#good omens is a Queer story not because two beings of the same gender identity love one another (although they do)

[ineffablydaydreaming]

Okay i might be a little pissed off. Expect typos, im on my phone.

A character does not need a specific label, have a gender, nor have sex/romantic physical gestures in order to be queer rep

Aziraphale and Crowley are not gay men.

They are played by male actors. They present male most of the time. But that means nothing, because gender presentation =/= gender identity or sex.

Neil has said multiple times that angels and demons are sexless. It's on the book. It's on several of his tweets and answers to asks. This implies that angels and demons are non-binary by default. Gabriel isn't a man, Michael isn't a woman, Beelzebub isn't a woman, Furfur isn't a man.

And now, you could argue that a genderless creature isn't necessarily queer and I agree! Several animals are genderless irl.

But here's what makes them queer: it's not that they don't have a gender, it's that they don't give a fuck about it. Crowley presents female i believe up to three times in the show, Neil was planning a minisode where both he and Aziraphale are fem-presenting in the 60s; Michael is a male angel name and he's played by an actress and (At least in the portuguese dub? Correct me if im wrong) still called "he". Same for Beelzebub, who I think is also reffered to with they/them in english. Hell, God has a female voice and is still called God (the male version of the word!!!) and even Her pronouns are a bit flexible in certain dubs.

What makes them queer is that their genderless aspect isn't just biological, it's their identity, too. These characters are all non-binary, they know it, and they don't mind it.

"But they present male and call each other 'he'!"

As I said, gender presentation does not equal identity and neither does pronouns. It's words: words that get often associated with a certain gender but are, in the end, just words.

Not only that, but this argument also comes from the expectation that non-binary people cannot present themselves in a binary way, which is an absurd thing to expect. People irl have all kinds of different hormonal balances and many enby folk may be hypermasculine or hyperfeminine due to high testosterone or estrogen respectively. And you know what? They might not want to change that, and that is completely fine.

Non binary people do not owe you androginy.

Being trans isn't about appearances, isn't about transitioning, it's about identity. Thinking otherwise is borderline transmedicalist ideology.

Good Omens breaks gender norms all the fucking time in both seasons, something many shows are afraid to do, and it's not just for comedy reasons, which tends to be the norm when shows do it. They do it because it's fun, it's fine, and because they acknowledge that gender norms are stupid.

That's queer as hell.

My second point, no need for labels. Just like angels and demons don't need gender labels, they don't need sexuality labels. At all. Especially since they're often intertwined.

Just because two characters don't have their specific labels revealed doens't mean they aren't queer or, fuck's sake, don't love each other.

In A League Of Their Own, no characters get specific labels, what they are is simply implied. Greta is very implied to be lesbian but they never say the exact word. Does that mean she isn't queer?

In The Song Of Achilles, no characters get specific labels because hell, the labels didn't exist at the time the story takes place in. Both main characters are implied to be bi/pansexual but it's obviously never told in the text. Does that mean they aren't queer?

In Undertale and Deltarune, no characters get specific labels, but in both games the main protagonist is nonbinary (and is in both cases a human being!) and both games have several mlm and wlw couples and several more nonbinary characters across the storyline, but it's never specifically labeled. Does that mean it doesn't have queer rep?

Neil has said several times that Good Omens is a love story, that Aziraphale and Crowley love each other, that even if they're not 'gay male humans' they still feel love for one another. That's the entire point of season two.

And now, I get it, okay? I don't like authors tip-toeing around labeling their characters either, especially since in most places we are past the age of having to code characters instead of just make them openly queer. I get the fear and uncertainty that often came from some sort of trauma from bbc's Sherlock, I felt it too. I get that for some it may seem as if it's queerbaiting, or pink money, or simply being too scared to say a character is queer.

But that's just not the case with Good Omens. The point is not to avoid labels because they're scary. The point is that, for Good Omens, and aziracrow, labels are useless. They're not humans, they don't have a gender, they don't need the labels.

And you know what?

That's also queer as hell.

Society has to put people into boxes, has to separate folk, has to label everyone. No one can be different, and id you are you need to fit this specific box of different. If you go out, you're too much, you're too rebellious, you're a freak. If they just let people do whatever they wanted it would be hard to marginalize them and keep the system going.

A quote I once heard feels important for this occasion:

"To define yourself is to restrain yourself."

When you define something in strict terms you're putting rules to it. Rules that can be broken. Rules that should be broken. And the rulebreakers get insulted, hated, violated, killed.

Aziraphale and Crowley are breaking these rules by 'existing' as who they are. They're not gay men, they're not lesbian women, they're not bisexual agenders, but at the same time they are all of those things at the same time, whenever they want to, whenever YOU want them to, as Neil himself put it. Because fuck labels. And you're hating them for it, hating them because they're refusing to enter those boxes.

Humans are weird and complex. Let the angels and demons be weird and complex too.

Lastly, queer relationships don't need sex - nor kisses.

There's this expectation that romantic love is only true love if they kiss, if they live together, if they sleep on the same bed, if they go on dates, if they marry, if they have kids, if they have sex. Break one of these and people will raise an eyebrow. Break two and they look at you weird. Break three and everyone judges you. Break all of them and, suddenly, you and your partner have been declared "just friends" by outsiders who don't know you in the slightest.

Welcome to amatonormativity.

Or, better saying, another stupid box, another set of rules.

There's this headcanon that Crowley kisses Aziraphale as a last resort not because it's a gesture if love (even Neil said it wasn't out of love) but because he's seen it in human movies and, in movies, kissing someone in despair is a cliché that often ends in the other person not leaving.

This wasn't a love kiss. But Crowley still loves Aziraphale. Do you know why?

Because angels and demons, most likely, do not need human gestures to show love. They, most likely, comprehend love in an entirely different light.

Maybe Aziraphale is touchy with Crowley because he likes it and that is a good enough reason, but it's an individual reason, just like a person irl might be more fond of hugging their partner than kissing them, and that's fine. Nothing wrong with it. There's no right or wrong way to have a relationship. Acting like there is is reinforcing the rules set by amatonormativity, and it is also completely disregarding the experiences of asexual and aromantic folk. The entire spectrums btw.

Now think about the rules I mentioned earlier. Must kiss, must fuck, must marry etc.

Aziracrow also breaks almost all of them.

That's also queer as hell!!!

Being queer and celebrating pride isn't about having labels. It's about breaking societal norms: heteronormativity, cisnormativity, mononormativity, amatonormativity, etc. Norms that are used to opress us, to put us in boxes, to separate us, to marginalize us, and to kill us.

A show that gives the middle finger to all of these and just tells its story however way it likes, not caring about labeling the characters or having a long monologue about homophobia or showing a explicit sex scene between the two characters or following any of those stupid rules imposed by society, a society ran by cishet folk, is as queer as a show can ever be.

To deny that is to reinforce a narrative that is literally used to opress us.

That's all, bye.

Also, some of you guys are giving "I call beez she/her because of the actress" and that's cringe, but not surprising, ngl.

#hissing around #go2 #gomens #gomens 2 #good omens #good omens 2 #good omens season 2 #good omens season two #crowley #good omens tv #ineffable husbands #good omens spoilers #good omens s2 #aziraphale #rant

[1941-crowley-slut]

I just wanna say I really love that queer shows lately have started to cast people who aren't teenagers or in their early 20s. Even in the case of good omens where all the beings are technically eternal so their body is just a vessel, it's still so very refreshing to see queer love and gender non conforming characters that look about middle aged. It's such a nice reminder that queerness is not a trend, it's not new, it's not something only young people are experiencing. I would actually argue that seeing so much queerness in good omens (which by the way was incorporated very beautifully into it, without feeling forced or being made a big deal) makes it even better, because it shows how it has all existed since the beginning of time.

And I also love the actors who are totally alright with playing such roles. Don't get me wrong, they should be fine playing them, that's the bare minimum. But we are now just starting to get the bare minimum in that sense, people not being too insecure to play queer characters, in spite of if they share the same identity with their character or not.

Their age (the actors') is very important to me as well. Because though the younger generation tends to be more accepting, we see constantly a lot of homophobia and transphobia from the previous ones. And we often pin it on their age, "oh they were born in a different time, I don't expect them to understand". Yet there are all these people out there the same age as those you make up excuses for, who understand perfectly. If they can, then so can everyone else, even if they come from a different generation.

Lastly, I love how humane they are finally portraying queer people on the big screen. I love that there can be physical affection and canon events that aren't just subtext, I love that they can show a sexual relationship between two queer people without fetishizing it (because I've seen one too many queer movies hoping for a love story, that turned out to be borderline porn). I love when they don't include traumatic homophobic/transphobic events for every single queer character or don't load them with guilt over their identity. Not that these experiences shouldn't be shown, because a lot of us can relate to them and it's always so nice to be able to relate to a character, feel like someone understands what you're going through. It just gets a tad exhausting when every plotline eventually leads to that.

Generally, I 'm glad they are finally treating us like normal people. Because we are.

#good omens #crowley #aziraphale #aziracrow #crowley x aziraphale #gomens2 #ineffable husbands #homophobia #queerness #transphobia

[olderthannetfic]

there are a lot of other ppl on here who take certain criticisms and choose to interpret them in the least charitable way. re: good omens and aroace representation. i took what the other anon said about aroace identities being less threatening clearly isn't talking about aroace people as individual people taking up spaces from other queer people. they're talking about how all corporations need to do is show two characters of the same gender without anything remotely/objectively romantic or sexual in nature, essentially just two close male or female friends. then, the creator can say they're "open to all interpretations of the characters" and they all get all this credit for "aroace rep" even though they didn't do anything controversial, transgressive, or innovative just because people of certain identities like the story and want to see themselves reflected in said story in some way. the characters never have to say the actual words "queer" or "aroace," and the creators never have to do anything that would alienate investors or larger audiences, like actually saying "queer," "aroace," or "gay."

it's the epitome of "queer-friendly" entertainment in that creators can invite all interpretations, so queer headcannons are welcome. however, they'll always just be headcannons that are only noticed if you have on your shipping goggles. good omens is not actually representation for aroace people, but the mainstream corporations behind it are always happy to make money from people who interpret it that way just because people on tumblr still don't realize that identifying with/liking a story doesn't mean it's literally about something about x facet of your being.

--

[keptin-indy]

When the Angels Left the Old Country review

Full disclosure: I won this book in a giveaway, so I feel like I'm morally obligated to write a public review instead of just talking to people in real life about it.  You are free to view me as an unpaid shill, or a shill who has been paid with one (1) book.

A little background on my perspective: I am Jewish, but not very good at it and I have extremely strong feelings on Good Omens going back more than 20 years.  I have cosplayed Aziraphale more than once like 10 years ago.  I looked up a whole lot of Yiddish words before I realized there's a glossary in the back, so learn from my mistakes.

Overall, I enjoyed this book and was sad when it started wrapping up! If the idea of a Good Omens / Fievel: An American Tail crossover sounds like a good time to you, you will probably enjoy this book.

It's a very quick and engaging read, but I happened to start reading it right before the latest round of internet discourse on antisemitism, which made for a fairly distressing combination and a solid day of Jewish navel-gazing in the middle.

It starts a little slow, both plot-wise and genre-wise, but picks up in the second half.  By genre-wise, I mean that there were long sections of the book where I could practically forget that two-thirds of the main cast were supernatural creatures.  Yes, they talked about it, but after a short burst in the beginning, they basically don't do anything with it until the second half of the book.  Even with more going on in the latter half, this is a very low magic book, so don't expect a Good Omens level of miracles and major supernatural characters outside of the main pair.  Yes, they do exist, but this is a much smaller scale story.  This isn't a bad thing, it's just different and I want to set the correct expectations.

Also speaking of expectations, this is much more a Jewish story than it is a queer one.  Yes, there are baby lesbians and what is technically a non-binary character (though I feel that a being that doesn't have a sex to begin with is a very different, less queer thing than someone who is born into the presumption of having a sex and gender).  Now I am wholeheartedly in favor of stories where the focus is not being queer, the characters just happen to be queer people and the plot does not revolve around their identities, so this was fine.  But if you're expecting a romance focus, this doesn't really have one beyond the bog standard "at the end of the narrative, the people who seem compatible get together".  Yes, the angel and demon are devoted to each other and the story treats that as very important, but I've seen a thousand stories where the same level of devotion could be played completely platonically as well.

To quibble, there are some inconsistences, where the author forgot something they'd said earlier or else made changes during writing and didn't go back and bring some other things in line, as well as some things that aren't adequately explained in my opinion, but they didn't detract much beyond occasionally breaking me out of immersion to scratch my head and go right back to reading.  It could perhaps have used another editing pass, but it's far from a major problem.

Very mild spoilers with my opinions on the main characters below:

Little Ash: I'm going to be frank here and say I didn't hugely like Little Ash because he's the kind of character that seems designed to appeal to a certain demographic of YA reader, e.g. the nonthreatening Bad Boy, who is a Rebel with a reputation for Doing Bad Things but who never actually does any of those bad things except when they're morally justified.  If you like Loki in the Thor movies and complain about him being too mean in the Avengers, or TV show!Crowley, or any of the various YA novel love interests of the leather-pants-Draco variety, you'll probably like him much more than I did.  Of the two divine beings, he's the more fleshed out and the one who feels more like a POV character the reader is supposed to identify with, which I of course was a little irritated by.

The angel: The angel's relationship with identity is the most compelling thing in the book to me, but it is unlikely to be a popular character with people who don't view strong senses of Duty, Purpose and general lawfulness as positive, which is frankly most of tumblr.  I would have liked more emotional responses to the changes in its identity, but I guess it was also learning emotions so maybe I shouldn't expect that of it yet.  While becoming more yourself is a good thing, not all parts of the experience are positive at the time, and when it encounters some of these parts, the angel mostly shrugs about it and moves on instead of mourning the loss of what it used to be.  It's a very sanitized transition.

Rose: I like her, as the sort of too-sensible girl you find in middle grade fiction, which I have utmost respect for.  She felt realistically like a young person who did not know what she was about but was convinced she definitely knew what she was about, which is just how being a teenager is.

I wanted there to be more Grandmother Rivke.  This is my biggest complaint.  She was great.

#When the Angels Left the Old Country #livejournal replacement

[itsclydebitches]

I keep seeing people calling Good Omens queer bating and a I can't help but ask why? I read the Aziraphale/Crowley relationship threw an Ace lens and they are clearly as close to married as they are probably going to get without stepping on holy ground.... and they love each other... why is it considered queer bating?

Personally, I think it's mostly young queer fans turning legitimate grievances on the wrong target. A case of getting so fed up with queerbaiting in media as a whole that they're instinctually lashing out at anything that seems to resembles it on the surface, without taking the time to consider whether this is, in fact, the thing they're mad at. Good Omens is a scapegoat, if you will. The equivalent of snapping at your partner after a long day. Your friend was an asshole, your boss was an asshole, the guy in traffic was an asshole, and then you come home to your partner who says something teasing and you take it as another asshole comment because you've just been surrounded by assholeness all day, to the point where your brain is primed to see an attack. Your partner wasn't actually an asshole, but by this point you're (understandably) too on guard to realize that. Unless someone sits you down and kindly reminds you of the difference between playful teasing and a legitimate insult - the nuance, if you will - your hackles are just gonna stay up and you'll leave the room, off to phone a different friend to tell them all about how your partner was definitely an asshole to you.

Only in this case, that "friend" is a fan on social media doing think pieces on the supposed queerbaiting of Good Omens, spreading that idea to a) people who aren't familiar with the show themselves and b) those who, like that original fan, have come to expect queerbaiting and thus aren't inclined to question the latest story with that mark leveled against it. Because on the surface Good Omens can look a lot like queerbaiting. Here are two queer coded characters who clearly love each other, but don't say "I love you," don't kiss, don't "prove" that love in a particular way. So Gaiman is just leading everyone on, right?

Well... no. This is where the nuance comes in, the thing that many fans aren't interested in grappling with (because, like it or not, media is not made up of black and white categories; queerbaited and not-queerbaited. Supernatural's finale is proof enough of that...) I won't delve into the most detailed explanation here, but suffice to say:

Gaiman has straight up said it's a love story. He's just not giving them concrete labels like "gay" or "bi" or "asexual," etc. because they are literally not human. Gaiman has subscribed to an inclusive viewpoint in an era where fans are desperate for unambiguous rep that homophobes cannot possibly deny. The freedom to prioritize any interpretation - yes, including a "just friends" interpretation - now, in 2021, feels like a cop-out. However, in this case it's an act of world building (they are an angel and a demon, not bound by human understanding of identity) meeting a genuine desire to make these characters relatable to the entire queer community, not just particular subsets. Gaiman has said they can be whatever we want because the gender, sexuality, and romantic attraction of an angel and a demon is totally up for debate! However, some fans have interpreted that as a dismissal of canonical queerness; the idea that fans can pretend they're whatever they want... but it's definitely not canon. It is though. Them being queer is 100% canon, it's just up to us to decide what kind of queer they are. This isn't Gaiman stringing audiences along, it's him opening the relationship up to all queer possibilities.

We know he's not stringing us along (queerbaiting) because up until just a few days ago season two didn't exist. Queerbaiting is a deliberate strategy to maintain an audience. A miniseries does not need to maintain its audience. You binge it in one go and you're done, no coming back next year required. The announcement for season two doesn't erase that context for season one. No one knew there would be more content and thus the idea that they would implement a strategy designed to keep viewers hooked due to the hope for a queer relationship (with no intent to follow through) is... silly.

In addition, this interpretive, queer relationship between Crowley and Aziraphale existed in the book thirty years ago. Many fans are not considering the difference between creating a totally new story in 2019 and faithfully adapting a story from 1990 in 2019. Good Omens as representation meant something very different back then and that absolutely impacts how we see its adaptation onto the small screen. To put this into perspective, Rowling made HUGE waves when she revealed that she "thought of" Dumbledore as gay in an interview... in 2007. Compare that to the intense coding 17 years before. Gaiman was - and still is - pushing boundaries.

Which includes being an established ally, particularly in his comics. Queerbaiting isn't just the act of a single work, but the way an author approaches their work. Gaiman does not (to my knowledge) have that mark against him and even if he did, he's done enough other work to offset that.

Finally, we've got other, practical issues like: how do you represent asexuality on the screen? How do you show an absence of something? Yeah, one or both of them could claim that label in the show, outright saying, "I'm asexual," but again, Gaimain isn't looking to box his mythological figures into a single identity. So if we want that rep... we have to grapple with the fact that this is one option for what it looks like.

Even if he did want to narrow the representation down to just a few identities for the show, should Gaiman really be making those major changes when he's only one half of the author team? Pratchett has, sadly, passed on and thus obviously has no say in whether his characters undergo such revisions. Even if fans hate every other argument, they should understand that, out of respect, Good Omens is going to largely remain the same story it was 30 years ago.

And those 6,000 years are just the beginning! Again, this was meant to be a miniseries of a single novel, a novel that, crucially, covered only Crowley and Aziraphale's triumph in being able to love one another freely. That's a part of their personal journey. Yeah, they've been together in one sense for 6,000 years, but that was always with hell and heaven on their backs, to say nothing of the slow-burn approach towards acknowledging that love, for Aziraphale in particular. We end the story at the start of their new relationship, one that is more free and open than it ever was before. They can be anything to one another now! The fact that we don't see that isn't a deliberate attempt on the author's part to deny us that representation, but only a result of the story ending.

So yeah, there's a lot to consider and, frankly, I don't think those fans are considering it. Which on a purely emotional level I can understand. I'm pissed about queerbaiting too and the knee-jerk desire to reject anything that doesn't meet a specific standard is understandable. But understandable doesn't mean we don't have to work against that instinct because doing otherwise is harmful in the long run. We need to consider when stories were published and what representation meant back then. We need to consider how we adapt those stories for a modern audience. We need to acknowledge that if we want the inclusivity that "queer" provides us, that includes getting characters whose identity is not strictly defined by the author as well as characters with overtly canonical labels. We need both. We likewise need to be careful about when having higher standards ends up hurting the wrong authors - who are our imperfect allies vs. those straight up unwilling to embrace our community at all? And most importantly, we have to think about how we're using the terms we've developed to discuss these issues. Queerbaiting means something specific and applying it to Good Omens not only does Good Omens a disservice, but it undermines the intended meaning of "queerbaiting," making it harder to use correctly in the future. Good Omens is not queerbaiting and trying to claim it is only hurts the community those fans are speaking up for.

#good omens #mymetas #queer

[collaborationandresearchproposal]

Thursday 29th April, Research Report: Lycanthropy and the hays code

Notable points * lycanthropy seems  to be synonymous with homosexuality- parallels between Teen Wolf and Buffy The Vampire Slayer's respective coming out scenes. * The Queer-ness of the character Remus Lupin from the Harry Potter books and film series. Many fans head cannon and write slash fics about Remus and Sirius' romance and relationship, reading the characters as queer. The ship, named 'Wolf Star' is quite popular and well known within the fandom. Many fans feel there is enough evidence to build this relationship on; Remus and Sirius' ghosts stood next to each other in the resurrection stone, mirroring Harry's parents,  a canonically married couple. They also bought Harry a joint present for his birthday and know the intricacies of each others personalities. Dumbledore also infamously told Sirius to 'lie low at Lupins.' But the problem here, as the article points out, is that Rowling doesn't acknowledge Lupin as queer, despite the homoerotic cues in the writings,  and instead gives him a female love interest and admits that Lupins Lycantrhopy is a metaphor for AIDS/HIV. She has further dismissed any alternative readings of the character, disappointing fans' hopes of there being a shred of representation in a queer monster who is actually queer. This sort of behaviour from authors and creators is what turns Queer-coding into the more harmful and frustrating Queer-baiting. A large majority of queer representation comes from connotations and interpretations. the clues are there and queer audiences do pick them up. However this grey area allows allows straight culture to use queerness for pleasure and profit in mass culture without admitting to it. Modern examples of this are CW's Supernatural and BBC's Sherlock. I can't personally speak for Supernatural but having watched Sherlock with the advantage of a queer eye, I can say with confidence that it is a prime example of queer-baiting. there is clear homoerotic subtext between Sherlock and John and even Sherlock and Moriarty. I Personally think it's entirely romantic as I head cannon Sherlock to be Asexual or at least on that spectrum but the point is, it is not just wishful thinking or pushing of a narrative. It's manipulation. Queer-baiting takes advantage of an already vulnerable group of people by preying on their desire for representation in the media.

In modern media werewolf's are often portrayed as having chiselled bodies and looming over each other. The 1985 Teen Wolf received a television reboot and it's fair to say it got reasonably more progressive.  It seemed interested in queering the werewolf narrative and in a sly moment of gender-bending the traditional Little Red Riding Hood narrative, protagonist Scott receives the Bite from a male werewolf while wearing a Little Red Hoodie (‘Wolf Moon’). Additionally, the show features LGBTQ characters while Scott’s human best friend Stiles visits a gay bar and makes friends with a group of drag queens in startling contrast to the gay panic of the 1985 film’s version of Stiles. By midway through the show’s second season, the slash pairing that had proved dominant in the fandom was Stiles and wannabe-Alpha Derek Hale. The two characters, who operate in the narrative as belligerent and begrudging allies, rapidly became a slash phenomenon, due, in part, to the chemistry and comic timing between actors Tyler Hoechlin and Dylan O’Brien. The narrative is further subverted when Derek is raped by an adult  human woman.

The pair 'Sterek' gained so much traction that it caught the attention of MTV and the cast and crew behind the show. So much so that they released a video of Hoechlin and O'Brien cuddling on a boat, asking fans to vote for Teen Wolf for this  years Choice Summer TV Show at the Teen Choice Awards. This  was big as it acknowledged fans and slash flics and the pairing itself as a possibility and many queer voices who watched the show felt heard and validated. However this didn't last long. MTV released a video on the official Teen Wolf Facebook, this time featuring O’Brien asking fans to vote for Teen Wolf in a TV Guide Poll. O’Brien joked that if fans did not vote, then the show would kill off its sole remaining gay character and one of the few remaining non-white characters on the show, Danny. The Teen Wolf Facebook released the video with the following caption: ‘Keep #TeenWolf in first place! Heed Dylan and Linden’s advice or we might have to. #KillDanny’ (Teen Wolf). The show’s social media team then attempted to make the #KillDanny tag go viral on Facebook and twitter, but fans, understandably, were not amused, primarily using the tag for outraged tweets to MTV (Baker-Whitelaw).Such blatant disregard for fans’ concerns about queer representation on the show alienated a large number of fans, especially when coupled with Jeff Davis’ more frequently dismissive and condescending comments about the Sterek pairing where he had been enthusiastic and even encouraging of the ship. As seasons wore on without any indication that Sterek would indeed become canon, it became clear that MTV and Jeff Davis had been queer-baiting Sterek fans as a marketing technique and that the unique interplay that fans had enjoyed with Davis, which offered a new kind of truly interactive fandom had, in fact, been something of an illusion. ' serial killer Hannibal Lecter and his love interest Will Graham in Hannibal, and reanimated gay corpses Kieren, Simon, and Rick in In the Flesh. Notably, both series have received an overwhelmingly positive response from fans and critics who have applauded the series for taking their queer monsters beyond mere coding and into explicit text. The warm reception of Hannibal and In the Flesh’s handling of queer representation by fans, and the continuing frustration with Teen Wolf’s queer-baiting and the appropriative nature of Remus Lupin’s narrative in Harry Potter, belie a desire not only for better queer representation, but also for more complex re-articulations of queer monstrosity' the symbolic and narrative trappings of monsters are often used as metaphors for queerness without actually acknowledging the positive behind that queer identity or even confirming the queer identity at all. Another positive example is the miniseries Good Omens. Based on the book of the same name, written by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman. Pretty much the whole fandom believe That the two leads, Crowley and Aziraphale are in a romantic relationship. They've known each other for centuries and perhaps what was the main fuel to this ships fire was the episode 3 cold open. Even fans who have only read the book seem to support these two as a couple and what's perhaps even more amazing is Gaiman’s response on twitter. "I wrote it as a love story. They acted it as a love story. You saw it as a love story. How much more proof do you need?" and "I wouldn't exclude the ideas that they are ace, or aromantic, or trans. They are an angel and a demon, not as make humans, per the book. Occult/Ethereal beings don't have sexes, something we tried to reflect in the casting. Whatever Crowley and Aziraphale are, it's a love story." It's beautiful because not only does it confirm that they are in love but it also leaves room for interpretations of what kind of relationship they have together.

https://dialogues.rutgers.edu/images/Journals_PDF/2017-18-dialogues-web_e6db3.pdf#page=164

In the year 1922, when cinema was gaining traction and popularity, The Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association (MPPDA) hired a devout Presbyterian, Will H. Hays as its head. Eight years later, in 1930, the MPPDA ratified the Motion Picture Production Code. Also known as the Hays Code, these guidelines were set up as “a list of rules that studios could follow to avoid the censors’ wrath” one specific line read “sexual perversion or any inference to it is forbidden” This era in censorship set the stage for a culture in which the stereotypical behaviour of homosexuals, or any behaviour deviating from the traditional gender roles, is seen as dangerous, evil, and even fatal. By representing coded homosexual characters as depressed, perverse, and succumbing to punishing ends, it shifted social subconscious beliefs of LGBT individuals in real life to those represented on screen. Media often teaches us how to feel about others and ourselves – e.g., it promotes specific body types and clothing styles. In the same way, by promoting gendered behaviour and banning homosexuality, it spread a message that homosexuality was not fit to be viewed openly. Although themes of homosexuality were banned they were definitely alluded to and that continues today.

#researchproposal

[oldtvandcomics]

I've seen some posts going around about Crowley/Aziraphale being queerbaiting in the Good Omens series. I'm afraid I will regret writing this, but I have OPINIONS, said opinions being less about Good Omens and more about Tumblr not necessarily understanding the way audiovisuel storytelling and the queer community work, and maybe it's worth taking a moment to think closer about these things.

Spoilers for Good Omens (2019) and some allusions to the Discourse below the cut. Also, long post. You have been warned.

I probably should say here that I liked Good Omens, am myself aro ace, and am of the opinion that Crowley/Arizaphale is canon. So yes, personal bias exists, although I am going to do my best to be objective. Also, I haven't read the book yet, so am only going to be talking about the series.

(Ignoring hereby that they are supposed to be agender. It is a very good series, but they really, REALLY should have found a way to include that piece of information.)

This is a surprisingly complex question, that can be boiled down to three different problems: First, the way people analyze audiovisuel stories (in this case, television, but the argument also stands for movies), second, the term “queerbaiting” not being clear enough and also used too broadly, and third, people's still too narrow view of what is and isn't queer.

In this order, I am going to start with the way tv (and movies) work. It is the least controversial.

One of the things that I love about tv so much is just how complex and layered it is. There is what is directly said and shown to happen, but than there is the music, the acting, the costumes, locations, camera angles and editing, all of which have their own language and add something to how we will see a story. If you watch Good Omens, you'll notice that the exact nature of Crowley's and Aziraphale's relationship never is directly addressed or them confirmed to be queer. However, you will also notice the way they keep looking at each other, the fact that romantic music plays in the background for an awful lot of their scenes together, that they do and say things on a regular basis that goes further than the normal limits of a friendship, and the list goes on. This show is as clear about them loving each other very, very deeply as it possibly can be without directly talking about it.

This, of course, leads us to the question: What is and isn't text? What level of queercoding counts as representation? And this is where things get a little more complicated, because there IS NO clear line. People usually say that it doesn't count, unless the correct term is used. Which makes sense, given everybody's tendency to just... Idk, make a movie about somebody fighting his ex without ever telling us that he is, in fact, his ex, and than hope that they can get away with either the queer fans doing all the hard work of reading between the lines, or just write a couple of tweets about how they're totally gay and get credit for the representation.

Seriously, people, don't do that. If there is a way to use the terms, do it.

But there is a gray area. Welcome to Night Vale never labeled Cecil's orientation, yet we still know that he's gay. That scene they cut from Thor: Ragnarok of Valkyrie leaving the room of a woman? It never said that she was bi. I mean, I haven't seen it, but from what I know, I'd bet A LOT of money that, had they included it, people still would have complained about it not being clear enough. We still act as if including it would have confirmed Valkyrie's bisexuality. What about period pieces, set in times when certain labels didn't exist yet? And, finally, what if a relationship would actually benefit from being left vague and undefined?

There is no clear answer to this. It's a gray are, so feel free to just sit around and think about your own opinion on these things.

Which leads us to queerbaiting: Creators playing up the fact that they MIGHT have a queer character or relationship in their work for publicity, without ever planning to include it. It's a thing that happens both inside and outside of the story. In practice, this usually looks like putting in a lot of subtext between two same-sex characters, including suggestive scenes in the trailers, and going in interviews “well, they could be, it's an ongoing series, you'll just have to wait and see. ;) ”.

Queerbaiting is a VERY vague and very popular term, that is used very broadly, even in cases where it isn't exactly accurate. It is not exactly easy to tell what is actual queerbaiting, and what queercoding because Higher Powers wouldn't let the creators include openly queer characters in their work. Than there is of course the cases where queer characters are kind of there, but it's a blink-and-you-miss-it thing. I've heard the term “queercatching” used for that in a video. Also, queerbaiting is an accusation people like throwing around every time a show disappoints them by not making their OTP canon. (Stop doing that, PLEASE!)

In this context, it is understandably difficult to say if a certain ship is or isn't queerbaiting. However, I would argue that Crowley and Aziraphale are not. I haven't seen all the promotional things going on, so no idea how big of a selling point their relationship was. But I do know that everyone behind the scenes seems to agree that those two love each other very, very deeply, and the show itself isn't trying to hide it. On the contrary, it goes out of it's way to draw our attention to it. To anyone who is watching halfway attentively, it is going to be very, very clear that what those two have going on is NOT straight.

Which leads us to our final point: What is and isn't queer.

Oh dear. It is a topic that is still hotly debated within the community (at least on Tumblr), mostly by people trying to exclude certain orientations or keep other people from using certain terms.

Queer is an umbrella term used for members of the LGBT+ community, meaning “not straight”. It may refer to gender identity, romantic or sexual orientation, and things that don't quite belong in any of the boxes we have. The beauty of the term “queer” is exactly that it is so huge and so vague that it exceeds all boxes and definitions. A really handy thing to have, if you want people to know what you're talking about without needing to give them an hour-long vocabulary lesson first.

Please note here that so far, I have avoided using any labels for Crowley, Arizaphale, or their relationship. Please also not that while I did say that they love each other very deeply, I never used the word “romantic”.

Because here is the thing: I really don't think that they're gay. Or bi, or pan. Or anything else, really. They, and their relationship, like the term “queer”, fall outside of any predetermined categories. It is just, really, really, really clear that what's going on isn't heteronormative.

I have seen many aces being happy and feeling seen and seeing themselves in Crowley and Aziraphale in Good Omens. I've also seen many aros think the same thing. Because here is the beauty of it: We only know that they love each other more than anything else in the world. It is never said that that love is romantic.

I've also seen many allos completely miss this point.

Asexuality and aromanticism, as is to be expected from orientations that are defined by the lack of something, are still very invisible, both in RL and in fan circles.  While we do have our own spaces and our own little community, mostly we are just there between our allo friends and... kind of stand and wait in a corner while they are busy with the sex and romance our society is constantly throwing at all of us. Being ace and/or aro is often confused with “being celibate”. We don't talk enough about what sexless or romanceless relationships could look like. No wonder so many people missed it when they saw one in Good Omens.

The queer community is STILL very strongly sexualized. And this is a problem, because while sexual attraction IS an important part of being queer, it is also not the only one. Queer people are still queer if they are not having sex. They are queer if they DON'T WANT TO have sex. They are queer if they don't enter romantic relationships. There is nothing straight about the close bonds aros can have with their friends. There is nothing straight about having a friend be the person you are emotionally closest to, close enough to openly beg them to run away together. Multiple times.

Queerplatonic or quasiplatonic relationships are the ones that are a bit difficult to define, because they are somewhere between “friendship” and “romantic relationship”. What they look like depends really on what the people involved want them to be like. Some live together, others don't. Some do things together that are usually considered to be romantic, others don't. Some kiss or have sex, others don't.

So far, I haven't really seen anybody really talk about the existence of queerplatonic relationships outside of ace and aro circles. And while I aggressively headcanon Sherlock Holmes and John Watson being queerplatonic, this was the first time that I've really seen an actual relationship onscreen that can be easily, or even best, read as being one.

But almost by definition, this means that it has to be vague, and subtle, and floating around somewhere around the lines separating friends from romantic partners. As such, I think that Good Omens did a really good job, giving us a relationship that is so obviously loving but also so beyond easy descriptions. However, this also means that it is easy to miss and end up feeling baited.

The problem is, I'm not sure that they COULD have done it better. Any explicit discussion about Crowley's and Aziraphale's relationship would have felt forced and out of place, and the term queerplatonic isn't enough known, they would have had to follow it up with an explanation of what that even is. And it isn't as if they could have made it any clearer how much they love each other as they did.

Some people say that they should have kissed onscreen.

Betty and Veronica in the Riverdale tv series kissed, and we all still know that it was only queerbaiting.

And isn't that, wouldn't that be, in the end, reducing queerness once more to the sexual bit in queer relationships?

I don't know. As I said, there is no clear answer, and in the end of the day, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I suppose, the best I can say is that what Good Omens did with Crowley and Aziraphale is very beautiful and well executed and also undoubtedly queer. It is, also, not enough. We still live in a time where we don't have much representation, and therefore all collectively jump on anything we can find. As long as this is the case, people will always be unsatisfied with everything. We need more. More explicit, more sexual, more romantic, yes, but also more quiet and subtle and undefined loving ones.

Anyway. I just had to write my opinion on this, because I REALLY didn't like what looked like a group of people dismissing a queer relationship because it wasn't sexual. This isn't even about Good Omens, not really, more about Tumblr being generally Tumblr and not seeing nuance and not thinking things through.

So... Please learn how to properly analyze audiovisual stories. Please be more careful and think a little before you start throwing around the term “queerbaiting”. And, please, PLEASE take a minute to think through if what you are doing isn't in fact sexualizing queer people and excluding parts of the community because of a too narrow definition of queerness.

And finally, PLEASE leave Gaiman alone. One, he has no obligation towards you whatsoever, and two, this was originally a thirty year old book that, three, he co-wrote with a now deceased friend. Being critical of media is one thing, and obviously, Good Omens isn't perfect. But... Just think about what you're doing before you do it, ok?

#good omens #crowley/aziraphale #my opinion #long post #queer representation #queerbaiting #queerplatonic ships #asexual #aromantic #aro / ace relationships #it's not many people who said it #and there are always some idiots who don't agree with me #in the end of the day #it's up to personal interpretations #but this is a bigger and more structural problem #and good omens just gave me such a good reason to talk about it

[zukoandtheoc]

1, 7, 8, 17, and 18?

1. What do you identify as and what are your pronouns?

i’m demi/bi/panromantic and asexual or maybe demisexual, my gender is ???? something nonbinary and very vaguely masc-aligned. i consider myself transgender. i am comfortable calling myself a boy, but not any other gendered terms. my pronouns are he/him or they/them.

7. What is one question you hate people asking about your sexuality?

this is a difficult one because i don’t really talk to people about my sexuality that much? back when i was a wee baby queer and i told my mom i thought i was bisexual i think she was kinda like “aren’t you kinda young to know for sure” and that’s really the only thing i can think of. my mom is kind of inept when it comes to sexuality and gender issues and definitely asks weird questions that i don’t know how to answer sometimes.

slightly tangential to this question, one time back in middle school (the year i first started exploring queer stuff) my english teacher gave us an assignment for some essay or other, i don’t know what the assignment was exactly, but somehow i ended up writing about labels and the split attraction model and bi- vs pan- prefixes. it was very clumsy and uninformed and not an accurate picture of how i view myself or the subject matter today, but in the essay i came to the conclusion that i identified as bisexual panromantic (which i justified based on the idea that there were two sexes and many genders. i was 14). anyway, i got a good grade on that essay, BUT the teacher wrote a comment on it that was something along the lines of “well written, but i think we should leave the labels to the people that matter - the poll takers.” which. fucking. pissed me off. i think it was a well-intentioned comment - at the time the Big Issue was same-sex marriage - but i was in the process of self-discovery and labels mattered to me, actually, and still do. and that kind of thing, coming from a person i looked up to and respected, was hurtful.

8. Describe the style of clothing that you most often wear.

whatever comfy t-shirts i have and a bunch of completely identical black pants, with the occasional navy blue or gray pants thrown in to mix it up. i dress strictly for comfort most of the time. if i wanna get a little fancy, soft button-ups are nice. also if i’m going out, usually a hoodie tied around my waist, or if it’s cold i will wear that hoodie or a flannel shirt or a coat. and i have a collection of jewelry comfort items that i need to have with me if i’m leaving the house, plus my stim toys.

17. Have you been in a relationship and how did you meet?

nope! well. not unless you count my pre-school boyfriend, which i think is a story involving me being the only person willing to play with him during indoor recess.

i AM in a relationship with two of my systemmates, but that’s... not really a question of “meeting”, lol.

18. What is your favourite lgbt+ book?

... Good Omens?

i don’t think i’ve read many queer books! the only book i can think of right now with explicit queer themes is Green, which... i don’t think was written by a queer person and also was weird as fuck. idk.

i do have a copy of Simon vs. the Homo Sapiens Agenda that i need to read sometime!

#lgbt+ ask game #ask meme #evan speaks #queer #anon #thanks for asking! #Anonymous

[chimepunk]

What novels or book series would you recommend?

oh fuckin boy dude so many. 90% of what i read is either gay or scifi/fantasy or both, and some are technically for a younger audience but still great, so thats what most of this is which hopefully you’re cool with here goes

this got super long so i’m putting it under a cut. bolded titles are the ones that i’m super recommending, though i love them all

novels

the coldest girl in coldtown by holly black - vampires! a trans character! a bi character! one of the most novel approaches to vampires in fiction that i’ve seen! 10/10 would recommend

the darkest part of the forest by holly black - again, holly black is one of my favorite authors. this one’s got faeries (the proper vaguely unsettling kind that i’m all about) magical music, girls embracing their sexuality, girls being knights, interesting sibling dynamics, and a super cute m/m pairing

les miserables by victor hugo - ok yeah, it’s like 1400 pages long and historical fiction, but i love les mis a lot ok. it’s gotta be on this list just because it owns my ass. it’s like a old drunk french man trying to tell you about the june rebellion but he keeps getting distracted by things like people’s personal lives, the intricacies of the parisian underworld, and how much he wants to fuck the sewers. it’s wonderful

the night circus by erin morgenstern - magical circus that mysteriously appears for days at a time and then vanishes? a competition between young magicians drawn out for years? a wide variety of fascinating side characters? (i will say that the synopsis available for the book is somewhat misleading, as it’s actually less about our two protags and more about the circus itself. but that’s what makes it so enchanting)

the song of achilles by madeleine miller - retelling of patroclus and achilles story to be explicitly romantic. will make you feel like you’re floating on clouds and then rapidly crush your soul. sort of a happy ending? but it’s still a tragedy. their ending is the same as it was in the illiad so if you’re not prepared for that then maybe don’t read

good omens by neil gaiman and terry pratchett - a demon who’s not very good at being a demon and an angel who just wants to collect his books in peace thank you very much try to sabotage the end of times. absolutely hilarious

fairy and folktales of the irish peasantry by w.b. yeats - the best collection of irish faerie stories by one of my favorite poets. if you like creepy and tricky faeries i would def recommend checking these out

rootabaga stories by carl sandburg - another collection of folktales, this time inspired by the american midwest. kinda weird, kinda zany, very neat

the poison eaters by holly black - a short story collection of faery stories that are sometimes creepy, sometimes touching, sometimes gay. my personal favorite is about a library science student who finds a book collection where the characters come out at night and interact, but they’re all really great

series:

alex rider adventures by anthony horowitz - teenager gets recruited by MI6 as a spy, has incredibly high success rate, gets pretty fucked up along the way but damn those one liners tho, maybe have some self preservation alex? just a thought

all for the game by nora sakavic - about a fake sport called exy that’s kind of like indoor lacrosse but more violent. contains: crime families, found families, an aspec protag, girls kicking ass, unhealthy levels of sass, wonderful slowburn m/m that you can’t even see coming for a long while, and a happy ending for everyone!! i came for the gays and ended up reading all three books in two days. also you can get the whole series for less than five bucks on kindle! (note: tw for rape, physical abuse, torture, ptsd, child abuse, drug use, alcoholism, some use of slurs, mentions of past self harm, mental illness)

artemis fowl by eoin colfer - more faeries, but this time they live underground and are way more technologically advanced than humans. the first book focuses on our anti-hero trying to catch one and steal their gold, and they quickly become allies and solve faerie related cases together!! one of my favorite series growing up, and i cried in the middle of the hallway at school when i finished the last book

camp half-blood series by rick riordan - does rick riordan write a lot of mythology books? yes. do i love them all? yes. neurodivergent kids! kids from a huge range of racial and ethnic backgrounds! queer kids! collect them all! ft. greco-roman mythology and a lot of stupid jokes

emelan series by tamora pierce - ok this is easily one of my favorite series of all time. non-western high fantasy setting (picture greece/turkey, china, tibet, mongolia, scandinavia, etc type settings), following four young mages who have unique kinds of magic as they train and grow their skills and become powerful in their own right. only one of the kids is definitely white (jury’s still out on sandry), one is a lesbian, one is ace, one is pan, all four are raised by a loving f/f couple, body diversity, one of the best found families i’ve ever read, feminism, discussion of racism, classism, cultural identity, war, and so much more. it’s so so good and so under-appreciated please read all of the emelan books 

the dark is rising sequence by susan cooper - full disclosure i have not finished this series yet but i’ve re-read the first book a million times. it’s a neat take on arthurian mythology, with dark forces trying to take over and kids getting shit done

diviners by libba bray - psychic teenagers in 1920s new york! i’m a slut for prohibition, but these are also super fun and have likable and real characters, and doesn’t only focus on wealthy white people having parties which is nice. the occult! government conspiracies! historical references! genuinely scary situations! it’s rad!

the enchanted forest chronicles by patricia c. wrede - i adore this series so so much. it’s about a princess who’s father keeps telling her that she can’t have hobbies like fencing or cooking or conjugating latin verbs because they’re unladylike and insists that she marry this doofus prince that she couldn’t care less about. so she runs away and volunteers to work for a dragon and proceeds to send away all the princes that try to rescue her. it’s genuinely funny, has a really neat magic system in the later books, great female friendships, cats, dragons who have no time for your gender roles, and wizards who are the most ridiculous group of antagonists you will ever see

the infernal devices by cassandra clare - i really really do not like the author of this series but it also broke me so it must go on the list. if you’re familiar with the mortal instruments or shadowhunters on freeform, it’s set in that universe in the 1870s in london and it’s very steampunk and very angsty and it made me cry a lot

the kane chronicles by rick riordan - see: camp half-blood series but egyptian

fablehaven by brandon mull - oooooh fuck me up i love this series. this is another one meant for slightly younger readers but all of brandon mull’s series are so wildly imaginative and i’m a slut for world building so. the premise is basically that there are secret preserves all over the world that house magical creatures, and five of these preserves have vaults with artifacts that when brought together make a key to this massive demon prison. an evil society called the society of the evening star is trying to get the artifacts to open the prison, and a different group who is allied with the preserves called the knights of the dawn is trying to get to them first to prevent this from happening. there are dragons, light and dark powers, crazy convoluted vaults to get through, and some really cool creatures and characters

beyonders by brandon mull - this guy again! this one’s about a parallel world called lyrian that people on earth can only get to through small liminal windows, and usually can’t get back through. the story follows two kids, jason and rachel, who get stuck in lyrian and end up becoming major members of the resistance against the evil emperor maldor. just like fablehaven, the world building is insane and you’ll fall in love with all the characters. this is yet another series that made me cry in the middle of class when i finished it

the kingkiller chronicle by patrick rothfuss - this is series is long as all fuck and the last book isn’t out yet but it’s my #1 favorite series of all time. i found out about it bc a cashier at a local grocery store held up the line to write it down for me and i never went back. parts of it are achingly, hauntingly beautiful, other parts are hilarious enough to leave you in stitches, others make you want to pull your hair out. there’s sass, recklessness, beautiful and deadly girls, an overwhelming love and emphasis on the importance of music and storytelling, magic that’s more like science, ethnic adversity, student loans, a thing that might be a cow or might be a dragon depending on who you ask, and more quotable lines than you could dream of. the audiobook by nick podehl is also fabulous, and lin manuel miranda is producing and adapting it for the screen and maybe stage at some point in the future!

a modern faerie tale by holly black - guys. i love holly black. almost everything she’s ever written is on this list. this one is fairly self explanatory by the title, but it’s gritty and dark and has those lovely creepy faeries that she’s so great at writing. also a surprising m/m couple in the last book, both of whom are characters in the other two installments. (tw for drug use/addiction, brief sexual assault, and probably other things that i can’t remember right now)

the raven cycle by maggie stiefvater - also in my top 3 favorite series of all time, i cannot begin to describe this series. i first read it while up in the nc mountains which improved the experience to a surprising degree, but it’s stuck with me for the last several years. basically 5 teenagers go in search of a dead welsh king, but along the way there is magic, psychics, ghosts, a sentient forest, dreams becoming reality, curses, teenage shenanigans, classic cars, swearing, church, kisses and not kisses, illict hand holding, a baby crow, bisexuality, a death list, hitmen, and nicknames and it will consume your heart before you know what’s happening to you (tw child abuse, implied sexual assault, substance abuse, dissociation, mentions of past suicide attempts, body horror, gore, and disturbing scenes esp. in the last book)

six of crows by leigh bardugo - a team of criminals band together to break into an impossible fortress, fall in love, con an entire city, and get rich. set in the same universe as the grisha trilogy (which is also good but not as good as soc), this is basically a heist followed by a con, but pulled off by ruthless teenagers and with the help of magic

curseworker trilogy by holly black - crime families, magic that can only done through touch so everyone wears gloves, moral ambiguity, and a twisted romance. one of holly black’s best and most underrated series

baccano! by ryohgo narita - this is a japanese light novel series which has been adapted into an anime, but is much more extensive in print. the plot is extremely convoluted, but an absolute ride spanning several centuries, although the bulk of it is in the 1930s in nyc and chicago. there’s an elixir of immortality, crime families, trains, a solipsistic assassin and his mute assassin gf, serial killers, a demon with a catch phrase, murder, explosions, adorable couples, gambling, a gang leader named jacuzzi who is always terrified, killer corporations, and much much more

no.6 by asuka asano - another japanse series, this time focusing on two boys, one who grew up in a utopian city, the other who grew up outside the walls after the city destroyed his life. they meet when they’re 12 years old, and several years later, they’re reunited when the outsider rescues the city boy from arrest. they, along with a pimp and a nonbinary dog hotel owner, try to expose and overthrow the government. also ft. drag performances, mice who like shakespeare, killer bees, and boys falling in love.

the merlin saga by t.a. barron - my favorite take on arthurian mythology, chronicling merlin as he comes into his power. there’s a vividly magical island, giants, amulets, talking trees, stones that will try to swallow you, a swamp witch, celtic deities, huge wicker hats, poetry, new kinds of fruit, people that are also deer, and human’s long lost wings.

#i love giving recs! #ask me for recs for whatever whenever you want!! #ask #anon #lit

[msmarvelsmarvel]

Lgbt+ ask game

What do you identify as and what are your pronouns?

Bisexual, she/her

How did you discover your sexuality, tell your story?

Uh well, I always kinda knew I liked both and in my family, no one was really homophobic so I never thought it was weird. My first kiss with a girl I was in 4th grade and she was my best friend. My policy was always “if you’re hot, I like you” and it didn’t occur to me that there was a term for that (and yeah I’m going with the OG term for Bi meaning the attraction to two OR MORE genders don’t @ me) Anyway in high school I had my ‘coming out’ when my friend group consisted of two pansexuals, a straight and another bisexual. They gave me a name for how I felt

Have you experienced being misgendered? What happened and how did you overcome it?

Since I am FAB I never had to deal with that sort of thing!

Who was the first person you told, how did they react?

I guess the first people I officially told were my friends and they didn’t bat an eye. 

Describe what it was like coming out, what did you feel?

When I finally like posted it on facebook and wore shirts around school and didn’t care who heard, it was a great feeling. I was much luckier than a lot of folks because if anyone at my school had a problem with it, they didn’t let on. My family was accepting, my friends obviously were, and the kids at my school didn’t give a fuck.

If you’re out, how did your parents/guardians/friends react?

When I told my mom and stepdad they just said they knew and they loved me all the same. My mom actually said she and my bio dad had known since I was like 2 lol

What is one question you hate people asking about your sexuality?

The threesome question, unicorn hunters, the like. Turning on your settings to women on tinder is so annoying because every other person is a couple ‘looking for a nice girl who wants to have some fun’

Describe the style of clothing that you most often wear.

Comfy. I live in leggings and t-shirts/tank tops. I also always have an overcoat of some sort, be it a leather (pleather) jacket, my favorite denim jacket, a sweatshirt, a hoodie, I have all types of overcoats. It’s actually a problem

Who are your favourite lgbt+ ships?

Non-canon of course cause most fandoms don’t like us: Ambrollins is probably the top, Aziraphale and Crowley from Good Omens (is that canon? Whatever), and Mickey and Ian from Shameless

What does makeup mean to you? Do you wear any?

Uh well, I don’t wear it super often. If I’m going to a nice event or it’s a nice occasion or even if I just feel like it and have time I wear like foundation and contour the whole nine yards, but I don’t do it every day. 

Do you experience dysphoria? If so, how does that affect you?

I do not, thankfully.

What is the stupidest thing you’ve heard said about the lgbt+ community?

The pretty obvious one: That we don’t need a pride month/parade and on the reverse, since we have one why isn’t there a straight month/parade

What’s your favourite thing about the lgbt+ community?

For the most part, I’ve had positive, welcoming experiences. I went to NYC pride last year and it was just very happy and welcoming and a sense of community

What’s your least favourite thing about the lgbt+ community?

GATEKEEPING! Nothing bothers me more than people acting like there are strict guidelines you have to follow in order to be in the LGBT+ community. Just shut up and let people live, dear lord!

Have you ever been to your cities pride event? Why or why not?

Well I mentioned NYC pride which was a lot of fun. I’m from PA so it wasn’t my own city’s pride, but it was so much fun! I almost went to Philly pride that same year, but it was supposed to rain so we canceled. It didn’t rain

Who is your favourite lgbt+ Icon/Advocate/Celebrity?

I think Halsey is a big influence for me, she’s doing good work. Also JVN who recently came out as non-binary. He just gives me a confidence I never knew I lacked. I also just a really big fan of Tessa Thompson

Have you been in a relationship and how did you meet?

I’ve only dated men as of now, but I have been talking to a girl I matched with on tinder and she’ll probably be the first girl I date

What is your favourite lgbt+ book?

I honestly haven’t read a book that wasn’t for school in literal years, none of which included lgbt+ characters so I can’t answer this tbh. Actually, I’ll say Harry Potter, according to JK that’s suuuuper LGBT, it just wasn’t important to the plot :/

Have you ever faced discrimination? What happened?

The closest I’ve come so far, in my very small town and closed off life, was a girl that I matched with on tinder.

Your Favorite lgbt+ movie or show?

Sense8 was cool, big fan of that show. I honestly can’t say I’ve seen any other shows that focus on LGBT characters. Send me recommendations! 

Who are some of your favourite lgbt+ bloggers?

I feel like at this point, all the people I see on my dash are LGBT somehow soooo

Which lgbt+ slur do you want to reclaim?

Queer! I think it’s mostly already been said, but it’s a good umbrella word for those that don’t exactly know what it is they feel or identify as. It also can take place of titles like bisexual heteroromantic or asexual biromantic. It’s just a nice general term to say without having to explain your whole LGBT story to complete strangers!

Have you ever gone to a gay bar, or a drag show, how was it?

I have! There’s a place here in Allentown called Stonewall (I know, right!) and on Thursdays they do drag night along with 18+ so in high school, my group of friends would go. It was always so much fun!

How do you self-identify your gender, and what does that mean to you?

I’ve never really questioned my gender, I’ve always known I was cisgender but it is important to me that I live up to the women I look up to like Carrie Fisher and my mom.

Are you interested in having children? Why or why not?

Tough question. Yes and no. If I ever have kids it’ll be adopted because I never want to be pregnant, no exceptions. I’m hesitant though bc my parents have instilled in me a reaction that makes me yell and I’m easily irritated and I also kinda practically raised my youngest brother at a young age so I’m not sure I’m cut out the be a parent

What identity advice would you give your younger self?

Advice in general: Go to more pride things. Join the pride+ club on campus earlier, take any advantage possible to go to parades and just be more annoying about your sexuality. Also! Find more lgbt friends, having friends that are allies is amazing, but actually having friends that are part of the community makes a huge difference

What do you think of gender roles in relationships?

I think they’re dumb af. Fuck gender roles in relationships and just in general.

Anything else you want to share about your experience with gender?

Not particularly, just be your genuine self!

What is something you wish people know about being lgbt+?

It’s not nearly as small a community as people think. Like, we’re considered minority which makes people think there isn’t a lot of us, but (and especially in recent years) I feel like you’ll meet more LGBT+ people than straight in some cases. Also that the majority within the LGBT+ community is bisexual, I feel like a lot of people don’t know that

Why are proud to be lgbt+?

Why wouldn’t I be? lol

♡ Happy pride from @hogwartsonline ♡

#pride #happy pride! #pride 2019 #pride ask game #long post

[itsclydebitches]

(WLW anon) I really don’t like the “bad rep is better then none at all”. I hate that. We should want good rep, because bad rep has been used time and time again by homophobes as to say we shouldn’t get representation. To me it’s not “gay can have the same flaws as het”, it’s “fix the flaws in the het”. Also I know Renora being independent was a good, I was just saying in comparison BB. Also, yes, they were separated, but also didn’t stop thinking about each other. Especially bad with Yang.

Indulge me for a moment because I want to take a trip down memory lane and list some—just some—of the queer rep that has been important to me over the years:

Ellen comes out both as herself and as her character… years later, she’s a hated millionaire who is criticized for how she treats her staff

The wildly influential Buffy gives us two women entering a loving relationship… except then Tara is killed off, Willow goes evil for a time, and Buffy comes under fire for Joss Whedon’s everything

The beloved and respectable headmaster of one of the most popular book series ever published is revealed to be gay… except it doesn’t count because it wasn’t in the text and now all of Harry Potter is cancelled because JKR is transphobic

Kurt is an unambiguously gay teen in a hugely popular TV series, acting as one of the first overt representations a generation has seen… except he’s way too stereotypical and Glee is a joke now

Orange is the New Black gives us a number of queer women, including one of our first trans characters… but isn’t it problematic that they’re all criminals?

Brooklyn Nine-Nine hosts an out gay captain and gives us a bisexual coming out story that resonated with many, myself included… except now we’re supposed to hate all the characters on principle because they’re cops

Korra and Asami walk off into the spiritual sunset together… but they never kiss or anything, so that doesn’t count either

Steven Universe gives us a queer relationship and a wedding… but it’s an issue that this is just a kid’s show and, really, does it count when the rep is embodied by space rocks whose entire species only creates a single gender? Feels like a cop-out

Same with Good Omens. Yeah, Crowley and Aziraphale clearly love each other… but you never see them kiss or declare their intentions. It’s great ace rep though! Unless you want to level the criticism that asexual characters are always nonhuman

A character intended to be a minor guest becomes a show staple and eventually declares his love for one of the two main characters… except then Castiel immediately dies, Dean doesn’t respond, and they never meet on screen again

I finished Queen’s Gambit the other day and the main character had a one-night stand with a woman! … but everyone is talking about how bisexuality is used to represent her lowest point, so that’s bad too

I could go on for literal pages. Some of these arguments I agree with (Dumbledore), others I’ve pushed back against quite strongly (Crowley and Aziraphale), but all of them are valid criticisms depending on what part of the queer community you’re in and what your expectations are. My point here is that it’s all “bad rep.” I mean that seriously. If anyone reading this is scrambling for the comment section to say why [insert media title here] is actually fantastic rep, I guarantee that someone disagrees. Or if they don’t, give it some time. Just wait until the characterization becomes offensively outdated, or another part of the story ruins the relationship, or it comes out that the author did something truly horrific, or the terminology changes and it’s labeled as “problematic” now… just wait. At some point, any rep we feel is good rep now will be criticized, cancelled, and dragged through the mud. The rep that I personally haven’t seen much push-back against—like the beloved Captain Jack Harkness in Doctor Who, or Schitts Creek that just won a ton of awards—is wrapped up in the criticism, “So it’s all just about able-bodied, cis, (mostly) white dudes, huh? :/”  Even the argument that queer characters need to be written by queer authors doesn’t hold up. I absolutely adored Sense8. “Wow, a gay main character in a loving relationship with another gay man, both of whom enter a loving poly relationship with a woman, another lesbian trans main character who marries the love of her life on screen, an entire cast arguably queer due to them sharing orgy scenes centered around the emotional intimacy they share, everyone survives, and this was written by two trans women! Great, right?” Well, not according to the wealth of opinions explaining how Sense8 is horrible rep, actually. Every piece of rep we’ve got is either currently flawed or will become flawed in the future.

So what do we do with that?

That’s where my “I’d rather have bad rep than no rep at all” comes in. For me, that’s not waving the white flag. That’s not an oath that I won’t expect better rep in the future (I do) or that I won’t criticize the rep we get (BOY DO I), but rather just an acknowledgement of reality. The vast majority—if not the entirety—of rep is “bad rep” in one way or another, but I’d still rather have it than nothing at all. Because I’ve lived just long enough and studied media just enough to know what nothing looked like. It was watching all queer characters meet untimely deaths. Before that it was watching queer characters be derided and treated as jokes. Before that it was nothing but coding, where queer characters didn’t exist except in our own headcanons and interpretations. Obviously “bad rep” covers a very large range of issues and “They haven’t even confirmed this relationship yet” is a bigger issue than “This queer character embodies one or two, mild stereotypes,” but ultimately I’d take any of it over nothing at all. And enjoying what we’ve currently got doesn’t mean I’m willing to settle for it indefinitely.

To use an iffy analogy, imagine there’s a factory. This factory makes plates. So. Many. Plates. Big plates, small plates, plain plates, decorative plates, plates for every possible occasion in your life—and everyone with a steak for dinner is pleased as punch. You though? You’ve got soup. You need a bowl. Your entire life you’ve been struggling to eat your soup off a plate (it doesn’t work) and listening to friends and family claim that the plate with a slightly raised edge could be a bowl if you squint (it’s not). To say it’s frustrating is an understatement.

But then, one day, the factory starts producing bowls too. Hurray! Except as soon as you get your hands on one, you’re told you really shouldn’t be using it, let alone praising it. Look at the state of that bowl! It’s cracked right down the middle, ugly as hell, shoddily made all around… you’re not really going to settle for that, are you? And no, you obviously still want the factory to produce better bowls, but at the same time, this is a bowl. You’ve never gotten one before and you can finally enjoy your meal, even if the soup leaks at times. Sometimes a lot. But you’re still feeling better about your meal than you ever have before. And what you then begin to realize is that lots of the plates are a mess too. They also have cracks, they’re also ugly, many are also shoddily made. The difference is that the factory is producing so many plates at such a rapid pace that every steak eater is able to get by. One plate breaks completely? You’ve got a thousand fallbacks. Don’t like the look of this one? A thousand other options. You disagree about what “shoddily made” means? Luckily there are enough plates that everyone can find what they prefer! But the bowls… there’s only a few. Some are really expensive. Others are only available for a limited time before they suddenly disappear. Your bowl breaks and you have to wait months, years sometimes, to get another one. You’re constantly told to go buy this one obscure bowl no one else has heard about and yeah, you like it... but you’d also like to buy one of the bowls everyone is already enjoying. You find yourself looking at the plates and thinking, “I’d like that. I’d like to have so many options that the flaws, while still a problem, are much more bearable.” You’re still going to demand that the factory get its shit together, you’re still going to (rightly) complain about the awful quality of your bowl… but it’s still nice to have a bowl, period. There are still things you like about it, even if it’s a mess: the color, the size, the beauty of the shape of it. Its potential. You’re still pleased you have something to enjoy and that helps serve the need you’re looking to fill, even if that something is imperfect.

That’s “bad rep is better than no rep.” To bring this very long response back to Blake/Yang, I don’t think their problems negate their benefits. Is their relationship currently non-canonical and filled with a number of writing issues everyone has a right to be angry about? Yup. I express that anger a great deal. Are they still half of a team on a very popular show that is (presumably) set to be canonized as queer? Yup. I’d much rather live in a world where big shows like RWBY try to include queer rep and fail in a multitude of ways—with the expectation and hope that they’ll continue to improve—rather than in a world where authors a) don’t care or b) are too scared to try. Because that’s where a “good rep or no rep” stance leads. The danger isn’t homophobes because they’re, well, homophobes. It doesn’t matter if the rep is good or not, they hate it on principle. But if queer authors writing for other queer identities, or allies writing queer identities, or even queer authors writing their own experiences (like in Sense8) continually come under non-stop fire for their attempts… there’s a good chance that many people won’t ever try. We’re already seeing that here on tumblr with young authors admitting that they wouldn’t touch [insert topic here] with a ten-foot pole because just look at what happens when you get it wrong. And authors will get things wrong because authors are fallible people forever unlearning their own ignorance. So though it might sound strange coming from a blog that has turned into such a RWBY critical space, I am glad that RWBY’s queer rep exists, despite all the frustrations that I share about it. I think a RWBY with various types of “bad” queer rep is better than a RWBY with no queer rep at all, particularly when “bad” or “good” is so intensely subjective. There’s a middle ground between passively accepting whatever we’re given, and tearing into rep with such ferocity that we end up rejecting it all. There’s a space where we can be critical of rep and embrace the parts that work for us, simultaneously.

I hope and expect the het rep will get better too, but… that’s never going to happen instantly. To quote RWBY, there’s no magic wand we can wave to fix all our problems. Rather, it will take slow, plodding, meandering, lifetimes’ worth of work to see that change occur and I personally don’t want to spend the one life I have waiting for that perfect rep to show up. Because it’s unlikely that it will. While we work, I’d rather find the good in what rep we’ve already got.  

#rwby #queer #mymetas #Anonymous