackson, A Touch of Darkness, Kaos, Blood of Zeus, Neon Gods, Super Giants ... the list is seemingly endless), you'd easily be forgiven for thinking, and I quote, they're one of the top three healthiest and most functional relationships in Ancient Greek mythology. (I actually saw a YT video on this.)

No, no. A thousand times, no.

The whole point of their relationship that people seem to be missing is that it's a toxic and abusive one, even by the standards of Ancient Greece, and I'll explain why in extensive detail below. (Source: Theoi.com and JSTOR)

Firstly, we need to dispel the baseless notion that Persephone wandered into the Underworld on her own, or that she made the choice to willingly leave with Hades, which came from an book written in the 1960s/1970s by Charlene Spretnak who claims that misogynistic men stole away Persephone's power and agency by making her a victim of Hades, because she wanted to get her daughter into Greek mythology and didn't want to tell her the truth. (Yes, because lying to your daughter about the very real historical misogyny in Ancient Greece is the feminist thing to do, amirite?!) It has led to an demonization of Demeter (who should be, by all accounts, hailed as an feminist mother in an era of oppressive patriarchy). There are literally NO versions of the myth (Homeric Hymn, Diodorus Siculus, Apollodorus, Claudian, Ovid) in which Persephone wasn't abducted, it's literally called 'The Rape/Abduction of Persephone' for a reason. There is even a famous statue of Hades violently kidnapping (a barely pubescent) Persephone in Italy!

In the Claudian version of the myth, Hades literally puts Persephone in chains: She saw Proserpine shut in the dark confines of a prison-house and bound with cruel chains.

Now, let's get into the other baseless notion (spread by YouTubers such as Overly Sarcastic Productions) ... that Hades didn't rape Persephone, he only abducted her because of a mistranslation, that rape and abduction are the same word. (Oh, please just kill me ...) That's not true, because 'rape' and 'abduction' are the same word in the LATIN language, not the GREEK language ... and they're used interchangeably because abduction always led to rape back in those days (and often these days!) You want proof that he raped her (or at least coerced her into sex)? Here it is:

"There he found the lord in his palace sitting on a bed with his bashful bedmate, very much unwilling, longing for her mother."

Regardless of the true translation, he was forcing her to share a bed with him, and why would he do that if they weren't having sex? In Claudian's version, Persephone was literally screaming about how she was inevitably going to lose her virginity to Hades as she was being taken by him: "Happy girls whom other ravishers have stolen; they at least enjoy the general light of day, while I, together with my virginity, lose the air of heaven; stolen from me alike is innocence and daylight."

People online bring up Overly Sarcastic Productions' video on Hades and Persephone as a rebuttal, and yet on OSP's website, she brings up the 'unwilling bedmate'. (OSP isn't a valid source of information  -  she admits that she deeply sanitizes these myths for her YT videos.)

I see people online defending Hades by saying that it's more of a forced marriage than a child abduction, which is true ... and they're also completely missing the entire point of the myth, which is why it's WRONG! It's true that in Ancient Greece (and elsewhere!), a man only needed to obtain the father's permission to marry his daughter, it didn't matter if her mother or the daughter herself disagreed. Even so, fathers in Ancient Greece (even Athens!) would at least inform their daughters of it, especially if the marriage was to another relative, hence why the Homeric Hymn goes out of its way to condemn Zeus for it. Yet, in the Claudian version of the myth, Hades threatens Zeus with releasing the Titans from Tartarus if Zeus did not comply with his demands for a wife and family. Ovid has Hades shot with an love arrow from Eros because Aphrodite did not want one more virgin goddess.

That's not even getting into how Persephone isn't just a young woman, she's implicitly an actual CHILD in these myths. The Homeric Hymn to Demeter, which is the earliest source of the myth, calls her 'Kore' (girl). Ovid's retelling of the myth in his Metamorphoses has this line:

Here Proserpina [Persephone] was playing in a glade and picking flowers, pansies and lilies, with a child's delight, filling her basket and her lap to gather more than the other girls, when, in a trice, Dis [Haides] saw her, loved her, carried her away--love leapt in such a hurry! Terrified, in tears, the goddess called her mother, called her comrades too, but oftenest her mother; and, as she'd torn the shoulder of her dress, the folds slipped down and out the flowers fell, and she, in innocent simplicity, grieved in her girlish heart for their loss too.

In Ancient Greece (with the exception of Sparta), the average age of marriage for girls was 12-14 to grown men twice their age, and if you were of the upper-class, then you would be married off to your half-uncle. Greece hasn't been pagan for centuries now, and yet girls as young as 14 were still being married off to old men for financial reasons in the rural countryside until 1970. Child marriage is still widespread globally to this day (the United States leads the Western world in child brides because of the Mormons and the Amish, with only 12 banning it by 2024, and two-thirds of teen pregnancies are conceived via statutory rape by men in their twenties).

Ancient Greece was a society in which young women and little girls alike would vanish off the face of the earth, and their mothers would never come to know of them again, either because they were dead and/or holed up in the basement of a rapist's house. This is because Ancient Greece was a society in which they regularly and routinely exposed baby girls to die, which created an severe gender imbalance in many city-states (mainly Athens), leading many men to resort to what we would consider in the modern era to be human trafficking (abduction and rape) of women and girls from city-states such as Sparta, Crete, Mycenae, etc. (The myth of Theseus and Ariadne also reflects this.) Mothers in Ancient Greece would pray to Demeter to bring their daughters back alive. The EXACT SAME literally goes on today, in countries like China, Vietnam, Thailand, Armenia, India (which was once invaded by the Greeks under Alexander the Great and adopted many of their cultural practices).

The grief and pain felt by Demeter and Persephone is still felt by mothers and daughters over the world. That's part of the reason why the incessant romanticization of this myth has a damaging side to this, it is not something we have left behind, and women still continue to fight against it. When we have a collective perception that this isn't a practice anymore, it's easier for it to continue, hidden in plain sight, while we dismiss mothers and loved ones for being "dramatic" and "ruining" a "love story", it becomes easier to turn a blind eye to the Demeters and the Persephones all around of us.

To be continued ... in Part 2

[majorbaby]

Isn't Trapper's nickname a euphemism for rape. I think that could have been explored more in depth in the show. And Hawkeye's hookups aren't always the paragon of enthusiastic consent either.

CW for rape mention and sexual harassment

I haven't read the MASH book and I'm not sure how it is represented there but in the movie:

John McIntyre, Trapper John. Only man to find fulfillment in a Boston Maine Railway, in the- in the ladies can! Conductor opened the door, the girl looked out and yelled "Oh, he trapped me! Omigod, he trapped me!"

Unless I'm missing some historical context for the term that's used, "trapped" I don't know that this is rape. With that said, Trapper (and Hawkeye) in the film sexually harass Margaret, no two ways about it, so I can't say it would be OOC for movie Trapper. I'm not sure where the word "rape" came from in this instance but in my opinion, it's ambiguous. I'm totally open to being wrong if there is concrete evidence.

The incident is retconned out of the show, along with much of the cruelty they subject Margaret to - the primary target of public humiliation and shaming in the show Frank Burns (who in the movie is Margaret's only ally and exits the movie halfway through) and with how much character development Margaret gets, to me it seems a deliberate choice to reduce the volume and severity of abuse her movie counterpart endures. You would never catch movie HawkTrap helping Margaret sober up (Hot Lips and Empty Arms) or hide a body (Iron Guts Kelly). In Bombshells Trapper pointedly respects Margaret's "no", that's the crux of the whole episode. He also doesn't seem to enjoy or return her advances when she's blackout drunk in Hot Lips and Empty Arms.

Personally I don't see the value in this stuff being explored in the show. It's sort of addressed in Hepatitis when Margaret asks for "respect" and Hawkeye folds.

I'd actually argue there's more canonical proof from the show of Hawkeye not respecting consent than Trapper. They both kiss Margaret without her consent, Trapper in Rainbow Bridge and For the Good of the Outfit, Hawkeye in Dear Dad and There's Nothing Like a Nurse. I can't think of any more wrt to Trapper but Hawkeye kisses Frank once on the lips without his consent (twice if he caught him in For the Good of the Outfit - it's still sexual harassment even if he didn't), in Ceasefire Hawkeye seems to have promised himself romantically to multiple women, deceiving them so they'll sleep with him.

(I just wanna note that the Ceasefire example seems like a misstep - he's never actually shown misrepresenting himself that way, he's normally pretty up front with his casual hookups, and it never happens again. Seems like a bad subplot rather than something I'd call a recurring flaw)

I know we all love the 'pegging scene' in Carry on Hawkeye but making a big show of dropping your pants so your female coworker can give you a shot is harassment, he does it because he knows it'll make Margaret uncomfortable and he does the same thing again in Hepatitis when she calls him out.

But honestly I can't think of a single example other than Ceasefire where his hookups aren't enthusiastic on both sides. Like part of my problem with the Ceasefire example is that Margie Cutler is one of the women who thinks she'll be marrying Hawkeye after the war she flirts with both Trapper and Hawkeye in Requiem for a Lightweight, pimps out Hawkeye to her friend in Edwina like... girl you knew what this was??? So prior to that episode, she seemed to be pretty enthusiastic.

And honestly I push back pretty hard against the hookups being seen as unenthusiastic. There's plenty of nurses who happily make out with Trapper and I don't believe they're all unaware that he's married, he talks about it openly in OR - yeah that's infidelity and it's morally wrong but it doesn't mean there aren't two consenting adults.

Similarly I have a hard time believing that the nurses don't see Hawkeye with a different girl on his arm every week, they know what they're getting. One of the things I like a lot about early MASH is the sex is enjoyed by all - I value positive portrayals of female sexual pleasure in the 70s over fidelity to offscreen wives because of the historical context. Hollywood is still terrified of portraying cunnilingus and Hawkeye is constantly shaving for his dates. Could it be because he's very enthusiastically kissing women? I suppose. But knowing this show and Alan Alda in general, I dunno.

MASH did try to explore misogyny, it responded to early criticism and dropped some of flourishes it relied upon. That's good and bad imo. It's nice to not hear so many 'honeys' and 'sweethearts' in the OR, but I miss the casual fucking and sucking when it goes away.

We have Inga which gives us a very OOC Hawkeye imo being put in his place. Hepatitis which muddies about with some comparison of Hawkeye to Margaret's in-laws but is ultimately a sweet moment for Hawk-Margaret (really he comes to respect her over a longer period of time but I'll take it). Who Knew where Hawkeye whines about sleeping with Millie in lieu of acknowledging her interiority as though these are two entirely mutually exclusive things - a swing and miss imo. But then you have season 10's Cementing Relationships where Margaret spends the whole episode being sexually harassed and it's played completely for laughs - just because it isn't Hawkeye doing it anymore doesn't mean it's not wrong.

I do appreciate the attempts at addressing misogyny, even though I think it led to some big missteps, but I don't personally feel I missed out on anything by there not being an in-depth exploration of sex and consent. Sex and romance aren't really given much focus in general, so I don't think it would make sense to explore it very deeply.

[the-technorats]

percy series ep 3 thoughts

so you can't rate shows on letterbox'd so i'm going to log my pjo thoughts here: (spoilers for ep3) (watched 27 dec 2023)

oracle scene was funny. for all the show onlys, it seems as though grover is the one kind of being built up as the character who's going to betray percy (at least in the beginning of this ep), which is an interesting choice.

on the action sequences (part 1): i do think the action sequences are pretty lackluster. when i rewatched the percy jackson lightning thief movie, the action and violence and reactions seemed very proportionate - like, the appearance of a horrifying monster actually had impact, whereas i feel like in the show, the pacing and choreography make it seem pretty banal.

the fight with the fury on the bus was uninteresting and didn't seem like much of a fight at all. annabeth's supposed to be quick and athletic and a really skilled knife fighter (skilled enough that she can even use a knife as her primary weapon instead of a sword) but there so far hasn't really been any proof of that. i'm willing to be a lot more generous though because the actors are very young and the target audience is clearly much younger than i am as well, and it's obvious that for those reasons they're trying to avoid violence/body horror/gore. however, the fight scene with clarisse in ep 2 was incredibly well-shot and choreographed, and it had action and movements that felt real and impactful, so i don't know why they don't try to achieve the same things with the other fight/action sequences.

on medusa: i was so interested by the way they were going to decide to portray medusa's story, especially because of sally's comment in ep 1 to percy about perseus being a hero because 'he killed monsters' like medusa: "who said she was a monster?"

i loved em's line: "the gift the gods gave me is that I cannot be bullied anymore," which initially insinuated to me that this adaptation of medusa is the one who was sexually assaulted by poseidon in athena's temple, so athena made it so no man could pull that with her ever again, but then they went with the "athena decided I embarrassed her and needed to be punished" story which i kind of feel like isn't totally consistent with the "gift" narrative? i mean they can be mutually exclusive in that what may have been originally a punishment from a god can be taken as a gift since she has to live with and make the best of it, but when medusa called herself "a survivor" and talked about "bullies" (a term that makes sense in the context given that it's a kid's/middle grade show) i will admit i was hoping it would go a different direction. alternately though if she were a SA survivor i don't know if killing her would have been the right move in the end lmao and ik they had to kill her for the plot.

i do think there was a more overarching message of the importance of understanding the unheard/unrepresented sides of stories as well as the lesson for annabeth that the gods aren't infallible and morally just but are petty and vindictive and cruel and humanlike. so i think the story was dealt with pretty well, all things considered.

on medusa and the action sequences (part 2): again, i think medusa's death scene was pretty anticlimactic. (this is not because i see them as adaptations of equal quality or even on the same playing field at all, but again,) to compare it to the pjo:tlt movie - the movie's medusa fight scene had a lot more impact; the tension and fear and stakes felt a lot more heightened and real while still being quite comedic/entertaining.

cool idea, in the show, using the hat to turn medusa invisible, but again, i wasn't ever actually convinced that the characters felt scared, under pressure, winded/tired after fighting, or even emotionally scarred by the intensity of the moment/having to decapitate someone. while all of the other scenes portray high emotions very impactfully and earnestly (i.e. sadness, wistfulness, loneliness, hurt/comfort), i have yet to be convinced that any of the demigods have been even a little bit frightened of any of the monsters, from the first fury attack at the met, and this unfortunately makes the stakes seem much lower.

while i understand the focus of the show is on character building (mainly through the dialogue), i don't see why the fight/action scenes can't be just as visually compelling and impactful. the emotional tension between the characters and the depiction of each character's internal conflicts, while powerful, can only do so much if the plot itself isn't supporting those developments, and I feel like the addition of the action sequences in the books serves to elevate the storyline to match the emotional stakes. they can tell the story as much as they want thru voice-over and dialogue, but the characters' physical actions represent just as much about the characters and their choices and motivations as their direct interactions with each other. i think maybe some of this stems from not wanting the story to be misinterpreted or to in any way resemble the movies, but you have to trust your audience. you can't just say everything explicitly, and if you do have to, then i don't think a tv show is the right medium in which to tell the story, which is typically my main issue with book-to-movie/tv adaptations.

anyway, while this seems like a lot of criticism, it's really only that one overarching problem that stands out to me. i obviously love the source material and (anyway would argue that i have to love it in order to want to think about it this much) the show itself, and the actors, and this has absolutely EVERYTHING to do with the fact that it's extremely extremely obvious how thought-out, how deliberate every single minute detail is. if there's one thing at all that matters to me, it's creators who care about their work, and this is a perfect example of ones who do.

on tv show percabeth: BRO "I CHOSE HER 'CAUSE I COULDN'T IMAGINE WE'D EVER BE FRIENDS" ???? FUCKING INSANE THING TO PUT IN THE SCRIPT LIKE?? they were NEVER this explicitly antagonistic toward each other in the books holy FUCK i mean. this drastically changes the trajectory and future impact of the slow-burn. the books were strangers to friends to lovers - maybe strangers to annoyances to friends to lovers if we're being generous, but the show is really going for that enemies to lovers arc huh. the fan edits are gonna go so fucking crazy once we start getting toward the final 2 books. and for them to only have one itty-bitty kiss midway thru botl with no emotional catharsis or resolution until the tail end of tlo? we're all gonna be absolutely frothing at the mouth for it when it finally finally finally comes around.

excited for next week!! i've been dying for the st. louis arch scene.

[ailelie]

weird apartment magic/love potion

So this is what has been running through my head lately when not thinking about Nora's story.

It starts with two straight guys--juniors or seniors in undergrad--getting an apartment together for the school year. The apartment building is older--maybe even a three-flat conversion--but the rent is too good to pass up.

They're not super close, more friends-of-friends than anything. But both had wanted to live off campus and, during a single conversation, realized their study/sleep/cleanliness/etc habits lined up. (Basically, both were complaining about a shared friend and realized they could probably stand living together).

It starts when they begin sitting next to each other on the couch rather than at opposite ends. Then there's the actual leaning against each other (they refuse to call it cuddling). And then the absent-minded kiss on the way out the door.

None of their habits outside the apartment have changed. Inside, though, they are slowly growing more physical.

It does not take long for them to figure out that the apartment is doing something weird. It is like a contained, low-range love potion or something.

One moves out to stay on the couch of a shared friend, but they can't tell anyone why he's not sleeping at home. And the one left behind, to his utter mortification once he's a block from home, has taken to sleeping in the other's bed.

The other guy returns for some clothes thinking his roommate would be out, but he isn't and they crash together in a flurry of lips and skin. They end up napping together and the guy moves back in. They talk about it at a café and agree that it isn't fair for one to be dealing with all the effects. Plus, the absence made the feelings worse and harder to control.

After that, sharing a bed becomes commonplace. Also, something new starts happening. Whenever they're in the apartment, they find themselves sharing secrets and stories they don't usually tell. Their decision to face the apartment together has apparently unlocked some kind of emotional trust, a willingness to be vulnerable. And, while it is definitely strong within the apartment, the trust extends beyond those walls.

They start to investigate why it is happening (and also stop fighting it so much and even start leaning into it, letting the apartment take blame for their own curiosities and explorations. Other friends notice they're usually together and often sit a bit too close together. What started just within the apartment is starting to spread, but they're both very aware of what they're doing outside the apartment. Inside the apartment everything feels normal and natural. Outside the apartment is a choice and a choice they're starting to oh so slowly make).

And they figure out the architect left a diary that is held within their library's rare and old books section. So they get access and bent together over the book, they read. And the guy was basically just filled with longing he'd never acted upon. He designed houses as a way of sublimating his desires. He wanted to make places where fantasy could become fact.

But, over time, that had gotten twisted a bit in their apartment. It doesn't just facilitate desire--it creates it. They figure this all out. And, while no one else would think their proof enough, they have enough to satisfy themselves.

And if they're juniors, they decide to keep the apartment--knowing what it does and embracing that. Deciding to commit to an oddly begun relationship and use the apartment's magic to give them the bit of bravery they want and need at times. (No one else knows all their secrets, no one has seen them cry, no one else is so damned sexually compatible, etc).

And if they're seniors, they initially decide to go their separate ways. They aren't going to change their futures over an apartment's weird magic. One is going to med school. The other is jumping into a career. They don't tell each other anything about where they're applying or where they decide to go. Only after everything is set on both their parts do they reveal it to each other. And by some coincidence or the apartment striking again, they're both going to the same place. So they decide to live together again and commit to the relationship, but this time without any magic easing the way.

(Or they don't. And they live separately. But they ended up texting constantly and meeting up for meals and the various friends at their school and workplace think they're dating, but they aren't, at least not intentionally. But they know each other and meeting up to watch a game on TV turns into messy making out and leads to a conversation where one basically says--look, like it or not, I can't not have you in my life. If we cross that line again--if we cross it without weird apartment magic nudging us across--I don't think we can go back. If we do this, we're dating. You'd be my boyfriend. I will have a boyfriend. People will wants answers. We'll have to tell family. Either we're all in or we're just friends. ...and the other thinks, decides, and pulls his new boyfriend down for a kiss.)

[wickymicky]

hi idek you but im glad you said something about the ETA thing lol there are some people using that single tweet, tweeted by god knows who, as “proof” without verifying it for themselves?? i tried to look it up, mikel was indeed a leader and there was an eva who was a member and an eva who was the daughter of one of the victims. there are a few marias related to the group because it’s such a common name lol. as with mikel and eva

now i do strongly dislike mhj i wont lie, and i cant listen to nwjns because of her + their ages, but people are reaching a bit (a lot) right now. it’ll just become something her supporters will bring up in the future

the only thing i wanna add to this is that "their ages" is something people are weird about too. two of them are 19, one is 18, one is 17. yes, one is 15 and that's not good, but if you listen to Le Sserafim, IVE, Izone, Itzy, or any other group that had young members debut, then i dont think you get to act like all of the Newjeans members are like 12 years old or something. it's just not true. IVE have pretty much the same age range. if you abstain from both of them, that's fine, though personally, aside from things like the ethics of having minors working full time as idols, i dont think it's a huge problem for teenagers to have role models who are their own age. i feel like a lot of the people who talk about how newjeans are super young are the kind of people who only engage with kpop in terms of shipping and sexualization. personally, i like music. when i see an idol ten years younger than me, i'm not thinking of how i wanna be their friend or lover or whatever lmao, but maybe i'm just built different.

newjeans's concept is nostalgia. people often say they're hypersexualized but there's just no proof of that. their concept is nostalgia. min heejin isn't the only one making the creative decisions here, there are a lot of people involved and they make really well-crafted artistic choices. for teens who are the same age as the Newjeans members (15-19), theyre a group who is "theirs" in a special way. for people who are older, Newjeans reminds them of their own youth.

i hate to break it to people, but being a Stan is not the only way to engage with kpop. you dont have to be obsessive, and i think it makes you look weird when you act like everyone obsesses in the same ways that you do.

anyway, whether Min Heejin is bad or not is not really something i know anything about, and to be honest, neither do you. She's not the only person involved anyway.

anyway anyway anyway anyway anyway, fuck kpop tumblr lmao. get your heads out of your asses and be normal for once in your lives

[lemon-boy-stan]

"FRIENDS"

summary: no one told y/n life was gonna be this way - her housmates are trying to identify jay’s secret girflriend, but that's the least of her problems. all while this is happening, y/n and jay must maintain their relationship while hiding it from their friends and y/n’s older brother jake. genre: crack, fluff, smau. warnings: swearing, sexual references, bad jokes. pairing: park jongseong (jay) x female reader

schedule: updates every day. status: complete but uploading chapters to tumblr. a/n: send an ask if you want to be added to the taglist or add yourself to the taglist here! date started: 071221. date finished: 260522

THIS IS BASED ON THE TV SHOW FRIENDS AND ITS CHARACTERS ROSS AND RACHEL.

listen to the playlist while you read!

00. "THE ONE WITH THE PROFILES"

01. "THE ONE WHERE MAJORITY WINS"

02. "THE ONE WHERE #JAY_IS_GAY"

03. "THE ONE WITH RIKI'S MISO SOUP"

04. "THE ONE WHERE SUNOO PLAYS SUPERTUNA"

05. "THE ONE WHERE THEY REVEAL JAY’S GIRLFRIEND"

06. "THE ONE WHERE SUNGHOON WANTS ANSWERS, AND GETS THEM"

07. "THE ONE WHERE JAY STARTS MOOING"

08. "THE ONE WHERE RIKI SEES"

09. "THE ONE WITH HAN-GYEOL"

10. "THE ONE WHERE JUNGWON IS IN HELL"

11. "THE ONE WHERE HEESEUNG WANTS TO MAKE JAY JEALOUS 😈"

12. "THE ONE WHERE JAY GETS JEALOUS"

13. "THE ONE WHERE SUNGHOON HAS TO LOVE HIMSELF"

14. "THE ONE WHERE OOF IS NOT ENOUGH"

15. "THE ONE WHERE JEONGHEON IS NOT HAN-GYEOL"

16. "THE ONE WHERE THE KID CRIED"

17. "THE ONE WHERE THEY'RE ON A BREAK"

18. "THE ONE WITH THE NEW YEARS' KISS"

19. "THE ONE WHERE THEY WATCH SAILOR MOON… AGAIN"

20. "THE ONE WHERE JAKE FINDS OUT"

21. "THE ONE WITH THE EXTRA"

22. "THE ONE WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT MOVING IN TOGETHER"

23. "THE ONE WHERE JAKE HAS A BIG MOUTH AND IMPULSIVE FINGERS"

24. "THE ONE WHERE THE ERA HAS ENDED, AND SUNGHOON IS FINALLY UPSET"

25. "THE ONE WHERE THEY REALLY DO MOVE IN TOGETHER"

26. "THE ONE WHERE JAY IS BETRAYED"

27. "THE ONE WHERE JAY HATES ANDREW GARFIELD"

28. "THE ONE WHERE SUNGHOON WAS THE FIRST CHOICE"

29. "THE ONE WITH THE ANGRY EX"

30. "THE ONE WITH THE BABY… THAT IS ACTUALLY A DEMON"

31. "THE ONE WITH THE WOK"

32. "THE ONE WITH THE CHILD MURDERER"

33. "THE ONE WITH THE CAT"

34. "THE ONE WHERE SUNGHOON IS A FREE ELF"

35. "THE ONE WITH THE BRO CODE"

36. "THE ONE WITH JAY AND Y/N'S FIRST KISS"

37. "THE ONE WITH JAKE'S GIRLFRIEND"

38. "THE ONE WHERE JAKE IS A LIAR"

39. "THE ONE WITH YN'S NEW EX"

40. "THE ONE WHERE YN IS PREGNANT"

41. "THE ONE WITH THE SAW"

42. "THE ONE WHERE JAY ISN'T IN THE GROUP CHAT"

43. "THE ONE WITH THE ZOMBIES"

44. "THE ONE WITH THE EXTRA PEARLS"

45. "THE ONE WHERE JAKE AND SUNGHOON HAVE A PLAN"

46. "THE ONE WHERE THEY GET BACK TOGETHER… AGAIN."

47. "THE ONE WHERE IT'S A WENDY'S"

48. "THE ONE WHERE JAY IS A DOUCHE"

49. "THE ONE WHERE YN IS TOXIC"

50. "THE ONE WITH PROOF OF SUNGHEE?"

>> navigation <<

enhypen masterlist is here but bit empty!

[sailorblossoms-snowbaz]

I was thinking about a discussion about Simon's sexuality that took place on discord and for me, I'm only really firm on demi/acespec Simon. Everything else I'm as uninterested as Simon is in truly defining it. In canon, I don't think he's ever experienced real sexual attraction outside of Baz. As a bi person, I don't bisexuality really fits him, and not just because he himself says so (relevant is that he has a fairly good understanding of what bisexuality is, better than what some give him credit for: having a gf and then a bf doesn't count if you weren't attracted to her. It's about attraction. He doesn't have to be explained anything when Baz brings it up, yet the word never crosses his mind) (I also wonder, given how prevalent the bi hc seemed to have been after the first book, if having Simon explicitly saying it doesn't fit is the author's way to address that it wasn't the intended direction for the character). I also can see the demi/gay readings some have, as he's not attracted to Agatha, and girls are cute (puppies can be cute, a gay man can describe girls a cute), while men are fit. As a boobie-liker, if someone notices cleavage only because they're absolutely surrounded by them, and literally never outside of that, and their reaction doesn't go beyond "cool! was I ever into women tho" before immediately moving on, I'm more inclined to believe they're not really interested, y'know.

As a concept, I'm not opposed to gender potentially not being relevant for Simon. I always go back to demi/acespec, because being able to tell eye-candy doesn't mean you're personally attracted. You can be ace and tell when someone is attractive--beauty isn't just subjective, it also has conventions and constructions, it's also trained. And when Simon notices men being fit, he's like, commenting on hair and the like, he's not distracted by something with more sexual connotations like ass/legs (Baz wearing jeans). He's not ever distracted, period, unless is Baz. His comments are very in passing. There's a difference between aesthetical attraction, sexual attraction, and romantic attraction. And Simon does experience a lot of aesthetical attraction, he notices pretty things (compared to Baz, who isn't really interested in looking at people because they're pretty, but rather to comment on fashion and style choices. Truly a fashion gay, he's just like me fr etc etc) but there isn't really attention to bodies and the like in a sexual manner. I joke about it, but perhaps the aesthetical attraction is the dragon in him. The temperature doesn't rise, he doesn't shortcircuit (also used to show Agatha is feeling attracted to Niahm when she cuts her hair), he mind doesn't fall into uncontrollable repetition, unable to think about anything else but what he's looking at, unless is Baz. Getting hot and bothered and wanting to jump on someone isn't necessarily a romantic reaction, it's more of a horny one, and Simon was already feeling it with Baz before he understood his feelings. (And while some of it might be romance conventions, there's also how lots of them aren't as interested in questioning romance and sexuality like this trilogy and other queer books, so) I agree that the thing with being demi is that we can't know for sure whether he's capable of being attracted to a woman, though we could argue that the lack of attraction to both Agatha and Penny might be proof that he can't (the bond required to experienced attraction for demisexuals doesn't have to be romantic, it can be a platonic bond too) but that's just mostly speculation. Ultimately, I'm as uninterested as Simon is in exploring that possibility: he already has his person, and he's uninterested in romance and sex with anyone who isn't Baz. He's content and settled with him, and that's where I like him to be.

Labels can be important for understanding and for visibility: this is a thing, it's real, it's valid. We're here. But when they don't fit, it can also feel confining. For a lot of people, being unlabeled feels much more comfortable. It's like there's more space to navigate, to just be. There's no pressure to figure out everything 100%. And I agree with the idea that it's better for Simon to be able to just be, without pressure of choosing one, because his life has already been confining enough with labels and roles. And he doesn't feel inclined to figure himself out for the sake of self discovery, he wouldn't have made himself process enough to voice his lack of attraction for Agatha for himself, he only did it because Baz asked. There's much about Simon that he only processes not because he has to know, but because he wants Baz to know. He wants to open up to him. He wants Baz to know him as much as Simon wants to know everything about Baz. And at the end of the day, all that's important to Simon is that he belongs to Baz (a Baz-sexual, in his own words). What's important for him is that he has found love, and it's someone that gets him "so turned on he can't think", and he's allowed to have this even if he doesn't have himself 100% figured out. What matters for him is how much he wants this relationship, and how this is something he can have.