long girl in the soup? 😳 well damn, congrats on ur transition ahsa! 👏🏳️⚧️🐋
6 notes
·
View notes
the desperation to survive is such an interesting part of kingdom and I especially like how it’s reflected in Yeong Shin, Lee Chang, and the Queen. The parallel between Yeong Shin and Lee Chang is lower hanging fruit, but the added factor of the Queen gives it more depth. These are the three characters where it is explicitly stated and shown that they will do anything to survive and I think they can be broken into three categories: selflessness, selfishness, and the intermediate.
Yeong Shin’s desperation to survive is selfless. Though it is one of the factors that ultimately causes the plague, the origin of it comes from a want for not only his survival, but the survival of the people in the village. Despite making the soup, he does not turn because he wanted to feed the people in Jiyulheon first. There’s the juxtaposition of the immorality of eating a human body and the moral good of feeding the villagers. His approach to most things seems to be whether or not the pros outweigh the cons with the information he has and he’s no stranger to going to great lengths in order to survive (such as cannibalism). That being said, to him, his survival also inherently means the survival of those around him. If he was bothered about just surviving himself, he would have destroyed the bodies in Jiyulheon, would not have gone back to the wagon when it was stuck, would not have defended the villagers when the Palace Guards attacked, etc. So yes, Mu Yeong was right to say that the chakho will do anything to survive, but that survival, in the case of Yeong Shin, is selfless.
On the flip side, the Queen’s desperation to survive is selfish. It is the kind of survival where there are no moral codes that bound her and the one where she will do anything in order to keep herself afloat. It is also what makes the switch from Lord Cho to her as the main antagonist so impactful, one because of the parting words she gives him after poisoning his tea, and two because Lord Cho, while cunning, never had the same level of ruthlessness as his daughter did; his existence was not constantly being tested and he did not know survival like she did. Like Yeong Shin, her desire to survive also played a part in the outbreak, but the circumstances are different. Her survival inherently requires the deaths of those around her. The lengths that she goes to in order to ensure her survival are extreme and they are a death sentence for anyone who threatens her. She survives through cruelty because cruelty is all she knows and this survival will always be selfish because it will only be her own.
And finally, we have Lee Chang whose desire to survive is the intermediate: it is the moral grey between two opposing sides, and it’s also interesting to note that it is also the only survival that does not play a factor in the outbreak. Throughout the show, he has moments of selfishness and selflessness, and he goes to similar lengths as the other two with the same sort of desperation that they all know. I don’t think he’s perfectly in the middle because it would be wrong to say he’s halfway similar to the Queen, but it’s also important to note that the survival they both know is one of the same because they are both disadvantaged in Joseon’s politics. When comparing him to Yeong Shin, he too includes others in his survival, but it takes him longer to get there. The best example of this is when they return to Jiyulheon and the palace guards attack; his hesitation ensures his own survival at the village but it comes at the cost of others. What’s interesting is that just before that, he risked his life to free the wagon as they escaped from the undead. His quest to survive is contradictory as much as it desperate. Part of his development is figuring out which way he will ultimately fall.
(There might be something to be said about how the consequences of Queen and Yeong Shin’s desperation to survive are immediate whereas Lee Chang’s are stretched throughout the show, but I think that would have to be another post).
39 notes
·
View notes
Jessamine Accidentally Writes An Essay About Two Conversations Ze's Totally Normal About
one of my beloved mutuals (@souplover13) is reblogging a lot of queerpunk posts tonight which just reminded me of two conversations i want to document. yes this story involves paul bellini why wouldn't it (fr tho i was considering not making this a post bc i was like oh god do people really want to hear me ramble about these 63-year-old gay dudes again maybe i should give it a rest but whatever it's my blog and if people don't like it why are they even following me this is all we do here)
anyway the story actually begins with a conversation i had with my parents earlier today. now, i'm lucky enough to have parents that are constantly trying their best to be good allys and are always learning to do better. they're not perfect, but they want to learn. while at lunch today my dad took a picture of me and my mom together since i won't be home again for a few months and he affectionately said "my girls." i've been out to my parents as nonbinary for around a year, but i let it slide since my gender wasn't the most important part of that sentiment, more the fact that it was a nice family moment.
a beat later my mom corrects "girl and person," and while i am grateful for her seeing that i'm not a girl, this type of correction always makes me feel more awkward than being misgendered. like, the point of my dad calling me "his girl" was this tone of familial affection, but the word "person" just feels cold and distant, which is something i struggle with in a lot of gender neutral language. but beyond that, it's just this weird separation. i jokingly correct my mom again, saying "hey, we're both people."
the conversation continues and eventually my mom asks if it bothers me when people call me "girl" like that. and the truth is: i don't know. it bothers me a little, but the forced neutrality bothers me more, and honestly i don't really care what gendered language someone uses for me as long as they mean it in a way that shows me they care. like, i'd rather be called girl affectionately than be called "genderqueer nonbinary person with a strained relationship to androgyny who uses ze/zir pronouns and feels represented by the word transfeminine" in a derogatory way. I respond "it's contextual," but that's not a satisfactory answer. the conversation moves on to a nonbinary person who stops by my mom's work often and how my mom's had to correct some of the older employees to stop calling them a girl, since times are changing.
the second conversation is from a few weeks ago when i first visited canada to help with the mouth congress concert and got to have lunch with paul bellini beforehand. at one point the conversation developed into paul asking me what being "nonbinary" means for me personally. it was clear he wasn't intimately familiar with the concept (though to his credit he did have more experience with it than i expected), and some of his assumptions were inaccurate to my experience, but he listened intently as i described my experience not knowing how to specifically label my gender but just knowing i don't want to be seen as a cis woman while also having no desire to be fully male. he related it to his own experience as a gay man with his own complex relationship to masculinity and femininity, acknowledging it's not the exact same, and by the end of our conversation i truly felt like he respected my unique relationship to gender even if there were certain parts he still needed to process.
but most importantly, it was funny. granted our conversation was a unique case since both individuals were queer comedians from different generations, but approaching the strange concept of gender identity with humor made it so much more comfortable. paul described being a little feminine gay kid and thinking "i'm not a boy or a girl, i'm a god" and i responded that's it exactly. i brought up the mouth congress song she-male: master of the universe, saying the vision of a vengeful genderqueer space goddess is the most represented i've felt by a piece of media, only half joking. but also there were times when i made jokes about failing at gender (e.g. referencing a group of "girls" at my high school who made me realize i'm nonbinary since i always felt weird for being the least feminine person when we hung out, and then the fact that several of them came out as transmasc after graduation meaning now they can be better than me at being trans as well) and while paul acknowledged the joke he also assured me i was exactly where i needed to be in terms of my gender presentation, and honestly i'm kind of tearing up just thinking about it.
paul never asked me for my pronouns, but to be fair i did somewhat volunteer them in the form of a joke: "i use any pronouns, but i will silently judge you based on what you do with that information." that line got a laugh.
I told the same line to my parents after our "girl" conversation today, earning only confusion, and it made me realize something: so much of modern trans allyship centers entirely around language, be it pronouns or recognizing the lack of neutrality in our everyday speech. and while these things are certainly important, that's not understanding. cishet allys so often want to be able to say the right thing, so they approach the subject as learning the rules for how to incorporate this new approach to gender into their lexicon. i think there's something to be said for how this parallels how we're often taught about cis gender roles: these are the rules you follow to be a man or woman. when you find out someone doesn't fit neatly into those boxes, it's natural to ask "okay, what are your rules?" this also leads to some cis people (even gay cis people) complaining about how "you can't say anything these days" since it's portrayed as just another set of rules you need to learn.
but honestly, i don't know what my gender rules should be. my approach to gender lately has been the equivalent of "idk dude i just work here," i don't know where i specifically fit in but i do know how i feel inside. the answer "it's contextual" doesn't give you the cheat codes to gendering me correctly, because even i don't know how to gender myself correctly half the time. however, more importantly imo it gives you a window into how it feels to be me, a nonbinary person with complicated relationships to every facet of gender who's decided to stop expecting language to fully represent me but still has to deal with language being applied to me all the time. my nonbinary gender is confusing as hell, and i'm tired of having to pretend it's not as if that's the only way it's worthy of respect. every gender (including cis genders) is confusing as hell, and it's only when we all accept this fact that we can actually make a meaningful connection.
as my parents and i were driving away from the restaurant my only thought was i wonder how my dad would've referred to that photo if it was my brother and my mom in the picture. would he have said "girl and boy?" or "girl and person?" or would he have simply said "family"
5 notes
·
View notes