#which is not to say there isn't a place for queer subtext!

[mythographers]

I have seen Galadriel treated as just one of Sauron's many victims and saw a post today. I won't pinpoint the post but it's something I've seen a while actually.

Galadriel isn't a damsel in distress but s2 doesn't help when she's held hostage for several episodes. But that's another post.

Hm. But I didn't say she was using Halbrand the same way he was using her. I brought up that she isn't fitting into the box of gendered victim. It's gendered, that fandom attempts to place her in that box even when she doesn't fit it. I brought up her actions to support that point, not to say that she used Halbrand via the same methods and the same scale and scope that Sauron used her.

Halbrand was always Sauron but my post was about what Galadriel knew and she believed Halbrand was a human man. She didn't know he was Sauron. Within her limited knowledge, I am speaking of what she did.

Galadriel is very clear about her intentions for a human man and she says that he can redeem his bloodline, that he's special, and that fate brought them together.

She, with all her rank and position that she lists in front of the Numenoroean court, flattered and singled out a human man about how grand a purpose he would have in following her to the Southlands.

I don't think it's overly villainizing Galadriel at all.

She is upfront about her intentions, yes. But the only reason the Halbrand character doesn't cow before her focus on him unlike Celebrimbor does before an emissary of the Valar telling him how special he is and how he can surpass his family's legacy is because the Halbrand character wasn't a human at all. [Also. I know the deception Annatar does with Celebrimbor about his true goals while Galadriel never hides her goals from Halbrand. This comparison is purely about the similarity of flattery and invocation of family. Sauron always deceives about his goals and Galadriel never does. That's the kind of nuance I'd like to see more in Galadriel meta].

I also don't believe I said that Galadriel deserved to be catfished. My point remains the point I was making from the beginning, which is about Galadriel being forced into the box of the gendered female victim beyond what's onscreen.

I agree that there is a desire to see characters as purely victims and victimizers which is what I was attempting to work around with my post. My pet peeve is the ironing out of Galadriel's flaws, when I love those flaws.

I agree with you about Sauron's and Galadriel's goals in s1.

My confusion in the de-exceptionalizing of Galadriel was in direct relation to making her a pure victim of Sauron, eliding past her actions, and transmitting the exact ways in which Sauron victimized others to her, despite there being an entire season to evaluate their dynamic on its own. A queer reading of Sauron can exist without doing that. I know it can because I've read those posts and metas analyzing Sauron to Adar, Celebrimbor, and Galadriel, and agreed.

Does it matter if the goal wasn't to diminish Galadriel or make her a victim if that's the end result? If Galadriel isn't a pure victim or damsel and there's more nuance than that, she shouldn't be made into that, for whatever purpose. There are ways to do a queer Sauron reading without overly victimizing Galadriel.

But the post I saw today wasn't about a queer reading of Sauron at all so that's not the only reason Galadriel's being trope-ified in this manner.

Hm, I touched on it a little because you brought it up but I didn't want to address romantic relationships in this post because this post was evaluating Galadriel and Sauron's dynamics as they are in canon without any romantic subtext. So, this post wasn't about a straight relationship: I even mention I used the ship tag for visibility but it's a general character post.

Sauron's relationships, including with Galadriel, are not canonized so I wanted to keep it very dry about the actions characters take.

And I'm a new viewer of TROP but a longtime reader of Tolkien so I'm quite familiar with that side of the world :)

Gennifer Hutchison who's a writer for TROP said that Sauron and Galadriel's relationship is different. She called it a relationship of equals. She went on to say that it's unlike the love bombing and manipulations of Celebrimbor in the second season. Galadriel is also using Halbrand in the first season which supports her point.

So why is there the insistence to de-exceptionalize Galadriel and insist that every way Sauron used and victimized Celebrimbor or even Adar can be transmitted to her?

The showrunners said that you've gotten to know Sauron by watching Halbrand.

Why the insistence then that the show started in s2 and Annatar is the way to understand Sauron's relationships? There's two seasons to watch with no need to make things up.

Galadriel isn't just prey that the dastardly villain preyed on that many of you want to make her be. A large part of s2 included her own culpability being listed for you and a large part of s1 included her agenda to take a human she met and use him as a tool against Sauron. She was telling this man she met he was very special, destined for greater things, and that their meeting was fate. Does the fact that he turned out to be Sauron erase the power differential she believed existed between an elf of her stature and a human?

From my point of view, many are forcing Galadriel into the box of female victim beyond what's on screen.

[pearwaldorf]

(jumping off from this)

Thinking about Deadpool and Wolverine and how the movie uses ironic camp to disguise its homophobia (sometimes). And how the puerile humor (hurr hurr the sword in the guy's butt is a penetration metaphor) has changed very little from when I first saw it in the 90s.

And the jokes haven't either. Like yes Wade is canonically pansexual but he's still going to couch it in a way that gives him some plausible deniability because this is Disney. It's Schrodinger's snark--you can always backpedal if somebody takes it seriously because it would be weird if it was sincere hahaha right

One of the people in the thread mentioned Jack Harkness as an analogue to Wade but here's the thing. You saw Jack flirt with men and women and aliens. You saw him kiss dudes (in 2005!!!) and fall in love with them and mourn them when they died. He was allowed to be unapologetically queer in a way we're never going to see with Wade.

I'm not trying to yuck anybody's yum. If you want to build on what you see in the movie, I'm genuinely happy it works for you. But after being in fandoms where I got a canon queer ship it's unpleasant to see something where the text can only strongly imply it at best. I don't miss it.

[sminny-wew]

I had a long discussion with friends earlier about the gender bias in how YA books are marketed and it somehow evolved into me saying "We need more fiction that questions the concept of attraction itself"

We got into how easily romance can be latched onto other genres (romantic comedy, romantic drama, fantasy romance, historical romance, etc.) and I started asking myself what an arocom (aromantic comedy) would look like. I decided, based on an old Tumblr post I can't find that joked about some comedy movie being aro representation b/c it had no romance, that it can't just be "a comedy with no romance at all", because then that's just a regular old comedy. By that logic, SpongeBob would be an arocom, which doesn't make sense b/c it largely focuses on non-romantic plots (SpongeBob working at his job, failing to get his license, the general shenanigans he and his friends get into) and only addresses romance sparingly, depending on the plot of an episode.

It sucks to admit but at least from my perspective, in order for a piece of media to qualify as "aromantic/asexual media" in the heavily sex- and romance-catered media landscape, it kinda needs to address sex and romance in the first place. As wonderful as it would be to escape for a few hours to a book or show or game where romance isn't addressed at all and think of that as aro rep, you can't really call attention to a character's lack of romantic or sexual attraction without acknowledging, even indirectly, that those exact things exist within the text.

I'm not saying sex and romance are inherently bad either. There are aces who engage in sexual activities, aros who date, folks on both spectrums who engage in kink because kink is not inherently sexual and just approach relationships in so many incredibly nuanced ways. It's not just about aspecs also having parents and siblings and pets either, we have friends and coworkers and neighbors. We have interests and skills and hobbies. But it's not just the cishets who place sex and romance on such a high pedestal as "fundamental aspects of what makes people human", I see it within the LGBT community too. There are more than a few openly queer folks out there who don't know or have forgotten that because asexuality and aromanticism are a lack or absence of attraction (and thus a lack/absence of conformist heterosexuality), that we are, to varying degrees, queer as well. And thus media with aroace subtext (or just text for that matter) tends to get excluded from discussions of queer subtext.

I feel like I got a little off-topic and rambly but Idk I just think we need more aspec fiction where people are free to explore all spectrums of attraction as much as they want, ask questions about what defines a relationship, and just generally bear in mind relationship anarchy when they create. I'd like to see it in mainstream media but I'd also like to see it in fanfic too

(Btw everything I just said also extends to people who are poly)

[triangular-static]

look i understand if people just don't like the idea of billford, i think we have a different internal concept of what shipping means (they're not good for each other at all but i need to dissect their dynamic like a bug. you understand. it's fun) but it's fine to avoid things you don't like, good for you genuinely

however people saying they like. don't see it. like. i'm not saying there's no platonic way to read it, i'm aroace spec myself i'm all for reading things in different ways. but i do think saying they weren't partners in any queer sense at all is trying too hard to go against what the narrative is trying to say, or missing it. somehow

anyway media literacy time if a character makes a joke like this

and the previous context of that joke within the show is that it's about an ex wife. what connection do you think the text is trying to get you to make.

and that's just from a writing point of view. not even noting that from an in universe perspective ford likely knows the joke from the same source as stan. and is therefore. placing himself in that role of the joke are you seeing where i'm coming from

(not to mention bill's side of this text which is. extremely manipulative but also does not read very platonic. again, it can technically be read as platonic! bill literally can manipulate ford's feelings. but the specific wording used is very much meant to look like possessive ex partner wording whether the character means it that way or not. it's coding. look again i'm not saying it was good for them i'm just saying there was something there.)

and then there's also the divorce/break up/rock bottom input on the website. like. how else is that supposed to be read. and the corresponding page in the book itself.

the language being used here. like yes he's saying it in a joking way but then there's the other side that isn't joking which is him crying at the bar. it's the both sides (the very coded language on top of the very genuine emotions and dynamic beneath)

i know most of us are on the same page with this i've just seen a couple people saying they don't see it when this is some of the most clear cut coding i've ever seen. and these are just the things that explicitly reference a relationship off the top of my head i'm not even including the general vibes of Everything

tl;dr it's barely even subtext anymore it's all but straight up text. what's not clicking have we forgotten what coding is (lighthearted i just enjoy the phrase what's not clicking. what's not clicking)

[a-dauntless-daffodil]

it hurts me. the parallel of Charlie at the start of ep 1, so excited about showing her plans for the hotel to heaven she doesn't see how VERY NOT excited about it Vaggie is (cough angel kicked out by heaven for not doing enough murder cough cough), even while getting literally up in Vaggie's face.....

and then Vaggie, when Charlie comes drooping home after that all crashed and burned spectacularly- now it's VAGGIE so excited to show CHARLIE the new and improved hotel commercial she got everyone to make while Charlie was away... now it's Vaggie, up close and basically physically pressing her excitement into her girlfriend, not seeing how utterly crushed Charlie is right then

like, clearly Vaggie expected the heaven meeting to not live up to Charlie's hopes for it. Clearly she REALLY wanted to have something GOOD AND HOPEFUL for Charlie to come home to afterwards

-which would have worked too, if the Extermination schedule update hadn't interrupted the commercial airing

look at how habby Charlie was finding out about the commercial

awww

"heaven isn't homophobic" well then what do you call them interrupting this lesbian's hard won cheer-up-the-girlfriend effort huh? what was that then. not only cruel but also an insult to us queers everywhere. one of the only real sins we ever see in the show, tbh

but gods, they give each other so much CONFIDENCE, chaggie and the mutual "I can do this for her" / "She thinks I can do this and I will" synergy...

and it keeps fucking their relationship up. GODS

how they mirror and act like they're trying to literally meld into each other, while both being So Bad at actually SAYING when and why they're upset about something Serious-

when they're also clearly wanting to share SO MUCH of what they feel specifically with the woman they love!!!!

and how that sometimes blinds them both, over and over again, to the moments when (ironically) their other half needed them to be a little less sure, for a second, that things are or would be okay. Share less of their own conviction, that they got from the other one in the first place

When instead of needing answers to the obvious problem, they both needed to be asked hey IS something wrong? is there ANOTHER problem here actually??

they both put so much of themselves into each other, they both rely on the other one for their sense of self-worth and the strength they need to be The One Who Get Things Done and The One Who Always Has A Plan

that's so DELICIOUSLY fucked up. the flip side to love,

(Vaggie freaking out feeling her existence is pointless while thinking she's failed Charlie, and Charlie losing so much hope just at the thought Vaggie might not really love or believe in her)

when someone else is walking around with your heart beating in their chest because you yourself put it there

heck, their resolution in s1 ISN'T even them hashing things out or communicating better! they don't NEED that- (yet) they JUST need each other! (soooooo fucked up I LOVE it) the thing that brings them back together is Vaggie fully letting go of her angel past to focus on her life with Charlie and tapping back into her whole self for first time since meeting Charlie, it's Charlie the singer and giver of heartfelt motivational speeches having her mind blown by words meaning less than actions as her partner who lied to her is also off right that moment doing everything she can to protect what they've built

the big moment is NOT them actually TALKING about what happened or why it happened. it doesn't matter!!! (to them) Their hurt came from being scared of losing each other, they meet up at the hotel gates and just seeing the other one there is Enough!

they happily return to status quo minus some secrets and plus some more confidence in what they have.... which means the rest of this stuff, the root cause of it all, the unaddressed subtext that they NEED to be fucked up together in an active, intentional, KNOWING way but are so good at inspiring and supporting each other that it just, doesn’t, happen..... that's all still there.

(i see you, Charlie sitting alone with your story of hell book and being shocked at your long time girlfriend coming up to your shared room, being around to see you sad, you putting on a smile and trying to wave it off bc yeah she's right you AREN'T alone anymore. technically)

(i see you, Vaggie asking to be left alone on a rooftop so you can deal with a devastating blow to your whole sense of self as 100% unintentionally dealt by your loving girlfriend who WANTS to be there for you through this but who YOU can't face until you're ready to shoulder the blame and apologize to her)

(i see you both trying so hard to help each other and not letting yourselves be helped)

(because no clearly you don't need it, clearly this is all already so much better that what you used to have and you're doing so much better, and what if you're still not good enough for it actually-)

chaggie is so happily, catastrophically entertwined and i hope they spend the next thousand years suffering through it together

[glisten-inthedark]

You wanna know what gives me confidence for Byler? The show.

That's it.

Because I promise you, if you watch the show objectively everything is there. You don't even have to look at camera angles, lighting, or signs that point towards closets, the information you need is there.

And it isn't even shit people made up (****** I'm looking at you, even though I ship it). It's there, I fucking saw it before even shipping it.

And at first, I assumed I was seeing shit. To be honest I mostly brushed it off, but when we found out that Will was gay and in love with Mike, it clicked.

My favorite mental exercise is: If Will was a girl, how would you perceive their scenes? All you have to do it's switch up their genders and it's not even up for debate because we all know everyone would eat that shit up.

I mean, a boy relentlessly looks for a girl in the woods, stays by this girl' side, tells her they'll go crazy together while touching her hand, tells her that asking her to be his his friend was the best thing he's ever done, fights with her but actually tries to apologize, then we find that said girl has been in love with her friend but it's lying so that this friend could be happy. Tell me that if this was the case there wouldn't be like 30000 fics of that couple on Ao3 and millions of people begging the showrunners to make them canon? Tell me, I fucking dare you.

And at this point I'm like a broken record but I am going to repeat myself.

WILL BYERS BEING IN LOVE WITH MIKE WHEELER does not make a difference to the plot. It doesn't.

He could have been gay and not be in love. If the life lesson was: "Will has to learn to accept himself as gay, and to love himself and understand he isn't a mistake" they could've done without the love. They could've given him exploring that part of himself in California, they could've presented another gay character that taught him that.

They could've fixed El and Mike's relationship without Will's love. We've seen them doing it before. Will could've helped by just being Mike's friend.

So can we ask ourselves this itsy bitsy question: Why make Will in love with Mike in the first place? Why make him say not once, but twice, that he and Mike could play DnD together for the rest of their lives which, if you're not good at subtext, means he sees himself with Mike by his side as long as he lives if all they're going to do is bring him more misery?

Because I'm going to be honest, with the way they wrote this love Will has, they literally didn't gave themselves a easy way out. They made sure we knew it was real, it was unconditional and that it would never change. We didn't make it up, they gave us that information with their writing.

So again, ask yourselves why that is.

Because whatever non Byler explanation I try to come up with doesn't make sense.

Queerbaiting? More like Bylerbaiting at this point considering Will is gay and again, he could've been in love with anyone else or not be a queer character experiencing love at all.

Make Mil*even stronger? It literally did the opposite, the ship is going down in flames and we all know it. Their relationship isn't healthy, El's arc isn't about romantic love and the painting which was the only reason Mike proclaimed the romantic love he doesn't feel literally came from Will.

So... Again. Why?

[cardentist]

I'm like, 70% sure this is only an issue with the gravity falls fandom on twitter, but if I don't say something I think I'm gonna explode

there Doesn't Need to be a bad guy between fiddleford, emma-may, and ford ! we can recognize one character causing harm to another, both directly and indirectly, Without framing it like it's intentional or that it makes any of them inherently bad.

in particular, I think there's been pushback against people vilifying ford (both in general and as angst material for other characters) by just. shifting that blame over to another character instead and running with it.

so to get this out of my system:

Yes I agree that fiddleford and ford have a lot of queercoding between each other. I think it's always been there to an extent, but it's absolutely been reinforced with the book of bill and "thisisnotawebsite."

and even if you choose to read their relationship as platonic (which is fine ! a lot of people like to read ford as aroace, for instance), it's very clear that fiddleford's relationship with ford heavily put a strain on his relationship with his family and ultimately lead to his and emma-may's divorce.

and there's nothing wrong with exploring that! exploring how it hurt emma-may and tate, exploring how it's another facet of fiddleford ruining his own life without even thinking about it, exploring the complicated feelings that were happening in that cabin. and I don't even think there's anything wrong with joking about fiddleford being a cheater or ford and emma-may being rivals.

but it Really grinds my gears when people frame fiddleford as being inherently in the wrong for taking the job with ford, as if he was intentionally hurting his family or that he Genuinely went there to cheat.

1: one of the first things we're told about fiddleford in journal 3 is that he was raised dirt poor and wanted to climb the latter in the scientific community to give his family a better life than HE had.

and that's Exactly why he took the job in gravity falls ! it was someone he trusted as his good friend AND someone he trusted academically. the whole idea is that this was supposed to be a temporary job that would Both help a dear friend of his And open up opportunities for his future.

and like, this aspect of his character isn't insignificant. he is Very Much So an archetype of a poor person, and has been since his inception. it's part of what Makes him a match for ford, he's an intellectual match yes but he's also an Outcast that wants more out of life than what he has. this aspect isn't Malicious by any means, but it equally lead them to hurt people they cared about.

Yes he left emma-may and his young son, but it was Never supposed to be forever. he left FOR them, which is half of what makes what happened so tragic in the first place. in many ways, he hurt them Because he cared about them.

and Yes, I do love a queer reading of these characters (and I'll get to that), but it's Very clear in the source material that fiddleford Does care about his family. a big part of his falling out with ford in the first place was because Fiddleford thought they both needed to leave gravity falls to raise their own families, and it's something that fiddleford brings up earlier on in their stay together as well.

that doesn't excuse how he'd mistreat emma-may at all. she was absolutely in her right to divorce him (which I thought even before the book of bill dropped). but I feel like we're letting the subtext overtake the TEXT while examining these characters and their dynamic.

2: lets assume that fiddleford IS a closeted gay man (or bisexual, or that he and emma may are in a lavender relationship, or-), as I so often like to do.

while exploring the pain that could cause emma-may and tate is Very Interesting and fun, I think we're ignoring the systemic homophobia in the room.

fiddleford was born in the 1960s to a religious poor rural southern family, and emma-may and fiddleford's relationship happened in the 1980s.

I Do think fiddleford is definitely progressive for his time (and just overall a very chill dude), but his upbringing Also very clearly had an affect on him. if it's possible for a man who believes the world is a simulation to also believe in jesus then fiddleford's the one to have done it.

and this is implied directly in the text mind, whether fiddleford is still actively religious or not he gets on ford for doing things like taking the lord's name in vein. not something that someone who Wasn't affected by a religious upbringing would do.

there's also the textual (rather extreme) anxiety, and the Implied ocd (the hair pulling, the cubix cube, the moral fixation, etc).

with all that said !

YES it would be extremely painful for emma-may to be in love with a gay man who had a crush on someone else, whether fiddleford was aware of or even acted on those feelings or not.

but I do hope we can all understand why it's Not Great to frame fiddleford as being inherently in the wrong for this right? for either not realizing his feelings at all or deliberately repressing them in the wake of Probable religious trauma and Definite safety issues in the society he lived in? Yeah?

no we should not treat emma-may like she's "getting in the way" of our beautiful yaoi, but ignoring systemic homophobia to vilify a queer man being afraid of appearing as anything but straight in the 1980s is. um. Bad.

the thing that's Most interesting about this whole situation is that it's a tragedy through and through. you can't inherently blame Any of them for what happened, and trying to do so loses what actually makes the situation so complex and painful.

because fiddleford clearly DID care about them, ALL of them, very dearly. and he obviously wanted to do the right thing. and yet he hurt them all, and yet his entire life and mind fell apart to ash in his fingers.

it's Crazy, and it absolutely does a disservice to the situation to frame it as fiddleford just being a slutty lying cheater (or ford Ruining a perfectly good man by being abusive, or emma-may getting in the way of our old man yaoi).

except bill, we can vilify bill. I think he'd like that

[project-sekai-facts]

is it me or does prsk not really cater towards hardcore yuribait or yaoibait as much even when given the opportunity especially compared to other gacha games, like even the wedding events neither of them was focused on a popular pairing or even just in general with the stories (except for minoharu and vbs i guess?)

Yuribait and yaoibait are strong words that aren't exactly right to describe project sekai. They're just alternative ways of saying queerbait, which implies a marketing strategy of attracting a queer audience by falsely promising representation. While they didn't advertise queer representation, spn and sherlock were accused of this due to the way they wrote their leads (i guess spn did become genuine rep. Ish). Proseka isn't that, neither are similar franchises, like bandori or love live for example. Even if they rarely say things outright, which admittedly is in part because of corporate greed and appeasing fans, I wouldn't say it's queerbaiting, especially for this game and the two I've outlined (well LL has a complicated history but this isn't the time or place). The whole idea of falsely promising queer rep or marketing off it doesn't really happen here, especially in project sekai it feels very genuine and clear even if not labelled. I put this down to the writers saying on record that they want the characters, and their relationships and issues, to feel realistic and relatable.

To actually answer the question now my little media ramble is over, yeah it does feel less compared to other games, especially bandori which gives content to multiple pairings for the same characters. Like don't get me wrong prsk has quite a lot of ship tease when you really get down to it and track through all the stories, but it definitely feels limited to only a handful of pairings. While prsk does give moments for multiple pairings for the same character sometimes it's just... less ig. Again i think it's just to do with the intentionally realistic way of portraying the relationships, so imo it makes sense that they only pick a hanful to give much more obvious or outright romantic subtext to (aka mmj/vbs), even if they still give little moments here and there for other pairings for those characters, as well as giving less-fleshed out or explicitly romantic shiptease for other pairings that don't include those characters (does this make sense? it's hard to talk about shiptease in the game without explicitly talking about shipping. oh well...).

(Also as an aside: mmj is also a bit of a genre thing, and a lot of a Love Live thing. I'm not reaching by saying that either, it showed up on the results to a survey about media the staff at colopale like. mmj does take a few cues from LL here and there, (rooftop practice, genki orange leader, the white feather, airis character design and voice actress) so this is probably one of them)

Even though the wedding events don't usually focus on a ship (aside from the Honami/Kanade one (for context it's honami's most popular ship at least on pixiv, although it's still on the rarer side of things, and it's not that popular in terms of Kanade pairings)), they have always featured popular ships on the card lineups, aside from the most recent one. the first one had cards for the two most popular Akito pairings, and the second one had An/Kohane and Shizuku/Airi. The second one is particularly notable since the event didn't go lightly on the ship tease at all in some parts, though it makes sense since both pairings have romantic text and/or subtext in the story. Even the first wedding event had a tiny bit in one of the card stories, and this year's one managed to squeeze in a scene where Minori imagines Haruka getting married (presumably to her).

We also had the buddy funny spend time event back in 2021, which was explicitly a double date event featuring an/kohane and minori/haruka (again two pairs with romantic text), and we've had other events that follow a sort of similar concept of two popular pairings doing something together, without the double date thing attached, but you can tell what they were thinking lol. I don't really wanna elaborate on that bc I don't wanna start a whole thing but if you look through the event list you can probably work it out.

But then again, this is the Hatsune Miku friendship game. Friendship and community are two of the core themes of the game, which again explains why it might feel like there's less romantic teasing and such compared to other games. Because there is. The events and other stories prioritise writing the platonic relationships over giving ship tease. There's definitely events that you can come out of with little to no moments for the ships you like. This isn't saying that other idol games don't focus on the friendship by the way, I'm just saying prsk has much stronger and consistent themes. From an objective perspective it has the best writing of the major idol games on the market (maybe, idk what's going on in bandori nowadays I've heard MyGO and Avemuji are really good).

Yeah it's the hatsune miku friendship game which prioritises realistic characters and relationships that's about the best way I can put it.

(aside #2: back to the idea of queer content, while they don't write the game, sega is pro-lgbt and is a sponsor of tokyo pride, and offer protections for queer staff. Other sega franchises like Yakuza and Sonic have queer characters! And mizuki is about 5 events away from coming out as trans unless they fumble super badly. So it's a nonzero chance that prsk can and will include textual queer rep in future (i mean they already have lol). It genuinely is down to the realism other fan appeal. Again this isn't to hate on other franchises I'm a huge fan of LL and a casual bandori enjoyer, prsk is just Like This)

[angelsdean]

I know it's a bitter pill to swallow in this fandom for many reasons but, the phrase "open to interpretation" IS inherently a positive phrase that good creators use to affirm to their audiences that stories and art belong to the fans, and that every fan is able to find their own meaning through their own interpretive lens. It's not up to creators or actors to tell people what something--especially ambiguous or subtextual moments--mean. Everyone will come to a different understanding, some views might be more supported by canon than others, but it's still within every viewer's right to see things how they see them.

All "open to interpretation" means is: you get to interpret it! And you! And you! This is a key tenant of any creative work. It can be interpreted. And that is what literary analysis is all about. You build a case for your interpretation. You go into the text and find supporting evidence for your view, your thesis. And some interpretations are argued better than others. But everyone's still allowed to have their interpretation. (Also, literary analysis is fun).

I say all this because I've seen posts about Jensen going from "open to interpretation" to "clear text" as if he's now against the fact that things can and will be interpreted by fans. In terms of Cas's declaration of love? Yes, that is "clear text." It's romantic in nature, that's not up for debate, and Dean processed and understood it as romantic on the dungeon floor. But for stuff that is still ambiguous, still subtextual in some ways, like Dean's own feelings? Those are still open to interpretation by all sides, whether we like it or not. Until we get to see more of Dean and Cas's story in the basically guaranteed reboot, Jensen is not going to speculate about Dean's feelings or Destiel's reunion. He's never going to word-of-god confirm anything about this on stage at a convention. We have to wait to see it play out on screen.

As an actor, it's also not his place to confirm or deny these things. He leaves it up to the fans to read into his performance whatever they want. And yes, that sentiment IS affirming to a Destiel interpretation. We can read reciprocation into his performance. We can read romantic love into his words about Dean wishing he'd said "I love you back." We can look back on the years of queercoding and subtext and Jacting Joices and read Dean as being in love with Cas for years. And, well, the other side can read what they want into it, and we don't need to care what they think, tbqh.

This, IMO, is also part of the reason Jensen tends to give "vague" answers or use language that can be perceived in different ways by either side. As an actor, at a fan convention where fans of all sides of the fandom have paid to be there to have a good time, it's not his job to personally validate specific headcanons and interpretations. Jensen may have his own personal beliefs about Dean's feelings, but he's not going to divulge them in full if they close off one side's interpretation. So he will weave his way through answers. He will use terms like "brother in arms" which one side will hear as simply "brother" and think "platonic" and Destiel shippers will hear as the full meaning, a strong bond between men, and see the queer history associated with these warrior bonds.

He does this, IMO, to keep all lanes open for every fan, because first and foremost he's an actor at a convention being paid to entertain. He's also not a writer, he's not someone who can definitively say what was intended. Personally, I feel that his metaphor about being in an art gallery that he gave back in 2020 is incredibly apt. People come to the gallery and look at the art and find their own meaning. And the artist isn't standing there beside them confirming or denying their interpretations. That's not the artist's job. Once it's out there, it's for others to find meaning in what the artist made.

And again, it's not his place to speculate or write fanfiction for anyone on stage and personally confirm or deny headcanons. He's pretty adamant about the reboot, so I think for some things we'll just have to wait and see.

[canonizzyhours]

I need to know if this is something: from my experience of some folks I know who went straight to the canyon after watching s1, it's given me the idea that I think that for some people who've been in fandoms a long time are so used to having to dig for subtext and craft their own queer narratives out of crumbs from shows with little to no rep and zero chances of queer ships ever becoming canon, when presented with a piece of media where the queer rep is extremely positive to the extent that it's one of the main focus points of the show, they don't know how to engage. When you're so used to having to look for secret clues under the floorboards, maybe some people have trouble knowing how to adjust when the subtext is actually supertext now, so they found a character to latch onto that lets them hold onto familiar fandom behaviour more.

Like, what do you mean we don't have to search for secret reasons this guy's queer-coded? What do you mean the gays are RIGHT THERE? Maybe that's how you get takes like saying that Ed and Stede are straight-coded actually and Izzy's the only true gay guy on the show because *insert that meme of Charlie It's-Always-Sunny with his conspiracy board*

I mean all that plus the obvious latent racism inherent in desperately needing to see Ed as irredeemable and cruel to poor lil Izzy who definitely isn't an obvious embodiment of how toxic masculinity culture (which conveniently comes bundled with white supremacy lbr) is an impediment to being able to live and love as your authentic self, which ties back to my first point inasmuch as the number of major slash fandoms we've seen that will go to lengths to prioritise the white guys even when it makes no sense. All this is nothing new in fandom, it just gets placed extra weirdly in a show where the queerness is RIGHT THERE and one of the explicitly queer leads isn't white.

#398.

[aa-400]

malevolent and the queer-coded villain trope

*disclaimer please respect the #masked tag. while i'm putting these thoughts out into the ether they're not really meant for harlan to see as i don't want to be put on blast for criticising the show. this is not me attempting to malign this podcast or its creator or to go "it's bad and problematic actually so don't listen to it" because that's a frankly horrible and unhelpful way of engaging with media and the world at large. i'm certainly not going to stop enjoying malevolent wholeheartedly or supporting harlan in his creative endeavours. this is not an accusation, it's an observation.

i've been thinking about the queer-coded villain trope in a separate context recently, but something clicked for me with part 34. horror (and other genre fiction but let's focus on the relevant genre here) has a tradition of placing queer elements within the subtext. it's a means of Othering and used to separate the protagonist from whatever evil entity they're up against in the story, be it man or creature, and where the the tropes of the monstrous queer and the queer-coded villain are born from.

a brief second disclaimer. i'm a queer villain and queer horror enjoyer and here to reclaim every single queer-coded villain and monster ever created but acting like the trope doesn't have a problematic, negative history is a sucky way of engaging with and examining a piece of media so let's not do that.

aaanyway, to the actual meat of this post: i believe malevolent reiterates the monstrous queer / queer-coded villain tropes however unintentionally and they go unexamined in the text.

first, we have kayne. flamboyant, exaggerated kayne who calls arthur—and to an extent john—pet names. i don't really think i have to go into detail for people to know what i'm getting at.

then we have larson. yeah, larson. in particular, i'm referring to the scene where arthur wakes up in the larson estate and his clothes have been removed. larson approaches arthur while he's in bed, vulnerable, and while there's not anything untoward happening in the text, it's still very ... master of the house and the gothic heroine, for lack of a better comparison. actually, think of count dracula and jonathan harker in castle dracula — the dynamic is very reminiscent of that, and dracula is a famously queer coded monster in part for that whole thing.

and finally, there's the butcher. a predator—a serial killer—obsessed with chasing arthur down. and boy did part 34 lay it down thick. i mean, he hears peggy gordon in his head when he hunts arthur and sings it to him when he's come to get him. it's a song about a man's unrequited love and it's pretty obvious the butcher's meant to be the man while arthur is peggy, who slighted him when he escaped from the butcher back in the train. and then as if that wasn't obvious enough he has a line about falling in love with his victims. "it's dedication, devotion, a bond. (laugh) sounds a bit like falling in love, doesn't it? maybe i suppose you could say i've fallen in love with each and every one of them. with each and every animal." which is then followed by more arthur-specific obsessing.

harlan has explicitly stated that arthur isn't queer rep, so unintentionally what's happening in the text is that the heterosexual protagonist is pitted against these queer-coded malevolent entities in a way that's pretty text book.

none of these characters i used as examples are written to be explicitly queer, but the coding is certainly there. again, i'm not saying harlan is a secret queerphobe who is putting this subtext in malevolent intentionally—i can with confidence say that we can safely assume that isn't the case! but, like i said when i was prefacing this post, queer subtext in the monstrous and villainous have a recorded history within horror. it's really easy to reiterate tropes like that if you create within a genre without actively examining your work and its wider context, and i think that's what happening here.

so what was the point of this post? there isn't much of one, really, i just made an observation and wanted to share because i believe in and enjoy examining the things you love critically. and i do love malevolent, with its queer-coded villains and all. i'm not calling for anything to change in the story, or accusing harlan or anyone else of anything; i'm just having thoughts about the wider scope of horror media and where malevolent fits within it and i'm using a cda and queer theory oriented brain to do it.

[moonbear-from-space]

SPOILERS FOR VENOM THE LAST DANCE!!

Okay I just saw it today and at first I was not okay, very much not okay. However after having time to mellow out and think more about it and seeing some other people's opinions about it, I can think more clearly about it.

Do I think this is queer baiting/bury your gays? No I don't think so at all. I should also mention please for the love of god do not go and harass or send death threats to any of the actors, writers or anyone that worked on this movie! We don't need to be known as another fandom going after creators and bringing them hell. It has happen too many times so please think twice before doing anything like that. You are allow to be critical not hateful.

Anyways that being said. Venom sacrificed themselves for the greater good of the world. The relationship in the comics is already cannon we don't need to prove a point, these movies at the end of the day are made for mass appeal for anyone to watch. And while yes I was very upset that it happen and it broke my heart. Not all hope is lost, the second last post credit scene shows a black cockroach which may or may not be Venom. So perhabs this isn't Venom last dance, there was that whole this its just a goodbye for now or something like that. Besides Venom is a popular character I really doubt there just gonna kill them off that easily, we may not get another Venom movie as far as I know (unless the rumors are true about this animated Venom movie in the works) however Venom may appear in other big Marvel crossover movies perhabs.

I do wish there were some moments like saying words like I love you or something. But those are just small nitpicks. So many symbiotes showed up as well I couldn't fully tell who was Lasher but yay Agony was there. ^_^

But yea at the end of the day we still have the comics we still make comforting fan art and fix it fics for all of our troubles but just know that this is a PG-13 movie they only do so much. I know we all wanted some big romantic scene but the subtext is still there and Venom wanting to sacrifice themself to save the world is a nobel act.

There's probably more things I can add to it but I just know tumblr is gonna riot over this maybe. But I will say this if I had a nickel for everytime Venom shows up in a third installment of a Marvel movie where Venom dies followed by big explosions I would have two nickels which is weird that it happen twice but also why the hell didn't Raimi Venom show up?? Like come on not even one post credit scene for him to be in? I guess him and his other are really dead... :/ or there lost in that void place or something like that.

Anyhoo besides that it will motivate me more to work on the second volume of my own Venom comic. Thank you for reading my thoughts and ramblings about this. :]

Let me know what you think about it, but for now I gotta get ready for a conversation to go to for tomorrow but before that gonna relax and play some SonicXShadow Generations for the time being. I will also be cosplaying as Raimi Venom lol, hoping it will turn out well. :>

[starrylayle]

Marauders Fandom > "There is no canon !!" and other rhetorics

Guess who's back in their marauders phase after 2-3 years of being dormant lmao?? ((spoiler its me lol)). Anyways, a lot has changed since 2021 in this fandom so I just wanted to talk about the direction i think it's going.

I remember in 2020-21 the fandom started to boom in popularity on tiktok --> esp with the rise wolfstar + atyd. I remember people were so suprised with remus' characterization as 'rougher around the edges' instead of the 'soft boi' thing, and how that influenced the new wolfstar dynamic. [Just want to add that the atyd characterisation is much more complex than this and its one of my fave fics --> I'm more talking about the fandom at large's reaction to this)

And since fandom is incapable of having two nuanced and characters who are not stark opposites,, their roles were basically reversed and now Remus is the toxic dom alpha male and sirius is the cute girlyboy twink --- which um,,, the oc-ification is so real its embarrassing but whatever (omg don't even get me started on jegulus 💀)). I just assumed these would stay as headcanons. But now we have people saying, that 'we barely know anything abt the marauders in canon' or 'isn't the whole point of fandom to make shit up?' which i have sO many issues with so let me just try and compile my thoughts into dot points for the sake of coherency.

'we barely know anything abt the marauders in canon' ---> First of all, Remus, Sirius and Severus are fully fleshed out characters in the og series -- why do you think people would care enough to create an entire fandom based on their backstories if they were 2d flat characters in canon?? Like bffr. I saw a post on here (forgot who it was by, let me know if u know!) that said, 'I didn't cry over sirius' death in OotP just for ppl to say that we know nothing abt him in canon'. Like, its just mind-boggling to me lol.

'isn't the whole point of fandom to make shit up?' --> Ok y'all. For a fandom to work, there have to be some guidelines, some kind of source material, some point of reference so people can build upon it and make content. I think we can all agree on that. One reason why HP is such a popular place for fandom is the world-building and potential plots/storylines. I see some people argue that jk rowling was a shit writer anyways so might as well contradict everything she says. Now, I don't disagree with that point in particular, Jo is a pretty mediocre writer and a terrible person. HOWEVERrr, I'd argue that it is a lot more fascinating when people expand or work on the concepts in HP. JK Rowling has a lot of great ideas but executes them terribly -- I love when fic writes do this, which prolly explain why I love atyd as it is still very much canon compliant but executes themes on class, disability and queerness that jkr could barely do in subtext. This doesn''t mean I only think canon compliant fics are valid. That's not the case! I think as long as the charcterization is consistent to the character and the particular circumstances/world they're in, its fine! In fact, I love seeing how the same character would function if in a different place! I also love seeing explorations of the magic and magic systems in aus or fix it fics (or even canon compliant ones) that still fit in with the canonnical system that we know.

I guess what I'm trying to say I wish the marauders fandom explored the world and charcterizations more deeply instead of creating shallow oc-fied version of the characters that fit into whatever's trending -- like just write your own book or smth lol -- booktok will eat it up i promise.

Also, kinda related kinda not but um,,, why are we romanticising fascists -- like babe no evan rosier is not your babygirl he canonnoically tortured multiple ppl and became a death eater soo... not saying that I wouldn't want an exploration of his character or even a relationship with barty -- (who's not some cool dairk-haired edgelord but a actually a cowardly fascist murderer with blond hair -- yes the blond hair is important) -- I'd just want them to be portrayed as the not morally good people they are. Like,, if u want to oc-ify a character like pick someone whos not a death eater or has little info on them like dirk cresswell or frank longbottom,,, or ya know,, one of the MANY female characters in the fandom ((This fandom also has a problem with women and sapphic ships in general but that's a whole other issue lol).

I know this 'babygirlification' of death eaters doesn't mean to do this, but it also ends up watering down the themes of oppression, bigotry, etc and leaves us with not nearly as complex characters. Also one of the issues I had with the og HP world is that JK will introduce concepts like wizard racism and slavery and then just like,, not really do anything about it or just have half-arsed redemption arcs whilst not ever actually exploring the root of the issue. And now i feel like the fandom is following in those footsteps unfortunately.

Anyways, i've been rambling for too long so I'll just leave it here. Sorry if this came off as mean spirited in anyway,, I just have a lot of thoughts™ and my family is sick of hearing them lol. These opinions are not set in stone however so I'd love to hear your thoughts on this subject! At the end of the day this is fandom and we're supposed to have fun -- so yeah !! thanks for reading if you made it this far!

[vanmarkus]

This has been on my mind (obviously with everything that's been happening) and I'm curious if I'm alone in it. Do you sometimes think maybe they missed the window with buddie? That it should have happened in season 4 and maybe now they're trying to tell us it's too late? They keep digging the hole deeper for eddie, with shannon being the "the love of his life" he'll never get over and I just wonder if it'll ever make sense again in a way that's not a "consolation" because that would be unfair

so much to unpack here and I doubt you'll like my answer but I'm behind on asks anyway so why the hell not.

so here's the thing.

I am so SO happy that they didn't do buddie in season 4. a rushed season affected by covid with literally one episode lead-up? if we lean into the idea that the shooting/will arc was supposed to be that, that is.

(but mind you that has never been said or confirmed, they floated a bi Buck storyline that got shut down, at which stage we don't even know, could possibly have been before even having a script written for it and way before they even came up with the shooting arc itself.)

but if we lean into that then I would've found it lackluster, personally. I know not everyone holds the same opinions and that's totally fine.

but having two characters who have previously only ever dated and talked about women* suddenly kiss and start dating, without coming out, self-realisation, any other preamble aside from "you almost died/I almost died" which isn't exactly a new predicament for either of these characters...

(*in Buck's case the bi crumbs were huge and I always felt that it could've been a pretty natural progression if they just let us know that actually, Buck was out this whole time it just didn't come up on screen lmao but in all seriousness from a general audience standpoint? having both of them suddenly be together? even though, we had a lot of subtext, I just doubt it would've worked as well as it could work now.)

I mean sure, it might've been just the start and then they could've done a bit more background work for it in season 5, but even if Fox didn't shut it down (again, just a simple bi Buck storyline, not even two main characters on the show suddenly being in a queer relationship or leading up to it at the very least) the risk of not getting renewed for season 5 would've been higher than ever, so for them to leave it hanging at the end of the season would've been unlikely imo.

just to reiterate before moving on: all of the above is based on speculation and what ifs.

and about buddie in this current climate, well... I talked about this extensively so just to keep it short; though I'm more than content if not, I still believe that buddie will become canon eventually.

and ngl I find it kinda frustrating how little faith some of you have in the writing of the show when this season proved more than anything that they are finally back on focusing on the characters and actually have ideas about where to take them instead of having every single one of them running around in circles.

sure, some of the storylines are more than bonkers, but this is 911 and that trend started in season 1, so if you don't like that, then maybe this isn't the show for you. because this season with all the insanity and heartbreak was and is so far, quintessential 911.

both Buck and Eddie are well established, complex characters and they deserve to be taken on a narrative journey separately and together if buddie should happen. yeah, clearly neither character is in a place right now, but what's the rush?

we have at least one more full season ahead of us, that could be more than enough time to take them there.

and I know that anytime I say this there are at least ten people in the notes saying that we had 6 years of lead-up, so it wouldn't be rushed, but I can't help but disagree.

Eddie still has no idea how to be in a relationship and actually be in it. yeah, sure, he and Buck have been playing house for years, but the fact that neither of them seem to recognise that is a big issue on its own. and Buck, for the first time since Abby, is in a good place romantically. like the ship or not, it's canon that he's more content and happy than ever and everyone around him thinks so too.

now, we don't know how long this relationship will last and if/when it'll end and why. but if Buck got the chance to discover this part of himself without trauma and significant pain, with the people around him being supportive and patient, then I don't want Eddie thrown in there with a halfhearted realisation-to-kiss-or-confession within one episode either.

I have trust that if buddie is about to happen, it'll be handled well and in no way, shape or form would it be a consolation prize — especially because Tim is no longer bending over for the bullying of the fans and just goes by his own rules and only gives as much as he wants to. as he should.

honestly, this whole "gimme and gimme now" attitude is so stupid. and frankly, the notion that a popular queer ship would actually have a real chance to go canon has just relatively recently became a thing and now so many people almost feel entitled to it, which then spoils their experience with what's actually going on as a whole.

if your enjoyment of the show is solely dependent on a ship becoming canon? then maybe watch something else, because you're just setting yourself up for heartache, one way or another.

[kenjiyabuki]

stuff that made me go 👀 from ep1

Well, gore-y horror from between 70s-90s w queer subtext is one of my most favorite genres ever, so obviously this show is right up my alley. Just the idea of Thai folk horror and 90s slasher fusion w a bunch of tense gay situationships sprinkled on top sounds like a dream to me <3

so OFC I enjoyed the first episode, the gore, haunting past, creepy mask and dick biting and all & now i'm ready to theorize

here are some little details that got my attention and some thoughts that were thunk by me:::::

After Por's (Us) classic setting-the-up-story horror tale gets called out as teasing from White (Fuaiz), Por and Top (Jet) turn the accusation back to his boyfriend Tee (JJay), calling him the best at tricking the younger ones/newcomers to the group.

Based on the trailers, it's safe to assume that in the past, it was Non (Barcode) who was the gullible young one and he was bullied (among other things that will happen to him) even after group decided to utilize him for the short film. Compared to loudmouths Por and Top, Tee seems more on the quiet and stoic side (albeit w anger issues) so this is definitely a clue. Trailers made me think Por was the main terrorizer of Non but maybe Tee played a bigger role.

If Non is the whatever the hell that is dwelling the forest, then why did he cop a feel from Tee while him and White were busy being the couple who chooses the worst time and place to get nasty in a horror? Is it a payback for the tricking the young ones Tee was so good at?

If this isn't a translation mistake, Jin (Copper) calls the movie "his" even though the credits says otherwise.

Firstly, I want to thank my trusty Yandex Image Translator for making this revelation possible:

While Jin says that he made the film for a contest he was in, it's Por who is credited as the Writer/Director/DoP. In fact, Jin's name is only under the cast list, along w Tee, Top and Fluke (Bump).

And maybe even MORE IMPORTANTLY, although we clearly saw him in the movie, taking off the mask just before Por shuts of the laptop & later Top admits he wrote the story, Non's name is nowhere to be seen in the credits. Not only he "disappeared", they also made it seem like he wasn't there in the first place. Uhmm, that's a cunty move to do to an old "friend"...

That really suspicious and ambiguous conversation between Tee and Por.

They might be talking about Non BUT Tee specifically says he doesn't want HIM, which i'm assuming to be White, to get involved and find out more. Por's face drops at first but then he brushes it off w saying it wouldn't matter even if he did because its not relevant anymore.

There are also other new guys who are oblivious to their past but it's White who is worrying Tee. Along w Por's reaction and him constantly teasing their relationship, I think this might be a sign that Tee and Por might have some kind of history??? I am hoping that as messy gay entangled relationships on top of the supernatural horrors would be even more fun!!!!!!!!!

Phi and White's lil sexual tension moment.

Here's the thing: this wasn't even a set up for Jin or Tee to get jealous or anyone to get thoughts because they weren't there to see it. It just happened so quickly and then Phi turned back his attention to Jin to get scolded (as he should) BUT i was stuck on it because what was the reason????????????? Why did White seemed lost in thought over it?

Jin might be jealous of Tan (Mio) for some fucking reason?

Jin gives Phi half a blowjob, BITES HIS DICK (best moment of the ep), chews him out (verbally) and then suggests Tan in his place. Well, Tan and Phi do seem close and Tan knows about their failed FWB. Still, it's interesting that Jin singled out Tan and thinks they had a similar thing, even though Phi assures him that isn't the case.

Honestly, the possibility of tangled relationships is getting to me AHHHH I didnt get that vibe from the trailer at all but I will be glad to see it. Insert the *I'm excited because I love mess* gif I cant be bothered to search rn.

Top being the token salacious fool archetype of this slasher.

Following up on the theme of horror gays being in entangled situationships: A high Top making passes at his friends might not lead anywhere as it just might be him fulfilling his role as the facetious, big mouth guy. But i will just put it aside just in case..... 👀👀

Bonus strays thoughts::

According to character profiles, all the boys are the same age, except Tan and White who are 2 years younger

Por says to Tan "you two got in [their friend group] in 12th grade". I am assuming other person is Phi as White got into the group as the boyfriend. I want to see how they got to be friends tho.

Smoker Tan has asthma and he needs an inhaler which definitely won't be a big problem in the future, right?

It's interesting how Phi wants to be a director and we fittingly saw him being a leader, being levelheaded and "directing" the critical situations, assigning roles to the group etc

Top claims Non is haunting them because they completed his film without him. Babygirl, I dont know if intellectual property theft is enough to turn into an evil ghost, I know you guys did more than that.

Random but I kinda want Fluke to be the Final Girl, surviving until the end w just a puke bag and 2 years of medicine knowledge.......

[definitely-not-5urreal-w4nderer]

It can be so disheartening seeing show which center girls and women, especially queer women getting cancelled left and right. As a queer trans person looking to break into film and tv, it can feel hopeless.

Sometimes I have to take a step back and remember that just 10 years ago when I was 14 and coming out, I had two shows. Just two shows that centered around the lives of queer women, The L Word and South Of Nowhere. (Mind you I wasn't ready to fully appreciate Xena. As 14 year old Canadian living in 2011 and an accepting home, subtext wasn't what I needed or understood. Plus I thought I was above campy old tv.) The L Word wasn't exactly age appropriate, and respectful representation of gender non conformity and being trans was near non-existent.

Which isn't to say that we should cut the industry any slack, just to say that even though justice and equity can never come fast enough there is movement happening. It's also worth noting that the refusal to invest in longer stories is a problem spanning the industry in this streaming age, it is shaped by a lot of issues around companies not wanting to pay for writers and residuals. It's an issue that disproportionately affects marginalized communities, but everyone out there on the picket lines supporting the writers guild strike is fighting for all kinds of stories to be told, and workers to be paid.

II'll never make excuses for the power structures in place, but its reflections like these that spark the hope in me needed to get up and fight another day. To demand better.