#so this is queer denoting text and that means

[goodluckdetective]

An update post season 2 release: I’VE BEEN WRONG BEFORE. I’d delete this post but:

1. I was wrong and I should admit it.

2. This post actually explains what queerbaiting is pretty well: it’s this kind of marketing except unlike Good Omens, there is 0 payoff. Cus shows marketed like this before with 0 payoff which is why I was so worried.

Anyway, glad to be terribly wrong on main. I accept my position as clown.

A Good Omens hot take on “queerbaiting” below. No spoilers, but lord knows people have talked this to death, so I’m sorry in advance:

As a queer person, I didn’t think the first season was queerbaiting. I know some folks did and that’s fine, I’m not here to change your mind and I respect your opinion. But to me, while it was somewhat ambiguous, it was very obvious the two loved each other, that it was a love story and regardless if it was platonic, romantic or “whatever these two got going on”, the text was clear that all of those perspectives were valid. Especially since it was a close adaptation of the book. Never did I get the feeling that the show was mocking me for thinking it could be romantic, or just playing around: it felt like the show respected that read.

Now, as season 2 comes up, I think the show has set itself up to fall into queerbait if they keep things ambiguous. This mostly has to do with regards the marketing. The marketing has been pretty damn romantic in a way season 1 wasn’t: Amazon Prime clips on youtube label the pair as a couple. Like this ain’t subtle:

The playlists being full of love songs (Take Me to Church? Really?). The Twitter ship teasing quite a bit. Outside of marketing, Neil describing the season as romantic. Having a romantic couple (Maggie and Nina) mirror the main pair (the lesbians are not queerbait of course, it’s the mirroring that can be an issue: Supernatural pulled this multiple times). This is pretty classic queerbaiting should this be left ambiguous. It is one thing to have a relationship be open to interpretation but have the narrative respect each interpretation equally. It’s another to imply a specifically romantic relationship and then never actually follow through.

“But Iz-“ You say. “They’re supernatural beings, they aren’t interested in sex-“ I never said there had to be sex. Hell, there doesn’t even have to be kissing. Holding hands or a love confession I think would be entirely acceptable for me (not for everyone, this is just me personally). I think you can have them be supernatural beings and still denote a relationship as queer without a huge make out scene. My concern here is that we get something so ambiguous that the build up feels deeply dishonest. Where you constantly hype up something as a romance and then when the curtain is about to fall, go “but it’s all up to the viewer, why would you guys think it HAS to be a romance, you can if you want but that’s just your read!” Like yes, it is just my read, but you’re the one who has been advertising this as a romance for months, not as a “odd couple who can be romantic if you want!” There’s a difference there to me. The second feels like making fun, and in a way that’s kind of mean.

I am of course, one lesbian, so don’t take my word as gay gospel. Just my thoughts.

(And don’t @ Neil or anything. The show isn’t out yet and even if it was and my concerns prove valid, I don’t need to staple my critique to his internet door)

#iz rambles #queerbaiting #good omens speculation #good omens #good omens discourse #good omens season 2 #also yes I’ve seen the leak but w/o context that doesn’t really help my concerns

[larkral]

Oh, hey. I continue to be absolutely buried under the fact that I'm buying a house in (checks watch) five days. Things are chaotic and stressful and wonderful and busy.

But also my wife is out of town this week for work, so that means my time is completely my own for the two hours between my children going to sleep and me going to sleep, and I refuse to pack without her, so I've been getting some writing done. Yay!

Here's a snippet from my @carryon-reverse-bang beach piece

Snow laughs as he throws himself onto the towel at my side. "Hungry?"  I hand him the sunscreen. "Starving."  He takes the sunscreen from me and crawls up behind where I'm sitting to rummage in his bag. He hands me a paper-wrapped scone.  He's at my feet now, cradling the arch of one foot in his hand, squeezing zinc oxide into his palm.  Snow's hands are warm. He's always so warm. The ball of his thumb runs up the arch of my foot and I can't keep myself from groaning. The sound of his snicker barely reaches me. It feels so good that it almost hurts. My eyes close. I feel them leaking at the corners. I want to sob with relief at how good it feels.  He keeps rubbing my feet, pressing the blood into my toes, bending them, turning my ankles. I don't know if he can see that I'm crying. I lie back and toss my arm over my face. There's a scone still in my hand. I take a bite. When the scone is gone, the foot massage is over too, and Simon's next to me. He presses himself into my side, and I leech away all of the heat his body is willing to give me.

I've also been doing a lot of podfic editing, and posted the first of the podfics I've been working on. I used sound effects to denote text messages. Someone tell me if this was a bad idea 🤣

Tags and hellos under the cut!

Thanks for tagging me @wellbelesbian @aroace-genderfluid-sheep and @artsyunderstudy! So many fun and different concepts today, I love it!

Hello and join the party, fandom friends! @stitchyqueer @thewholelemon @confused-bi-queer @raenestee @facewithoutheart @cutestkilla @hushed-chorus @sillyunicorn @you-remind-me-of-the-babe @basiltonbutliketheherb @ileadacharmedlife @asocialpessimist @bookish-bogwitch @aristocratic-otter @captain-aralias @petedavidsonscock @takitalks @yeonjunenby @carryonvisinata @takenabackbytuesdays @martsonmars @nausikaaa @nightimedreamersghost @chen-chen-chen-again-chen @ionlydrinkhotwater @shrekgogurt @forabeatofadrum  @palimpsessed @fatalfangirl​ @blackberrysummerblog​ @valeffelees @imagineacoolusername @orange-peony @j-nipper-95 @whogaveyoupermission @rimeswithpurple @youarenevertooold

#wip wednesday #feet buried in the sand #snowbaz #help me put on my sunscreen #is the prelude to this scene #OR IS IT!?

[batrachised]

Hi! I am not sure if you haven't been asked this question already, but I shall take my chances :). Your knowledge about Anne's books is amazing, so I'd absolutely love your opinion about Walter: do you think he is homosexual?

If I remember correctly, you mentioned that you thought so, after reading an article about him. It would be lovely if you could say something more :). And what do you think about Walter's fancy for Faith or Alice? Was it just a platonic admiration of their beauty, from a young poet's pov?

Of course, no need to rush, take your time! Thank you so much in advance! I'd be happy to hear from you anytime.

Yes, of course! so @gogandmagog and I had a lengthy discussion about this earlier this year which really delves into the details. My opinion has evolved a bit since then. For one, after delving into LMM's history, it's very obvious the intent wasn't there. Briefly, I'll take a stab at Faith and co first-- they read much more as platonic ideals to me, and if my memory serves, Walter himself never confirms interest in Faith - it's another character theorizing. (and also, bi people exist lol but even then faith really never seemed like true interest to me, although i do love the idea of walter watching faith fall in love with jem because i enjoy suffering :D)

I think importantly, Walter plays a key symbolic role in the text from the beginning. The signifiers for this role, while intended by LMM to point towards his fate, inadvertently double as signifiers for him being gay. These range from his near total lack of interest in women, to the other characters' perception of him.* While other significant characters get paired up, Walter doesn't. LMM meant this to be a demonstration of the tragedy of life cut too short; it can come across as a complete lack of interest in women. Walter, like Emily, has a sort of second sight. LMM meant this to be a terminal and aware of it type of ominous foreshadowing; it can come across as conveying the queer experience (@jobey-wan-kenobi had a great post about this!). Walter has stereotypically feminine characteristics, something commented on at length by the other characters. LMM meant this to denote Walter as someone who lives as an "other;" this can come across as characters questioning Walter's sexuality, right down to the implications of calling him slurs.

And so the list goes on! Those are the cornerstones for that interpretation. As you can see, the text is loaded with accidental double-meanings. To my impression (and I am speaking VERY broadly, and VERY anecdotally here), people who are very absorbed in the series tend to have the walter as an emblem take-away, and people who are very casual readers tend to read walter as gay, which I find interesting but I also think makes a lot of sense. I love both interpretations because I love walter and tbh would read anything about him lmao

#i think eric has replaced walter in terms of “lmm character most likely to be gay” though ngl #thanks for the ask!! #sorry for taking 84 years #walter blythe

[xxlovelynovaxx]

Cool, so you're fundamentally reactionary:

(AI discourse below, you have been warned)

(the part below it says something about "the torment nexus)

If you think the books from 1984 are the torment nexus, or even a large contributor to the dystopia and not say, extreme censorship leading to those books that are made by machines that have STRICT rules about what can be written and produce NOTHING deemed "unacceptable" then I don't think you actually read 1984.

It's almost as if they have symbolic meaning and "machine book bad" isn't actually the full point.

And don't get me wrong, I don't personally like AI books. But about the only censorship that's occurring is of sexual content, and given that sexual AI text generators exist I think that's a moot point. If you're so concerned about society becoming "literally 1984" though, maybe focus more energy on stuff like Patreon and Gumroad's bans of (certain) nsfw content, on legislation within your state attempting to ban or restrict access to literature on queer identity and racism, and so on?

I'm not saying the people whining about AI aren't also doing that, but I am saying that wasting time on AI that could be used on stuff that actually matters isn't smart, because a world where AI generated texts exist alongside all manner of human-made ones is nowhere fucking close to 1984 and y'all need to either get a grip or keep weeping.

Also bonus:

Cool, cool. How much of your dislike of AI then comes from just having a squick around certain types (especially since as AI tech improves, I highly doubt you're having this reaction to every single image - at least, you're either "reacting" to stuff that ISN'T AI based on a shared art style and a guess that it is AI, and/or you're not reacting to all AI images because there's some you miss and think are not AI) and how much from fundamentally fascist ideas about what "real art" is or culturally christian ideas about how "real art" requires "hard work" or has "no soul" without a human touch.

I really need to filter AI discourse myself because I'm getting so tired of seeing the same indistinguishable-from-conservative-arguments-about-art about AI.

Especially the ableism and leaning into inspiration porn as proof that all disabled people CAN do art without using AI - or if not inspiration porn, insisting that any medium puts on a surface counts as art and people who can't do art in the way they want should just make basic fingerpaintings or scribbles and be happy they created something, which is WILDLY patronizing. There's nothing wrong with fingerpaintings or scribbles ofc, but gods don't act like that's enough for most people or even the reason people are engaging with art.

And for that matter stop moralizing people who engage with art for an end product rather than the process because reacting to "art is always about the end product" with "art is never about the end product" is just the same problem in reverse! It's almost as if the actual issue with either statement is in fact the idea of a "right way" to engage with art!)

Anyway it's not like the squick/trigger isn't valid but like. You clearly have not examined your biases or how your dislike of a type of image informs your reactionary beliefs towards it. Also, your actual issue seems to be that people aren't properly tagging their posts that contain AI images (and listen, I do have some sympathy for not being able to filter just "AI" as it would filter every post that has any word with letters in those order, possibly even that has letters in between judging how "a/e/mogai" filters "accessmogai" for us).

But I mean, people improperly tagging and poor filtering abilities aren't actually about AI. It's about this site's hostility to attempts at curating your own experience, despite being one of the better sites out there for it, and about people not doing anything to get around that.

Mind you, there's a solution that involves AI itself - if AI has a tag denoting that it is such in the metadata, and sites have a toggle that allows you to filter that tag so it's blurred or blocked altogether, much like they currently do for "adult content", then you'd never have to see AI again. Hell, the site could make the toggle only for stuff that had a "community label" or tag of AI and let users determine that - although with how many human artists have been accused of their art being AI, I think that's probably a really fucking bad idea.

Anyway, I'm tagging this as aicourse. I also struggle to filter shit takes like the screenshots above because no one is fucking tagging "ai hate" or "ai discourse" or anything, so again, I get the annoyance at not being easily able to filter it. I just think the latter person is a huge fucking hypocrite for not making their tired takes about AI filterable for everyone too, especially if it's because they think it's all "stupid brainwashed techbros" (wow, that's a lot of ableism*) that are for or neutral on AI.

*The amount of ableism and downright cruelty I've seen even towards people who have fallen for actual scams like NFTs and cryptocurrency, basically treating them the same shitty way you treat people with intellectual and cognitive disabilities with a heaping scoop of the shitty way you treat people who have been manipulated, radicalized, and even survived cults or cult-adjacent groups, is really fucking gross. And as somesys who hated NFTs and cryptocurrency at the height of their popularity, it's certainly made me feel unsafe as victims of manipulative abuse and survivors of cult-adjacent harm, it's made us feel really fucking unsafe!

Do you even actually care about how your rhetoric impacts vulnerable people, or is hating or clowning on a random bit of tech more important to you than that? Well, it's not either/or, because you could literally just actually think critically about the things you're saying and decide to use actual arguments that don't send out shrapnel leaving a bunch of collateral damage in their wake. I'd still disagree with it, but quite frankly even if I think you've chosen the wrong target, I can get behind hating.

Even if it's just for hating's sake, or if it's not, I find hating not related to identity/people to be a perfectly acceptable and even enjoyable pastime for plenty of people. It's just that you kind of fucking need to make sure you AREN'T still hurting people about it, directly or indirectly. Like when I hate on rayon sheets because their texture makes me want to peel my skin off, I'm not making it the problem of people who can only afford that or who like them or who are forced because of fast fashion to keep getting them or w/e.

Idk this has devolved into a personal vent but like. I'm gonna go make a post now about how shitty people are about people who are literally victims of scams and cults and such bc. Y'all fucking suck.

#aicourse #<- oh look a tag for filtering purposes #🙄

[religiononhellsite]

Introducing the Research (Entry 01)

Why use Tumblr to research the intersections various digital communities (fandoms) have with purity culture, religion, queerness, and feminism, among other areas?

Tumblr is often treated as a “forgotten” social media site, but in reality it has hosted a growing 308 million blogs containing over 137 billion posts which are only continuing to increase. In 2016 Tumblr saw an average of over 45 million daily posts, but this has likely decreased since due to the December 2018  “Tumblrpocalypse” when the platform’s content moderation policies changed to become harsher to topics considered “adult” such as porn and sex work, but these changes also harmed sex education, LGBTQ+ topics, and art (Attu 528-529; Bussoletti 33). Overall, 1 in 10 adults worldwide have used Tumblr yet there is sparse academic research centering Tumblr with only 61 full academic entries in 2016 (Attu 529); a cursory search on Google Scholar, JSTOR, and the university’s library revealed some 2,500 entries where the word “Tumblr” appears but full entries where Tumblr is the focus seem to be less than 100 as of May 2023.

Additionally, Tumblr is a site of “fandoms” categorized by different tags denoted by the pound/hashtag symbol (#). Even topics like #feminism are considered a fandom (Bussoletti 26-27). Moreover, Tumblr is essentially a blogging space about aesthetics, so even if the tag #feminism will pull in text posts about feminist discourse, it also is about the aesthetics of “feminism” including, but not limited to, photos, videos, and memes, often with text accompanying them or other tags used in conjunction with #feminism to contribute to the discourse (STRANGE ÆONS). The same can be said about any tags associated with the topics being researched by this blog, tags such as #purity culture, #trad life, #cottage core, #Christianity, #queerness, and #witchy. Tags are simultaneously their own individual fandoms/aesthetics while also serving as united parts to other communities. For example, #cottage core is its own fandom/aesthetic with its own posts and blogs associated with that, but #cottage core can also be combined with other tags like #queer to create a fandom/aesthetic that uses both tags at the same time. For an example of the intersectional nature of fandoms see the below post.

However, despite the fact Tumblr is a globally used platform, the majority language is English and 47% of internet traffic comes from the United States leading to Tumblr being American-centric and Eurocentric and hosting predominately “English-isms,” even in fandoms where the source language is not English such as Japanese anime. Knowing English well is also necessary to navigate the site to the fullest. This all means that the digital communities here will be dominated by Western perspectives, and most will be exclusively from the United States (Bussoletti 30-31).

Lastly, due to the ever changing nature of the platform, frequency of abandoned blogs which may remain up or be deleted, and recommendations from previous research about Tumblr, most posts from this site will be shared via screenshots as reblogging the posts may not guarantee they will remain visible on this research blog (Attu 542).

In this above Tumblr post you see an interesting intersection of lesbian, queer, Christian, and cottage core as one unified aesthetic and fandom; searching similar tags together will also pull in other similar posts. Also worth noting is how the tag “#God please don’t let this end up on conservative tumblr” is being used to contribute to ongoing discourse across the platform as the tags #Christian, #lesbian, and #cottage core can pull in problematic posts relating to topics such as purity culture, traditional gender roles, and anti-trans/anti-nonbinary rhetorics. This unique interaction of vastly different cultural, political, and social ideologies is only made possible because of how Tumblr classifies and categorizes fandoms and tags, resulting in both subversive content like this above post but also content that reinforces dominant heteropatriarchal views. This means the tags used and the content being said in the tags is just as crucial to understanding the context of a Tumblr post as what is being said or shared in the post itself.

Exploring these unique interactions will be at the center of this research blog, particularly regarding how religion genealogically connects diametrically opposed communities and systems of belief, and how engaging innocently with certain fandoms like #cottage core can quickly lead to problematic fandoms.

Works Cited:

Attu, Rose, and Melissa Terras. “What People Study When They Study Tumblr: Classifying Tumblr-Related Academic Research.” Journal of Documentation 73, no. 3 (2017): 528–554.

Bussoletti, Arianna. “‘Tumblr Is Dominated by America:’ a Study of Linguistic and Cultural Differences in Tumblr Transnational Fandom.” The Communication Review (Yverdon, Switzerland) 26, no. 1 (2023): 24–41.

STRANGE ÆONS, “Tradwives & The Tumblr #Girl Ecosystem” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXGBYAOMLsA).

[jamesbi-canonbarnes]

Anyway James “Bucky” Barnes is literally into men in mcu canon.

“Tiger photos” is queer text. It’s not even subtext, that’s literally text where the primary reading is that Bucky sought out men’s dating profiles. Mind the goal posts 😘

#bi!bucky #gay!bucky #queer!bucky #bucky barnes #tfatws #just doin my part to spread the bi bucky gospel #literally like learn the difference between subtext and context #this is text that is queer in context it is not subtext #it is not up to interpretation bc the primary interpretation is clear #like I mean it’s vague and subtle yes but it is text #IMO it’s canon and if they want him to be straight they will have to disprove the primary queer meaning IN TEXT #a man does not have to say ‘I want to sleep with men’ to be mlm that’s ridiculous #does a man have to say anything specific to be into women on tv? no #so stop saying it has to be different for queer men #diss course meal #not that subtext isn’t also part of the canon but it’s a whole thing where queer subtext often isn’t queer denoting #but text that is queer with the relevant context is unmistakably queer denoting #so this is queer denoting text and that means #bucky barnes is queer

[whysojiminimnida]

Hello YSJ! Love your blog! Would love to hear your opinion on why JM and JK wrote in English on each other’s b-day cakes rather than in Korean.

That is an excellent question. And I have opinions. OF COURSE I DO I ALWAYS HAVE OPINIONS ARE WE EVEN SURPRISED NO, NO WE ARE NOT SURPRISED But first, illustrations:

So I thought, WELL. We must have some amazing Magic Gay Code happening here. If it isn't in Korean maybe they're sending us a message. Maybe this is a Rainbow Connection Moment of some type. So I went LOOKING. And found:

So I was like

"Well we cannot use the queerness or lack thereof of BTS as a guideline because we're all a little bit gay here we have not been properly informed as to the gayness level of most of these men SO I BETTER GO LOOK FURTHER

And at several higher-end Korean bakeries I found

OKAY. Google was, I will have you know, ZERO HELP. So I did what any God-fearing American White Girl would do and I shot a message a couple time zones over to my friend X, who just so happens to be stateside on business right now. (And also possibly looking for houses but that's another post).

"WHY KOREAN BIRTHDAY CAKES IN ENGLISH" I asked articulately. Leave me alone it was a couple nights ago and I was on morphine derivatives and muscle relaxers. So if I missed anything in this conversation that's why. "HI I'M VERY DRUNK RIGHT NOW" X replied loudly. It felt loud because he was in a club or something. It was loud. I allowed as how I was gonna call Kev in Itaewon to get answers and X said TEXT ME BITCH and I said YOU DO NOT NEED ALL THE DETAILS ANYWAY

Drunk X said that actually, it's... just trendy. Literally, that's why. Because "candles in Hangul really are kinda hard to make work" which makes sense and also that "Korean cakes aren't as elaborate as the ones here" and "English denotes a little higher class, like you're cool enough to read your decorations" whatever the hell that means.

He says you go to the bakery and there are English phrases you can choose from, or someone probably knows enough English to get the job done or if you are very personalization-oriented they will give you an icing sleeve thingy and you can do it yourself at some places. THAT'S WHAT THE GAY KOREAN MAN SAID IT'S MY ANSWER. So I go "no gay coding then" and he said "only in the way that gay people buy better cakes." I guess that's why, then. We stan our world-citizen metropolitan extra cool English-cake-deco kings.

#thanks nice anon #korean cakes #why are they decorated in English #because it looks cool #that's it that's the reason #jimin #jungkook #jikook just jikooking around with cake #it's not their first time #it's not their first time with tape now either #jimin the cake fairy #trendy cakes #stan a cake fairy king #jikook #bts #kevin from itaewon #kev's boyfie X

[mythgenderedloki]

To celebrate Loki being confirmed as canonically queer in the Loki series, please enjoy this 12,000 word, fully referenced dissertation exploring Loki’s genderfluidity in Norse Mythology and Marvel comics....

Myth-gendering Loki: Changing attitudes to gender non-binary in the afterlives of the Prose Edda.

Abstract

 This dissertation focuses on the character of Loki in the Prose Edda and in Marvel Comics as a way of exploring non-binary gender. The first chapter will use myths involving Loki as case studies through which a queer reading of the Prose Edda can be performed. Developing on the notion that the gender ambiguity in the Edda sets the foundation for Loki being a queer character, the second chapter will acknowledge how some of the most recent interpretations of Loki have fully embraced this aspect of his character and will therefore examine how this is presented through the two different mediums of comics and novels. The value of queer reading means that greater representation can be found not just in modern texts but can be sought out in the historical as well. Through the course of this dissertation, the importance of queer representation has been argued with regards to its place in history and to young adult audiences.

 List of Illustrations

 Figure                                                                                                                                                   Page

1.       Stan Lee et al Journey into Mystery (New York: Marvel Comics, 1952), #85          35

2.       Al Ewing et al Loki: Agent of Asgard (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020), #2            35

3.       Al Ewing et al Loki: Agent of Asgard (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020), #14          35

4.       Al Ewing et al Loki: Agent of Asgard (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020), #2            35

5.       Al Ewing et al Loki: Agent of Asgard (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020), #5            36

6.       Al Ewing et al Loki: Agent of Asgard (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020), #16          36

7.       Walter Simonson et al, Thor (New York: Marvel Comics, 1966). #353                    36

   Contents

 List of Illustrations

Introduction: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1

Chapter One: Loki in the Edda: ………………………………………………………………………………….. 4

             Gender Ambiguity: ………………………………………………………………………………………… 5

             Sexual Deviance: …………………………………………………………………………………………… 10

             Race: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15

Chapter Two: Loki in Marvel: ……………………………………………………………………………………. 20

             Genderfluidity: ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 21

             Existing as Queer: ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28

             Identity: …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 30

Conclusion: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37

Bibliography: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 39

  Introduction

 ‘The greatest power of myth: it never stops changing, yet its appeal is eternal’.[1]

Mythology is not something which is set. With every telling and retelling it changes over and over. Even before Snorri Sturluson wrote the Prose Edda in C.1220, the myths he would commit to paper had undergone countless changes innumerable times. Once they had found their way onto the page, the assumption that they would remain there, unchanged, is therefore unwarranted. As Christopher Abram states: ‘Myths of the Pagan North have grown, changed and developed to meet the needs of the new situations in which they find themselves’.[2] With regards to this concept of changeable mythology, this dissertation sets out to examine how the Prose Edda has been changed and developed to adapt to the requirements of modern societies. Using the character of Loki as a point of entry, this dissertation will examine how the Prose Edda has been interpreted to meet these requirements, centring around the concept of non-binary gender. To achieve this, both the original text and Marvel Comic’s interpretation of Loki will be examined through a critical gender and queer perspective.

Gender as something else which is not fixed is an idea first suggested by Judith Butler. Her 1990 book Gender Trouble theorises the concept of performative gender, suggesting that masculinity and femininity are not fixed and are instead performed identities which are acted out constantly. In short gender is not a matter of biology, but instead something governed by the arbitrary rules of a heteronormative ethos. These rules, therefore, can be broken leading to the rise of gender identities that exist outside the sphere of heteronormativity. Genderfluidity and non-binarism define themselves as resistive to the conformed ideas of a binary between masculine and feminine. These terms are not only useful for defining gender identities found in our modern societies but can also be used as tools to re-examine the Edda with, using a queer lens to scrutinize gender performance in this text.

The queer lends itself effectively to the Edda because of the numerous examples of gender inversions. The Poetic Edda especially features gender deviance, with Thor crossdressing in the Thrymskviða,[3] and the questioning of Odin’s masculinity in the Lokasenna.[4] However, for the purpose of this dissertation, only Loki’s role in the Prose Edda will be examined due to it being the most consistent in terms of gender ambiguity and elements of the queer. Although Loki changes between male and female in both this text and the Marvel texts, the pronouns of he/ him will be used to remain consistent with the primary texts.  Queer scholarship of the Edda does have some recent precedents, with critics like Brit Solli examining the role of Odin as a queer god, but historically the queer elements of the Edda have been explained away.[5] The main reason cited for this is the difference between the perception of the queer today and of its perception during the composing of the Edda. Although it is true that placing modern terms onto historical texts and forcing certain characters into categories that did not exist at the time can be problematic, this does not mean that a queer reading does not have relevance. Instead, it opens a new way of understanding a culturally significant text.

The Edda has experienced multiple literary afterlives, from Wagner’s Ring Cycle to a significant influence on Tolkien’s work. Most people, however, will first encounter Norse mythology through the medium of Marvel, especially after the phenomenon of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. This is why two Marvel texts, Al Ewing’s 2014-15 comic series Loki: Agent of Asgard and Mackenzi Lee’s 2019 Young Adult novel  Loki: Where Mischief Lies, have been selected as examples of how mythology has been adapted to meet the needs of their new situation, namely queer representation. Loki is canonically queer in these texts, both in his sexual orientation and gender identity. Increasing diversity has been a clear part of Marvel’s agenda over the last decade, though usually through the introductions of new characters, like Kamala Khan as Ms Marvel. Loki is one of the few already established characters to be reinvented as queer. Although Marvel’s Loki is an entirely separate character to the one found in the Edda, he retains the same archetypical characteristics ensuring he resonates with the original. Whether queerness is one of these innate to Loki and is therefore essential to his character will be examined.

Why Loki so effortlessly lends himself to queer interpretations, evidence of his genderfluidity as well as the intersection of the queer, gender and race will be explored in the first chapter. Marvel’s interpretation and embracement of Loki as a genderfluid and queer character will be the focus of the second, examining how genderfluidity is presented, the pressure to conform to heteronormative societies, and the overarching issue of identity. More widely, this dissertation will argue for the queering of characters from the Edda in modern adaptations.

 Chapter One: Loki in the Edda

 The Prose Edda is one of our main sources for Norse Mythology. However, as it was written in Iceland around C.1220, the Edda was composed several centuries after Norse paganism had been widely practiced with Christianity replacing it as Iceland’s main religion.[6] The author Snorri Sturluson himself was a Christian and, according to Robert Kellogg, ‘largely functions as a collector or reteller’.[7] I mention this not to question the authenticity of the Edda, but to demonstrate that mythology is always subjected to change. Jan de Vries argues that Norse Mythology has undergone three different stages; a period without Christian influence, suppression from Christian forces, and a final version corrupted by a Christian presence.[8] Those backlashing against diversifying mythological figures often cite ‘original’ texts like the Edda, suggesting diversifying is corrupting the ‘real’ version of this figure. If the oldest existing version of Loki was changed to fit a Christian narrative, why should he not be changed again in modern texts to fit a narrative of queer representation? Nevertheless, this chapter will use the Edda as a way of finding evidence that even this version of Loki has innate queerness.

In the Gylfaginning, where Snorri lists all the main gods, Loki is positioned in between the male Æsir and female Asyniur.[9] Anna Birgitta Rooth refers to this position as a ‘special appendix’[10] which separates Loki from the Æsir gods he is ‘reckoned among’.[11] He is listed after the minor Æsir, making him the last of all the male gods, as this denotes his position as an outsider in the gods society. It also places him in between the male and female categories, hinting at his gender ambiguity. Snorri makes sure that Loki’s sexual deviancy is presented to his audience by listing Loki’s monstrous offspring alongside him, ‘One was Fenriswolf, the second Iormungand (i.e. the Midgard serpent), the third is Hel’, in addition to his mixed racial heritage. [12] When stating Loki’s name, ‘He is Loki or Lopt, son of the giant Fabauti’, Snorri identifies him as the child of the enemies of the gods. [13]

In Loki’s first significant appearance in the Edda, it is possible to read gender ambiguity, queer sexual deviance, and racial anxiety. Some readings of the Edda will try to explain these elements of Loki away. [14] For example, Rooth argues against examples of Loki sexual ambiguity as ‘a motif used to produce comical effects and situations’.[15] This dissertation will instead embrace queerness in the Edda, using Loki as a focal point that intersects gender ambiguity, sexual deviance, and racial anxiety. These three elements of Loki will form the structure of this queer reading of the Edda.

 Gender Ambiguity

Before analysing the gender binary found in the Edda, it is important to establish what this meant to medieval Scandinavian societies. For the time of the Edda’s creation and the subsequent oral tradition of Norse myths, Thomas Laqueur defines a ‘one sex model’ where ‘to be a man or a woman was to hold a social rank, a place in society, to assume a cultural role, not to be organically one or the other of two incommensurable sexes.’[16] With regards to this model, Carol J. Clover argues that male and female were not considered opposite in the way modern societies tend to view them. Instead there was ‘a social binary, a set of two categories, into which all persons were divided, the fault line runs not between males and females per se, but between able-bodied men (and the exceptional woman) on one hand and, on the other, a kind of rainbow coalition of everyone else’.[17] This meant that gender was not necessarily assigned to biological characteristics but social ones and, consequently, fluctuated with social status. This can be linked to modern gender theories regarding the connection, or lack of, between biological sex and gender identity. Butler’s theory is particularly notable, arguing that ‘there is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender; that identity is performatively constituted by the very “expressions” that are said to be its results’.[18] However, during the Norse period, Clover notes the peril that came with this one-sex system: ‘Not only losable by men, but achievable by women, masculinity was in a kind of double jeopardy for the Norse man’.[19]

The notion of losable and achievable masculinity is illustrated by a story found in the Skaldskaparmal section of the Edda. After the kidnapping of Idunn (which Loki both caused and remedied), the giantess Skadi ‘took helmet and mail-coat and all weapons of war and went to Asgard to avenge her father’ the giant Thassi, who had been killed by the Æsir gods. [20] As part of her compensation for this, Skadi demanded that the gods made her laugh, believing this would be impossible. The task fell to Loki who uses a rather unconventional method: ‘he tied a cord round the beard of a certain nanny-goat and the end round his testicles, and they drew each other back and forth and both squealed loudly. Then Loki let himself drop into Skadi’s lap, and she laughed’.[21] Each character in this tale represents a different aspect of fluidity within the Norse gender binary: Loki represents the loss of masculinity; Skadi represents the gaining of masculinity and the goat itself represents a kind of sexual ambivalence.

Loki’s loss of symbolic masculinity is demonstrated through physical loss in this mock castration. Stefanie von Schnurbein describes this as ‘an act that places his dubious sexuality and gender identity in a grotesque light’.[22] Loki is not only physically sacrificing his masculinity, but his symbolic masculinity simultaneously. This demonstrates ‘dubious sexuality’ because Loki is displaying his testicles in a show of masculinity only to have them symbolically removed by an animal. This willingness to sacrifice his physical gender characteristics supports Butler’s concept that gender is performative and therefore has no relation to biological sex because Loki takes on a performative role, playing a sexually impotent male. Consequently, he is placed into the gendered jeopardy that Clover suggests since he loses his maleness and, therefore, his social status. This reduction in status is a fitting punishment for Loki who betrays both the gods and the giants earlier in this myth so ends up being humiliated for their entertainment. Clover notes how in Medieval Scandinavian society ‘there was finally just one "gender," one standard by which persons were judged adequate or inadequate, and it was something like masculine’.[23] In this system, Loki is undoubtedly found inadequate, and fails to meet the standard of masculinity, placing him on the opposite side of the binary.

Evidence of this decreased masculinity can be found in the position Loki ends up in. He falls into Skadi’s lap, thus ends up sitting on top of her which, in addition to his exposed genitals, creates a sexually charged image.[24] However, Loki is in the female position while Skadi is in the male for this pseudo sex position.[25] Clover notes how, despite gender not being connected to biological sex, the Norse gender system has a ‘dependence on sexual imagery’, meaning that Loki being positioned sexually as female adds to his decreased masculine status. [26] This demonstrates not only how Loki has lost his masculine status, but how Skadi has gained her own masculinity.

This increase in masculinity therefore increases Skadi’s status. She wears a helmet and mail-coat to take on the celebrated masculine image of a warrior;  a position that was accessible to women in medieval Scandinavian society as long as they gained the necessarily masculine traits and became, as Clover states, ‘exceptional’.[27] It is this embodiment of the ‘exceptional woman’ that allows Skadi to take revenge in the first place. Preben Meulengracht Sørensen argues that in Medieval Scandinavian society ‘a woman cannot herself take revenge; she must do so through the agency of a man’.[28] Skadi refutes this. Although she does not repay the death of her father in violence, she succeeds avenging her loss through the humiliation of Loki, whose betrayal led to her father’s demise. On the other hand, Sørensen may be right to say only men can take revenge. Skadi has gained enough masculinity to be perceived as socially male within the Norse gender binary. She takes on the image of a warrior and goes to Asgard to demand compensation to restore her family’s honour.  The fact her biological sex is female makes little difference. Clover explains that Medieval Scandinavian society was ‘a world in which a physical woman could become a social man’, and this is what Skadi achieves. [29] In later myths, such as the Lokasenna, she is seen feasting with the gods demonstrating her heightened status considering she is not only female, but a giant as well. Moreover, Skadi lives independently without a male guardian. Although she may replace her father with Niord, the husband she gains as part of her compensation for her father’s death, this marriage fails and Skadi lives alone. According to Clover, Medieval Scandinavian society was ‘a universe in which maleness and femaleness were always negotiable, always up for grabs, always susceptible to ‘conditions’.[30] Snorri’s literature provided a safe space to explore these ideas and push the limits of this system. A system that accepted a certain fluidity between genders, but the condition was always one that supported a transition from female to social male but derided the reverse.

The final and most surprising character in this myth is the goat itself. Although seemingly playing only a minor role, the goat symbolises sexual ambiguity and the transition between genders. The nanny-goat is a female animal with male characteristics such as a beard thus combines masculine and feminine in one form, making it a symbol of gender non-conformity. Beards particularly in Norse literature are symbolic of male vitality.[31] There is a connection, quite literally, between Loki and the goat which implies Loki himself is sexual ambiguous. The goat is the one who removes Loki’s masculinity, and therefore, is the vessel through which Loki transitions from physically male to socially female. Margaret Clunies Ross highlights the ‘symbolic equation here between Loki, who plays at his own castration and has a reputation for sex changing, and the sexually ambivalent nanny-goat with the beard and horns’.[32] John Lindow also suggests the presence of the nanny-goat creates doubt over Loki’s perceived masculinity: ‘if the beard attached to one end of the rope is here a false symbol of masculinity, what are we to make of the genitals attached to the other end?’.[33] It is important to remember that Loki himself ties the goat around his testicles. He chooses this method to make Skadi laugh and does so willingly. This disproves Rooth’s notion that Loki’s gender ambivalence is depicted by ‘the epic course of events’[34] since the feminine display here is Loki’s choice and raises the question: why would Loki willingly sacrifice his own physical and symbolic masculinity? Perhaps he does not. It would only be a sacrifice of masculinity if Loki had already embodied the ideals of a Norse man. Loki famously takes on physical female forms throughout the Prose Edda, such as during Baldur’s death[35] and The Fortification of Asgard[36] myths, meaning his masculinity is already questionable. If Loki is prepared to become physically female, becoming socially female matters little by comparison. Loki, after all, is the trickster god; he will use whatever shape, form, or gender to his advantage.

Clover describes the Norse sexual system as a ‘permeable membrane’[37] and stresses an interest in the ‘fluidity implied by that system’.[38] This is a system in which a person can choose to move between feminine and masculine if they do not care about the social consequences for their actions. As discussed previously with reference to Loki’s position in Snorri’s list of gods, Loki is already socially at the bottom of the male Æsir and his status places him in between them and the female Asyniur. With a status already this low, Loki loses nothing when he reduces his masculinity and embraces his position as a social female. To navigate the Norse universe with such a diminished status, Loki uses everything to his advantage, including embracing his own femininity.

 Sexual Deviancy

There are multiple terms in Old Norse relating to sexual deviancy with ergi, nið, ragr, and argr, as the most common. Although their meanings do differ slightly, essentially, they are all insults declaring someone as cowardly, weak, and unmanly due to an association with queer sexuality. Ergi especially encapsulates this idea of weakness being associated with sexual deviance, making it the most fitting term to use in this subsection. It fits within Laqueur’s one sex model aligning courage and strength with the masculine, and weakness with the non-masculine. Evidence of the seriousness of these insults can be found within Icelandic law. Grágás, the oldest Icelandic law text to survive, states that ‘one is entitled to kill on account of these words’. [39]  Floke Ström also states that ‘the law prescribes its most severe penalty, outlawry, for anyone who imputes womanly behaviour to another in the form of nið’.[40] The severity of the punishment highlights just how negatively sexual deviancy was viewed. Those guilty could be anything from accused magic users, effeminate men or those taking the receptive position in homosexual intercourse, referred to problematically as ‘passive homosexuality’ by some Norse scholars. Loki is associated with all three of these elements, even exhibiting all at same time in the myth of the Fortification of Asgard.

This myth is found Gylfaginning chapter of the Edda. To prevent a disguised giant builder from completing the fortifications around Asgard and claiming the sun, moon and Freyia as his payment, Loki transformed into a mare to seduce the builder’s horse Svadilfæri, which stopped the completion of the wall. However, ‘Loki had such dealings with Svadilfæri that somewhat later he gave birth to a foal’ called Sleipnir who becomes Odin’s own horse. [41] In this myth Loki is clearly ergi; he uses magic to become a female, is sexually penetrated leading to pregnancy thus proving his unmanliness.

Magic, or seiðr to use the Norse term, is associated with the feminine to the extent that ‘males are forbidden to practice seiðr because of its power to damage their essential, defining qualities as males’, according to Ross, and male gods use ‘its power at the price of moral impairment and symbolic feminisation’. [42] It is this moral impairment that closely links Loki and his ergi nature, raising an interesting debate surrounding this association. Is ergi considered immoral because of its association with Loki, or is Loki considered immoral because of he is ergi? Despite also being a seiðr user, Odin escapes most of its negative association with being ergi. It is not mentioned in the Gylfaginning and Kathleen Self explains Odin ‘is made more masculine through the omission of his performance of seiðr, and the distinction between masculine and feminine is maintained’.[43] It is no coincidence that the Gylfaginning, the part of the Edda that contains the introductions of the gods, omits Odin’s magic use while containing myths that highlight Loki’s morally dubious nature. This is the chapter that sets the expectations and conventions for the rest of the Edda and Snorri makes certain that his audience takes away these specified associations. It is only in the Lokasenna that Odin’s dubious use of feminine magic is addressed by Loki himself. Accusations of sexual deviance of are exchanged between the two of them, yet only appears to have a negative effect on Odin.[44] Ström describes Loki as ‘a shameless ergi’.[45] It is this word ‘shameless’ that is the distinguishing difference between the two gods. Like the previous myth, Loki embraces his dubious gender to his advantage, and it is this acceptance that makes Loki so problematic in the Norse conceptual universe. As von Schnurbein notes “(Loki) represents the "effeminate" man and, for that reason, not necessarily because of his malevolence, is subject to derision and considered evil’.[46]  He threatens the gods by undermining their one sex system. By embracing magic and resulting unmanliness, Loki challenges the concept that masculine is the pinnacle gender to which members of both genders should strive to achieve.

Further challenge to this system is seen in Loki through the connection his ergi nature has to femininity, specifically effeminate men. According to Ström, if the term was used to insult a woman, it was ‘virtually synonymous with nymphomania, which was a characteristic as much despised in women as unmanliness was in a man’, meaning its connotation of femininity were only applicable to men. [47] In the Fortification of Asgard myth, Loki performs the ultimate female act by both conceiving and giving birth to an eight-legged horse. A further old Scandinavian law that demonstrates just how transgressive this was: ‘the Norwegian laws already mentioned include insults likening a man to a female animal (berendi) among the words liable to the highest personal recompense. To liken a man to a male animal cost only half as much (halfréttisorð). Accusing a man of having given birth to a child… is added by the Gulathing Law to list of ‘full penalty words’ indicating the severest recompense to be paid’.[48] Both insults are applicable to Loki in this myth, demonstrating how morally corrupt he was in the eyes of Medieval Scandinavian society. The fact that these insults are gendered, with the female insult being the costliest, demonstrates how the one sex system impacted life within Medieval Scandinavian society. Everything comes back to the idea that masculine was not just the desirable gender, but the only gender which could gain honour and respect. Sørensen examines the moral repercussions of this connection: ‘the effect of nið was founded on the accepted complex of ideas about effeminacy and of effeminacy as identical with immoral, despicable nature’.[49] The reason these Norse terms for sexual deviance were so offensive is because of their association with femininity; whether it be seiðr’s connection with women, or the idea that a receptive male in homosexual intercourse was taking the female position. Ström agrees ‘that it is the feminine sexual role which makes allegations of ergi particularly injurious and in fact intolerable for the recipient’.[50] This is another aspect of ergi that Loki fulfils.

It is important to note that ergi and the other terms do not translate into modern ideas of homosexuality, something Brit Solli emphasises: ‘the term ergi must be understood contextually and not as a synonym for homosexuality, as we understand it today’.[51] The term is only applicable to those seen as taking the female position, whereas Clover notes ‘the role of the penetrator is regarded as not only masculine but boastworthy regardless of the sex of the object’.[52] Loki represents the concept of the penetrated male in this myth, considering the conception of Sleipnir, and this is an example of his immoral character. Although Loki’s negotiations and tricks save the Æsir, he is not the hero of the myth. That role goes to Thor who kills the giant with his hypermasculine, physical prowess, thus embodying the image of ultimate masculinity and its valued perception within the one sex system. Loki cannot be the hero because of his queer nature with its connotations of cowardice and corruption. Snorri explains that Loki ‘being afraid’ of the Æsir gods’ threats was the reason he changes shape and gender to seduce Svadilfæri which conveys the link between ergi and cowardice. [53] Sørensen explains how ‘in ancient Iceland consciousness, the idea of passive homosexuality was so closely linked with notions of immorality in general that the sexual sense could serve to express the moral sense’.[54] This means that, despite saving the Æsir, Loki still represents immorality. Snorri states Loki ‘is responsible for most evil’ in this myth, even though his only offense was to give poor advice. [55] His supposed evilness therefore comes from the queer gender inversion employed to fix his mistake.

Although not a hero, Loki is still powerful despite deflating his status by transgressing against the Norse gender system. In fact, it is this very transition that gives him power. Anthony Adams acknowledges that ‘Loki represents a type of imprecise, androgynous (or even hermaphroditic), yet still potent sexuality that is entirely at odds with the simpler, overt masculinity of the sagas’.[56] This conflict between Loki’s transgressive position as a queer character and the hyper masculine gives Loki power despite his low status. As much as they distrust Loki, the Æsir need him. The very fact they allow Loki to live amongst them demonstrates how important his transgressive abilities are, especially those associated with ergi such as magic. Soli reasons that ‘Seiðr must have been so important for the maintenance of society that the queerness of its practice had to be accepted as a cosmological necessity’.[57] Therefore, all the Æsir are guilty of engaging with queerness through their tolerance of Loki but only when he can be used to meet their needs.

When it comes to summarizing Loki’s sexual deviance, Ross best expresses how Loki and Odin ‘make good use of their ‘weakness’ (ergi) which allows them access to resources or patterns of behaviour normally regarded as female and hence unavailable to male beings’.[58] By embracing his ‘unmanly’ nature, Loki takes advantage of areas of power restricted from the higher status masculine gods and suppressed within female gods. Unlike Odin, whose ergi is ‘undoubtedly a burden’ (Ström), Loki does not care about the social (or any) consequences of his actions as long as he can use them to survive within the one sex system he simultaneously transgresses against. [59]

 Race

Loki’s resistance to fitting within the gender binary is paralleled in his resistance to fit within the mythological race binary between the gods and the giants. His very existence bridges these two opposing races. According to Snorri, Loki is the ‘son of the giant Farbauti. Laufey or Nal is his mother’,[60] the latter Ross theorises was ‘presumably among the Æsir’.[61] This dual heritage unites the two enemy races within one being, meaning Loki is neither giant nor god but an unconventional combination of both.[62] Ross goes on to explain that this means Loki ‘is the embodiment of the most tabooed social relationship in Medieval Scandinavian society’.[63] Existing in between these races, Loki brings together the cultural aspects of both races despite their clear binary differences. By examining the threat Loki’s heritage presents amongst the gods and its connections to femininity, it is possible to see how Loki’s lack of conformity to the Norse racial binary demonstrates his resistance to the gender binary system too.

Loki is not only a product of a taboo relationship, but the participator in one too. From his relationship with the giantess Angrboda, Loki has three children who take the monstrous forms of Fenris, a giant wolf, Iormungand, a giant serpent, and Hel with her half dead body.[64] The gods ‘felt evil was all to be expected of them’[65] and imprison Loki’s children ‘because of their mother’s nature, but still worse because of their father’s’.[66] Despite possibly being half Æsir, it is Loki’s lineage the gods fear more than the full giant blood of Angrboda. This is because he embodies the union of two races whose conflict makes up a key aspect the Norse conceptual fabric. A typical trope of Norse mythology involves the morally superior Æsir gods defeating the monstrous giants, thus maintaining their system of ideals throughout the realms. Even when there is an exception to this, such as Thor being out-witted by Utgarda-Loki, the story still centres around the opposition of gods and giants, not their union as Loki represents. [67]

Loki does not fit within the usual racial structure of the society within Norse mythology. Ross describes Loki as an ‘anomalous being’[68] and notes how ‘the myth of Loki and his offspring indicates the kinds of disorders the gods oppose is not only ‘out there’ in the other world they associate with giants but exists within their own society’.[69] Loki is the product of two races that should be always in contrasting conflict, not uniting sexually, and even his presence amongst the Æsir presents a threat to their strict structures that maintain order. The very fact Loki exists undermines the whole system which sees gods and giants as opposite and opposing binaries.

One reason why the gods and giants live in such opposition is due to their opposing gender systems. While the gods live within a one sex model where hyper masculinity is the true gender and all others are inadequate, the giants’ system contrasts this. They fall within Clover’s ‘rainbow coalition’ making them ‘other’ to the Æsir. [70] Ross explains the connection between giants and femininity as a result of both concepts being treated as ‘other’ and ‘so the combination of the category ‘giant’ with the category ‘female’ represents an intensification of the nation of otherness and therefore an intensification of the association of danger with it’.[71] This adds to the threat of Loki existing within the Æsir gender system. Not only does he embody femininity through his non-binary gender and sexually deviant nature, his giant blood also adds to his innate gender inversion. Self also examines the connection between race and gender: ‘the binary of the gods and the giants echoes the male/female divide with the giantesses appearing more masculine at times and certain giants having a malleable gender’.[72] Skadi is example of this, but her gender is malleable in a way that is in tune with the Æsir one sex system meaning she is the only giant who is welcomed into their society.

Loki also uses his divine heritage as a way of embracing aspects of his femininity. Ross points out that Loki is ‘always referred to as Loki Laufeyjarson (which) indicates the precedence of his divine kinship through his mother’s family’.[73] While it does make sense that Loki would want to be associated with the parent with the higher status and assimilate with the gods by emphasising his racial connection to them, this still transgresses against the Norse patronymic system. By taking a matronymic surname in place of his father’s name, Loki is bestowing an honour usually reserved for men to his mother. This demonstrates his willingness to embrace femininity if it results in increasing his status amongst the gods, therefore we again see Loki using typically eschewed femininity to his advantage.

Although treated as an anomaly, Loki is not the only member counted among the Æsir to have giant ancestry. Both Tyr and Odin also are descended from giants; a fact the Gylfaginning conveniently forgets during their introductions. However, it is no coincidence that both these gods are hypermasculine war gods which places them firmly at the top of the one sex model. Therefore, their desirable masculine traits compensate for their undesirable, unorthodox lineage. Loki’s lack of conformity within the gender system is what makes his mix heritage a problem for the rest of the gods. By not fitting within their system of gender, his race is just another aspect that makes him a threat. Nevertheless, as with his queer nature, the gods will often use Loki’s liminal position between the two races. Rooth notes that Loki’s ‘role is frequently that of mediator’[74] between the gods and the giants but John McKinnell also notes his ‘special role is as a traitor’.[75] The gods depend on Loki’s nonconformity to navigate situations which their strict morality prevents them engaging with, such as magic and interrace relations, and still hold the very aspects of Loki that they need against him. McKinnell reasons that Loki shares these undesirable yet essential traits with other gods but ‘unlike the others makes no attempt to hide them’.[76] This is what makes Loki a true threat to the gods. It is not so much his engagement with taboo practices, but his openness. His refusal to hide his transgressive nature highlights the hypocrisy within the gods and flaws within their binary systems they try to hide.

 Conclusion

Loki in the Prose Edda is clearly a transgressive character who resists categorization within the concept on the one sex model. His race, sexual deviance, and complete disregard to gender binaries combine to create a male entity who openly and happily engages with femininity without shame or fear of the social ramifications.  However, while modern terms such as gender non-binary, or genderfluid may seem applicable to him, it is important to remember that the gods of the Edda are not characters but mythological concepts, with Thor embodying the concept of strength, Odin wisdom and so on. Loki’s mythology offers a safe arena in which cultural taboos can be broken and their consequences examined. Therefore, he does not have a gender identity in the same sense a modern fictional character has, so cannot identify as gender non-binary or fluid. As A. S. Byatt states mythological figures ‘do not have psychology.... They have attributes’.[77] Loki is instead a vessel through which the concept of gender binary within a one gender system can be explored and ultimately critiqued and punished. As the antagonist of the Edda, he brings forth the destruction of the gods. Loki destroys not only the Æsir hierarchy but the entire Norse universe during Ragnarök.[78] The Norse universe is one that relied on these binaries to exist and collapses once they are destroyed. The concept of Loki cannot survive in the one sex model, and the model cannot last with Loki in it. However, if Loki is removed from this gender system and placed within a modern one, his role and his outcome is entirely different.

 Chapter Two: Loki in Marvel

 Prior to the 2014 release of Loki: Agent of Asgard, a new comic series which centred around the reimagined, teenage version of the trickster god, the writer Al Ewing confirmed that Loki would indeed be a queer character who would switch between genders.[79] This came as no surprise to many in Loki’s fanbase since evidence of Loki’s queerness can be found throughout his history in Marvel comics. Examples of this include; flirting with a male teammate in Young Avengers Vol 2,[80] the ambiguous sexuality that comes with possessing a female body in Dark Reign[81], to even his first appearance in the modern era of comics in Journey into Mystery #85[82] where he is given a feminised, hourglass figure in contrast to the broad masculine figure of his counterpart Thor. (Fig. 1) However, in his own comic book, Loki’s character could now embrace his queerness and his gender fluidity in his own body much more openly than before.

The recent 2019 young adult novel Loki: Where Mischief Lies written by Mackenzi Lee will be examined alongside this comic.  Like the comic, this novel also features an openly queer and gender non-conforming Loki. Both versions of this character face similar problems as they struggle to find their place within the wider narratives of the Marvel universe, especially concerning where they fit within the gender structures and heteronormative worlds and their roles as presumed antagonists.

Unlike the Loki found in the Edda, both Loki in Agent of Asgard and Loki in Where Mischief Lies are fully fleshed out characters with their own identities and motives, especially now they are the protagonists of their stories rather than just antagonists used to highlight the heroism of their adversaries. As a result of their enhanced characterisation, they become representative of genderfluid and non-binary people. Marvel’s acceptance of queer characters is something to be commended. As Mathew McAllister notes ‘comics mirror a pluralistic society’, therefore Marvel presents a fictional society that reflects our own. [83] Underneath stories of gods and heroes, the two texts explore queer gender identities and what it means to exist as ‘other’. This chapter will explore this by analysing how gender non-binarism, transgression and identity feature within Ewing’s and Lee’s stories.

 Genderfluidity

By reimagining the mythological concept of Loki in a modern society, he is removed from the one sex model Laqueur suggests for Norse literature and placed in a new gender system. This new system, according to a contemporary critical lens using Butler’s theory of gender, is one based on the notion of performative gender and therefore allows for fluidity between them. However, the concept of gender being directly related to biological sex along with ideas of masculine and feminine being separate and opposite are still prevalent in most societies. Agent of Asgard is set within a society reflective of our own. The comic takes place across Earth and Asgard within their similar performative gender systems.

Where Mischief Lies is slightly more complicated, taking place across two very different societies: the ‘idyllic paradise’ of Asgard and nineteenth-century London. [84] Gender binaries are strictly upheld in the latter, following a system in which women are perceived as inferior to men to such an extent that even wearing trousers is seen as being transgressive, and where homosexuality is criminalised. [85] Asgard contrastingly does not have ‘such a limited view of sex’, instead it is seemingly a society in which all genders are treated equally. [86] Yet, there still is a binary system in place that echoes the one sex model in the Edda. Rather than between male and female, it is between sorcerers and warriors with the latter viewed as the desirable trait and the other as inferior. Loki is encouraged to hide is magical ability and ‘dedicated himself to becoming a warrior’[87] because ‘no one wanted a sorcerer for a king’.[88] There is still a gendered aspect to this system, however. Similarly to the Edda, magic is closely associated with women, with the only magic users in the novel being female (Frigga, Karnilla, Amora) or Loki who is feminised. Whether magic is viewed as inferior because of this feminine association is unclear. Reflective of the one sex model found in the Edda, background female characters who pursue hypermasculine warrior lifestyles, Sif and the Valkyries, are praised while magicians are viewed with fear and suspicion. To observe Lee’s Loki in this system, and Ewing’s Loki in the Agent of Asgard system, this section will examine how the characters exists as both genders, how this is physically presented and how this disrupts each of their gender systems.

Although Loki changes genders several times throughout the comic series, the term non-binary or genderfluid is never used. Nancy Hirschmann identifies the issue of  ‘what queer… individuals are called, by themselves and by others,’ as a ‘political, ontological, and epistemological issue’, however, this does not negate from the validity of an identity just because it is not labelled nor means it is not applicable. [89] The first example of Loki changing gender is in issue #2 where Loki takes the pseudonym ‘Trixie’ to infiltrate a heist. Although it could be argued that Loki only becomes female because it is a necessary disguise, as Rooth argues in the Edda, Loki explains that his illusion magic would not have worked in that situation. [90] ‘I am always myself,’ Loki states explaining that being female is no different from being male. [91] This is best demonstrated by a single borderless panel depicting Loki shifting between female and male. (Fig. 2) The lack of borders symbolises the lack of boundaries between Loki’s genders and the single panel means both genders are contained in a singular space as both genders exist within Loki. Panelling in issue #14 again demonstrates how Loki regards shifting between genders. (Fig. 3) The three panels picture male Loki putting on a shirt as he changes to female as if changing gender is no different from changing a shirt.  According to Sandra Bem, an individual can contain both female and male traits, which means Loki exists as both female and male simultaneously; changing genders therefore is not an artificial act made capable through his magic abilities and is not done just because it is convenient for the situation. [92]

The most obvious evidence of Loki’s genderfluidity in Where Mischief Lies takes place in Victorian London, due to the scrutiny Loki faces when removed from the supposedly gender equal Asgardian society. Theo, trying to find out Loki’s sexual orientation, asks his preferred gender which Loki misinterprets and answers ‘I feel equally comfortable as either’.[93] When Theo argues that this is again simply because of Loki’s magical abilities allowing him to change appearance, Loki states ‘I don’t change my gender. I exist as both’.[94] The confusion between gender and sexuality highlights, according to Jonathan Alexander, how ‘sexuality intersects with and complicates are understanding of gender’ and further demonstrates the difference between the two gender systems of Asgard and Earth. [95] Loki’s misunderstanding conveys how gender and sexuality intersect so frequently on Asgard that he cannot separate them, while Theo is accepting of homosexuality yet struggles to understand genderfluidity. This is perhaps because Loki has to appear more masculine during his time in London, ‘he missed his heeled boots’, although, he still defends his feminine identity. [96] Whenever feminine terms are applied to him, Loki accepts them: ‘“It’s the feminine version of enchanter.” “Does that matter?”’.[97] The setting of Victorian era with its stricter gender binaries is effective for demonstrating the ‘the arbitrariness of the Western gender system’ through Loki’s critiques of it. [98]  By framing these critiques as being ‘small-minded’ and associating them with conservative Victorians, Lee helps to validate queerness and genderfluidity, reflecting the diversity of her young adult audience. [99]

The visual medium of the comic means appearance becomes key for demonstrating Loki’s genderfluidity in Agent of Asgard and consequently meaning his genderfluidity is always present through the art of the comic. Like in his very first issue in Journey into Mystery, Loki’s male appearance is feminised. Black nail varnish, a fur lined coat and V-necked tunic all hint at his feminine nature while scaled armour and greaves are typically more masculine. (Fig. 4) The fact that both male and female aspects exist in one costume demonstrates how Loki is consistently both genders, especially because the costume does not change when Loki’ changes from male to female, or even a fox. (Fig. 5) Terrence R. Wandtke notes how a superhero’s costume is ‘a marker of self’, thus Loki’s androgynous costume represents his genderfluid self. [100] This also reflects Loki’s queerness in terms of his sexual attraction to both genders which is not particularly explored in depth in the comic. Aaron Blashill and Kimberly Powlishta refer to ‘cross-gendered characteristics’ in homosexual people which Loki’s costume captures, demonstrating not only is genderfluidity but his homosexual orientation as well. [101] It is also notable that Loki’s physical female appearance is very similar to his male. In the example of ‘Trixie’ in #2, the only difference between the male and female Loki is make-up and hair length. This accurately reflects how potential genderfluid readers use cosmetics to reflect their own transitions between genders thus proving how Loki becomes a representative for genderfluidity in literature.

Where Mischief Lies also relies on appearance to demonstrate Loki’s lack of gender boundaries. This is because, unlike Agent of Asgard Lee’s Loki never becomes completely female meaning clothing is often used to symbolise his innate femininity. Loki’s femininity is introduced when the novel opens with Loki worrying about his appearance. These concerns focus on aspects typically associated with feminine appearance, such as his love of ‘a bit of sparkle’[102] and his boots which ‘made him feel like doing a strut down the middle of the hall …(and had) heels as long and thin as the knives he kept up his sleeves’.[103] This evokes a feminine image of Loki with ‘strut’ in particular conjuring the queer image of a drag queen. The simile of knives as heels is particularly demonstrative of Loki’s gender fluidity, combining the feminine heel and weapons with their connection to masculinity within the hypermasculine Asgardian gender system. The use of clothes further validates the performative aspect of gender. Although Loki is biologically male, his choice of clothes demonstrates the feminine image he wishes to portray to the world. Lisa Walker expresses how the whole concept of performative gender relies on an individual performing the gender they think they are; Loki’s performance suggests he views himself as both male and female. [104]

A further way to examine Loki’s queer nature is to explore how it exists in contrast to the gender system in which it is found. Although the performative system in Agent of Asgard is in theory accepting of genderfluidity, there are still queerphobic elements that demonstrate that strict binary views of gender still exist. Loki is referred to as a ‘precious little girl-child’[105] and a ‘preening half-a-man’.[106] These both use Loki’s feminine gender as an insult, suggesting either the idea of femininity being a weakness, or that queerness is ‘viewed negatively due to a presumption … (of) cross-gendered characteristics’.[107] However, these are the only two queerphobic instances in a comic that is overall thoroughly embracing of Loki’s genderfluid identity. While some commentators on comics, such as Norma Pecora[108]  and Carol Stabile[109], criticise the innate sexism in the comics of the 1990s, Marvel has made a substantial effort to improve female and queer representation in recent years, including recently featuring a pride parade consisting entirely of their LGBTQ+ characters, including Loki.[110] McAllister notes the power the comic book has ‘to both legitimate dominant social values and provide an avenue for cultural criticism’, therefore highlighting the importance of representation in comics and providing an accepting society to legitimise their presence both on and off the page. [111]A comic being void of any criticism of queer people would not accurately represent the prejudices LGBTQ+ people face, justifying the use of limited queerphobic remarks. Therefore, even in a fictional society that recognises the performativity of gender and provides a system Loki should exist easily within, the lingering prejudices of gender binaries means Loki is still seen as transgressive and, like the Edda, his queerness is used to insult him.  

Despite Where Mischief Lies featuring two distinct binary systems, one sentiment combines how Loki transgresses both: ‘Be the witch’.[112] This sentence, which is not only repeated throughout the novel, but concludes it, brings together the idea of transgressing the gender binary of Victorian London as well as the sorcerer/warrior binary of Asgard. By being transgressive, Loki is a threat to both systems and the social hierarchies they uphold. In term of gender binaries, Hirschmann suggests that ‘those boundaries may be established by cultural practices as a way to protect social hierarchies’.[113] Victorian London has this system to defend the patriarchy from threats of female power. This can be seen from the character of Mrs Sharp whose masculine trousers brings her into conflict with the male authority, ‘“Why do you try so hard to look like a man, Mrs Sharp?”’,[114] and the use of ‘witch’[115] to insult Loki due to its association with powerful women. Loki’s presence as someone who openly embraces multiple genders threatens the rigid binary that protects the patriarchal system, resulting in his femininity being ridiculed due to the anxiety created from its threat to male power.

Within terms of the hierarchy system of Lee’s Asgard, in which magic is seen as inferior to warrior prowess, Loki transgresses through his magical ability rather than his genderfluidity. While Thor’s expression of physical power is praised, Loki’s magical power is punished or regarded with fear: ‘His father was afraid of him. Afraid of his power’.[116] Magic users who remain subservient, ‘Karnilla… Odin’s royal sorceress, stood like a soldier’[117] and Frigga, Odin’s wife ‘who supported him’,[118] are accepted in Asgardian society, while those who transgress, like Amora who is ‘too powerful to control’, are banished. [119] There is an obvious gendered narrative reflecting a woman’s place in society; her power must be subservient to the masculine ruler or she will be rejected. The concept of the witch, being a feminine magic wielder who exists outside of society, accurately reflects how Loki does not fit within either binary of the two systems found in Lee’s novel. For much of the novel, Loki struggles to be the subservient sorcerer Asgardian society desires him to be, but ultimately decides to embrace his transgressive nature and ‘be the witch’.[120]

 Existing as Queer

In both texts, Loki exists as an outsider to the societies he seeks acceptance within. Although his queer identity and orientation are never directly cited as the reasons for this ostracization, they are emblematic of why he is never accepted. In Agent of Asgard, Loki’s genderfluidity translates into to a wider desire to resist being categorized as either a villain or hero, while shame over his magical abilities in Where Mischief Lies reflects a struggle to accept homosexual attraction. Loki’s othering as a queer character will be explored by examining how it is reflected through other aspects of his characterisation.

Categorization is expressed in Agent of Asgard through the repeated metaphor of boxes and cages. They symbolise a conformity with conflicts with Loki’s fluid and transgressive nature. Loki connects this idea of identity and boxes, ‘I am my own and will not sit long in any box built for me’, demonstrating how being his own means being innately transgressive. [121] Throughout the narrative Loki is trying to prove he is no longer the archetypal villain he had been for most of Marvel’s history. He will no longer fit neatly into that category nor the one of hero, instead existing between the two as an antihero. Like with gender, Loki does not fit in either binary meaning the threat of literal imprisonment is used to symbolise conformity as either a villain or as a single gender. At the climax of the novel when Asgard goes to war with Hel, Loki does not choose either of the binaries presented to him, stating ‘I don’t do sides’ in a panel that heavily shades half his face. [122] (Fig. 6) The combination of both dark and light colouring creates the impression that Loki is neither entirely good nor evil, instead he is both and neither; he has found a way to exist outside the binary of good and evil, reflective of his ability to exist outside a gender binary. Binary gender as being restive and box-like is something explored by Jennifer Nye: ‘the range of human possibilities extends far beyond that recognized by the gender box.’[123] Loki’s resistance to imprisonments represents a desire to break free of restrictive gender categories.

The concept of the gender box goes beyond just gender identity to include sexual orientation. Nye definition of the masculine gender box relies on the assumption that ‘if your sex is male, your gender is masculine, and you are sexually attracted to women’.[124] Of course this excludes anyone who is not a cisgender heterosexual, but it does demonstrate the traditional expectations of gender and sexual orientation, therefore making anyone who exists outside the gender box automatically an outsider. In Where Mischief Lies Loki and Theo’s homosexual feelings for each other mark them as outsiders in Victorian London where Theo has been previously imprisoned for being ‘a boy who likes boys’.[125] This is something Loki instantly relates to as ‘he knew what it was to be cast out and unwanted and taunted for the fabric you were stitched from.[126] While Asgard, according to Loki, is accepting of homosexuality, it is possible to map the clichés of closeted homosexuality onto Loki’s struggle to hide his magical abilities: ‘wriggling with a shame he didn’t understand, before his mother finally came and explained that it would be best if he did not use the magic’.[127] Unintentionally paralleling the Edda, magic becomes an othering force like seiðr in Norse literature. Like Theo, there is also a threat of punishment for this othering, which Amora experiences in her banishment. This connection between Theo and Loki being forced to hide who they really are leads to the shared sentiment: ‘I wish I could make your world want you’.[128] Existing as queer means embracing what makes you other. Something both Theo and Loki accept by the end of the novel with Theo kissing Loki[129] and Loki using his magic to save Asgard.[130]

No matter how accepting the society of Asgard is in Agent of Asgard or Where Mischief Lie’s, there is always the tendency to cast anyone who transgresses traditional views of gender and sexuality as a villain. Mark LaPointe and Meredith Li-Vollmer argue that ‘gender transgression may also cast doubt on a person’s competence, social acceptability, and morality’ in cultures that still hold on to ideas of ‘naturalized constructions of gender’. [131] Consequently, if Loki is to stay true to his own identity, he must exist outside of society, often causing conflict with it that presents him as antagonistic.

 Identity

Loki’s exploration of his identity is a key theme not just in these two texts, but in the wider Marvel universe as well, with rumours an upcoming television series will also delve into this.[132] A fundamental aspect of Loki’s identity is of course his gender but this is just one aspect of many that result in Loki finding conflict between his own identity and the societies he longs to belong to. The way Loki is othered from society, how he exists as an othered being and his acceptance of his othered position will be examined in this section.

In Agent of Asgard Loki becomes increasingly othered throughout the comic. His position in this society has always been precarious; like in the Edda, Loki is racially other to the Asgardians[133] which is used to test his loyalties: ‘your race and mine are old allies’.[134] Although this is unsuccessful ‘We gave you a family’, ‘Yes, but I already have one of those’, Loki’s heritage is other enough for this to pose a threat, at least in the eyes of those within Asgardian society. [135] Loki begins the comic desperately trying to earn a place in this society by atoning for his crimes of the past, trading ‘new legends for old’,[136] but by issue #10 Loki’s secret of killing his child self, ‘the crime that will not be forgiven’,[137] is revealed leading to ostracization from Asgardian society. Loki consequently loses a key element of his identity: ‘I’m no longer an Asgardian’.[138] This concept of losable racial identity is not unlike the concept of losable masculinity in the Edda because Loki must meet the heroic requirements of Asgard or be cast out. Adam Green also argues that ‘identity as an ongoing social process marked by multiplicity, instability, and flux’ therefore can be lost or gained. [139] Loki’s exile ultimately frees him from the constraints of a society he was constantly in conflict with. Exile came because of Loki’s inability to live up to the expectation of Asgardian identity, with ideals of heroism that did not coincide with the trickster elements of Loki’s identity. While genderfluidity does not directly violate the concept of Asgardian identity, it is an expression of Loki’s malleable character that contrasts with the traditional image of the heroes of Asgard. Now he is separated from this society, Loki is finally free to explore his identity without restraints.

In Where Mischief Lies, Loki’s othering comes from his inability to find his place in a society that only values qualities such as physical strength and a warrior prowess.  Like Ewing’s Loki, Lee’s is also desperate to find acceptance in society, ‘working to be a better soldier, a better sorcerer, a better prince’, with little success. Loki is aware of his otherness. [140] He is worried that magic will ‘make (him) unnatural’, and Amora’s banishment demonstrates how dangerous otherness is in Asgardian society. [141] Alexander argues that ‘our identities are shaped and communicated through a variety of interesting social processes’, therefore this othering would have significantly impacted Loki’s identity, particularly his gender. [142] Asgard is supposedly accepting of Loki’s genderfluidity, yet he is the only genderfluid character found in Asgard and his femininity associates him with the otherness of magic as the only male user. The concept of otherness in this society consequently forces conformity on Loki in his desperation to be accepted. Paradoxically, it is when Loki enters the more oppressive society of Victorian London that he realises his identity cannot be suppressed; to be true to himself, he must exist as other in Asgardian society.

Loki’s acceptance of his place as an outsider to Asgardian society is central to the development of his identity as a transgressive character. By being ostracised from his society, Loki no longer needs to fulfil any expectations apart from his own. This allegiance to nobody but himself if something that has been part of Loki throughout his history in Marvel comics. Ewing turns the idea of Loki’s selfishness into an idea of self-preservation of an identity othered by Asgardian society. In Agent of Asgard’s introduction Ewing cites the iconic panel from Thor #353, which Odin’s battle cry is ‘For Asgard!’, Thor’s is ‘For Midgard!’, while Loki’s is ‘For Myself!’. [143] (Fig. 7) While humorous, Ewing argues that ‘when your self is a thing you have to fight the very cosmos to decide… it’s almost kind of… heroic?’, demonstrating how Loki’s perceived selfishness is evidence of him fighting to preserve his own identity. [144] To be true his identity, Loki must exist outside the society he had been trying to appease: ‘I probably shouldn’t care what they think, then, should I?’.[145] Agent of Asgard is ‘a comic about being For Yourself’, about existing without apologising. [146] Loki’s genderfluidity is just one aspect of his identity that causes him to transgress against the society he tries to exist within. Rather than sacrifice his identity to be accepted by others, Loki choses to exist as an outsider.

Loki in Where Mischief Lies also accepts his place as being an outsider. He tries to find his identity through his position in society, by trying to prove that he is a worthy contender for the throne. However, throughout the novel Loki is forced to question his own sense of identity due to the way others perceive him: ‘He did not know who he was. Everyone knew but him’.[147] It is only at the very end of the novel once Loki finds out he will never be king that he accepts that he will always exist as other to his society, choosing to ‘serve no man but himself, no heart but his own’.[148] Forming an identity othered from society, Loki gives in to fulfilling the expectations of others, becoming ‘the self-serving God of Chaos’, but is also free to be true to himself. [149] This impacts Loki’s gender identity because he no longer needs to worry about what others think of him, leaving him free to explore his gender to its full extent.

The final, and most important, aspect of identity both texts explore is self-acceptance. After revealing that the antagonist of the narrative was really himself, Loki embraces him and tells him ‘it’s all right’, meaning Loki finally accepts himself and no longer strives to conform to become something he is not. [150] Lee’s Loki also accepts himself. While on Earth he meets other people othered by their societies, such as Mrs Sharp and Theo, and it is through their friendship that Loki learns to accept his otherness. Theo and Loki are both othered in their own societies, so instead find acceptance in each other, sharing a ‘soft kiss’.[151] Through this action, Theo accepts his sexual orientation and Loki accepts that he can receive affection without having to meet the impossible standards society expects of him. Self-acceptance is key to embracing one’s own identity, especially transgressive gender identities such as genderfluidity. McAllister highlights the importance of comic books and ‘the degree of cultural argument they permit or encourage’ meaning that Loki becomes a figure representative of genderfluid identities and validates their presence not just in literature, but in the world of the reader as well. [152] Therefore, it is critical that Loki in both texts learns to accept himself and his entire self. Not just as a genderfluid individual, but all aspects of his identity that makes him a fully fleshed character and not just a symbol of deviance as Loki in the Edda is.

 Conclusion

The two texts explore Loki, not as simply a figure representative of transgressive gender, but as a character with a genderfluid identity that brings both internal and external conflict. Although Loki’s genderfluidity is an essential part of his identity, these texts prove that he is more than just his gender and that gender is more than just one aspect of his identity; it is a foundation in his otherness and symbolic of the malleability of his personality. The comic book industry was once notoriously slow to adapt to changes in the treatment of gender, with stories revolving around a hypermasculine hero protecting the delicate female, is now significantly more embracing of social progress. Loki is just one of a growing number of characters from LGBTQ+ backgrounds, yet he is one of the oldest to exist in Marvel comics. This is testament to the gender ambiguous legacy that the original mythological Loki left behind. The mythological Loki’s transgressive approach to gender reverberated across centuries, until it reached this modern medium where it could be expressed fully.

                                                                                   (Fig.1) Stan Lee et al, Journey into Mystery      (New York: Marvel Comics, 1952). #85

(Fig.3) Loki: Agent of Asgard #14

(Fig.2) Al Ewing et al, Loki: Agent of Asgard (New      York: Marvel Comics, 2020), #2

(Fig.4) Loki: Agent of Asgard #2 Jamie McKelvie      Cover Variant

                 (Fig.5) Loki: Agent of Asgard #5

(Fig.6) Loki: Agent of Asgard #16

(Fig.7) Walter Simonson, Thor (New York: Marvel      Comics, 1966). #353

   Conclusion

 ‘Loki makes the world more interesting but less safe.’[153]

When Neil Gaiman wrote this in Norse Mythology, he was referring to the threat Loki poses to the gods of Asgard as the bringer of their downfall. However, I think that there is another way to interpret this. A world made ‘less safe’ does not necessarily mean a world of danger, but a world less conservative, less static, where diversity makes the world more interesting. To help this world come into being, it first must be accepted. This means not only in wider society but in popular culture too, by finding its way onto our screens and pages.

While this dissertation has praised Marvel’s efforts to increase diversity in its comic books, the Marvel Cinematic Universe is far behind its comic counterpart, especially in queer representation. At the forefront of this fight for LGBTQ+ depiction is the Thor franchise, with Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie being the first, although unconfirmed, LGBTQ+ character originating in Thor Ragnarok.[154] Thor: Love and Thunder is also rumoured to introduce a transgender character and, while Loki’s place in this film is yet to be confirmed, there are again rumours he may be genderfluid in his upcoming TV series. There has always been controversy surrounding Marvel’s queer diversity, such as Brazil recently banning a Young Avengers comic due to a same-sex kiss being featured in it, which is the reason why Marvel’s mainstream movies have been so slow to increase representation in comparison to its comics. [155] However, the fact that it raises such controversy only heightens the need for greater representation.

Rick Roidan, during his acceptance speech at the 2016 Stonewall Awards, expressed the how important it is for ‘LGBTQ kids see themselves reflected and valued in the larger world of mass media’.[156] He too identified the connection between genderfluidity and Loki with his genderfluid character Alex Fierro being the child of Loki in Magnus Chase and the Gods of Asgard. Another example of mythology being repurposed for a modern audience, it furthers Abram’s argument that mythology will change to meet what is required of it. It also conveys the importance of representation that goes deeper than appearing in mass media, with these LGBTQ+ kids being connected to something even more engrained in culture.

The target audience of the modern texts explored in this dissertation are mainly young adults, many of whom will be beginning to explore their sexual identities and orientations. By queer reading mythology then using this as a basis for representation, queer identity is established as something validated by its presence in the past and position in popular culture.

 Bibliography

 Abram, Christopher, Myths of the Pagan North: the Gods of the Norsemen (London: Continuum, 2011)

Adams, Anthony, ''He Took a Stone Away’: Castration and Cruelty in the Old Norse Sturlunga Saga', in Castration and Culture in the Middle Ages, ed. by Larissa Tracy (Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer, 2013).

Adams, Tim, Thor: Ragnarok's Valkyrie Is Bisexual, Tessa Thompson Confirms (2017) <https://www.cbr.com/thor-ragnarok-valkyrie-bisexual/> [accessed 5 May 2020]

Alexander, Jonathan, 'Transgender Rhetorics: (Re)Composing Narratives of the Gendered Body.', College Composition and Communication, 57.1, (2005), 45-82 (p. 50), in ProQuest <https://search-proquest-com.ezproxye.bham.ac.uk/docview/220712396/fulltextPDF/BDE4C525A8C64762PQ/1?accountid=8630> [accessed 11 March 2020]

Bem, Sandra, 'The Measurement of Psychological Androgyny ', Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42.2, (1974), 155-162, <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.472.525&rep=rep1&type=pdf> [accessed 11 March 2020].

Bendis, Brian Michael et al, Dark Reign (New York: Marvel Comics, 2008)

Blashill, Aaron, Powlishta, Kimberly, '“Gay Stereotypes: The Use of Sexual Orientation as a Cue for Gender-Related Attributes.” ', Sex Role, 61.1, (2009), 783-793

Butler, Judith, Gender Trouble, 4 edn (Suffolk: Routledge, 2007)

“             ” Bodies That Matter: On the discursive limits of "sex", 2nd edn (New York: Routledge, 2011)

 Ciacoya, Bea, Brazilian Mayor Orders Armed Police Seize LGBTQIA+ Books, Leads to Protest (2019) <https://www.cbr.com/brazilian-mayor-orders-armed-police-seize-protest/> [accessed 5 May 2020].

Clover, Carol J., 'Regardless of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern Europe', Representations, 1.44, (1993), 1-28

Ewing, Al et al, Loki: Agent of Asgard The Complete Edition, ed. by Mark D. Beazley (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020)

Foss, Sonja K., Karen A., and Domenico, Mary E., Gender Stories: Negotiating Identity in a Binary World (Illinois: Waveland, 2013)

Gaiman, Neil, Norse Mythology (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2017)

Gillen, Kieron et al, Young Avengers Vol.2 (New York: Marvel Comics, 2014)

Gíslason, Jόnas, 'Acceptance of Christianity in Iceland in the year 1000 (999)', Old Norse and Finnish Religions and Cultic Place-Names, 13.1, (1990), 223-255, <https://doi.org/10.30674/scripta.67178> [accessed 6 May 2020]

Green, Adam, 'Queer Theory and Sociology: Locating the Subject and the Self in Sexuality Studies', Sociological Theory, 25.1, (2007), 26-45

Hardman, George L., The Saga of Bosi and Herraud (2007) <http://jillian.rootaction.net/~jillian/world_faiths/www.northvegr.org/lore/oldheathen/071.html> [accessed 6 May 2020]

Hayward, Eva, Weinstein, Jami, ' Introduction: Tranimalities in the Age of Trans* Life', TSQ, 2.2, (2015), 195-208, in Duke Press < https://doi.org/10.1215/23289252-2867446> [accessed 30 October 2019]

Hirschmann, Nancy, '“Queer/Fear: Disability, Sexuality, and The Other.” ', Journal of Medical Humanities, 34.2, (2013), 139-147 (p. 140), in Springer Science Business Media <https://link-springer-com.ezproxyd.bham.ac.uk/content/pdf/10.1007/s10912-013-9208-x.pdf> [accessed 11 March 2020]

Hume, Kathryn, ' Loki and Odin: Old Gods Repurposed by Neil Gaiman', Studies in the Novel, 51.2, (2019), 297-310

Kellogg, Robert, 'Introduction', in The Sagas of Icelanders, ed. by Örnólfur Thorsson (New York: Penguin Group, 2001)

LaPointe, Mark E and Li-Vollmer, Meredith, '"Gender Transgression and Villainy in Animated Film." ', Popular Communication: The International Journal of Media and Culture, 1.2, (2009), 89-109

Laqueur, Thomas, Making Sex: Body and gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992)

Lee, Mackenzi, Loki: Where Mischief Lies (New York: Marvel Press, 2019)

Lee, Stan et al, Journey into Mystery (New York: Marvel Comics, 1952)

McAllister, Matthew, 'Cultural Argument and Organizational Constraint in the Comic Book Industry', Journal of Communication, 40.1, (1990)

McCloud, Scott, Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art (New York: Harper Perennial, 1960).

McKinnell, John, Essays on Eddic Poetry, ed. by Donata Kick and John D. Shafer (Toronto: University of Toronto Press)

Melrose, Kevin, Loki will be bisexual, occasionally a woman in 'Agent of Asgard' (2013) <https://www.cbr.com/loki-will-be-bisexual-occasionally-a-woman-in-agent-of-asgard/> [accessed 11 March 2020]

Nye, Jennifer, '"The Gender Box."', Berkeley Women's Law Journal, 13.1, (1998), 22-256

Pecora, Norma, '“Superman/Superboys/Supermen: The Comic Book Hero as a Socializing Agent.”', in Men, Masculinity, and the Media, ed. by Steve Craig (Newbury Park: Sage, 1992)

Riodan, Rick, The Stonewall Award (2017) <https://rickriordan.com/2017/06/the-stonewall-award/> [accessed 5 May 2020]

Rooth, Anna Birgitta, Loki in Scandinavian Mythology (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1961).

Ross, Margaret Clunies, Prolonged Echoes: Old Norse myths in Medieval Northern society Volume 1: The myths (Odense: Odense University Press, 1994).

Schaefer, Sandy, Loki Will Struggle With Identity & Control in Marvel Disney+ Show (2020) <https://screenrant.com/loki-marvel-disney-plus-show-plot-identity-control/> [accessed 2 May 2020]

Self, Kathleen, 'Straightening Out the Gods’ Gender', in Irreverence and the Sacred: Critical Studies in the History of Religions, ed. by Hugh Urban and Greg Johnson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018)

Simonson, Walter et al, Thor (New York: Marvel Comics, 1966)

Solli, Brit, 'Queering the Cosmology of the Vikings: A Queer Analysis of the Cult of Odin and “Holy White Stones”', Journal of Homosexuality, 54.1, (2008), 192-2008 (p. 195), <https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360801952085> [accessed 4 February 2020]

Sørensen, Preben Meulengracht, The Unmanly Man: Concepts of sexual defamation in early Northern society, trans. by Joan Turville-Petre (Odense: Odense University Press, 1983)

Stabile, Carol, '“'Sweetheart, This Ain’t Gender Studies” Sexism and Superheroes.' Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 6.1, (2009)

Ström, Floke, Nið, ergi and Old Norse Moral Attitudes (Edinburgh: University College London, 1974).

Sturluson, Snorri, Edda, trans. by Anthony Faulkes, 3rd edn (London: Everyman, 1995)

Trosterud, Trond, 'Gender assignment in Old Norse', Lingua, 116.9, (2006), 1441-1463, in Science Direct <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2004.06.015> [accessed 20 November 2019]

Vecchio, Luciano et al, Marvel Voices #1 (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020)

von Schnurbein, Stefanie, 'The Function of Loki in Snorri Sturluson's ‘Edda.’ ', History of Religions, 40.2, (2000), 109-24, in JSTOR <www.jstor.org/stable/3176617> [accessed 20 January 2020]

Walker, Lisa, Looking Like What You Are: Sexual Style, Race, and Lesbian Identity (New York: New York University Press, 2001)

Wandtke, Terrence R., The Amazing Transforming Superhero!: Essays on the Revision of Characters in Comic Books, Film, and Television, ed. by Terrence R. Wandtke (Jefferson: McFarland, 2007)

Williams, Bronwyn T., 'Action Heroes and Literate Sidekicks: Literacy and Identity in Popular Culture', Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50.8, (2007), 680-85

The Poetic Edda, trans. by Carolyne Larrington (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014)

[1] Christopher Abram, Myths of the Pagan North: the Gods of the Norsemen (London: Continuum, 2011), p. 231.

[2] Ibid

[3] The Poetic Edda, trans. by Carolyne Larrington (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), p. 93.

[4] Ibid, p.80

[5] See Anna Brigitta Rooth in Chapter One

[6] Jόnas Gíslason, 'Acceptance of Christianity in Iceland in the year 1000 (999)', Old Norse and Finnish Religions and Cultic Place-Names, 13.1, (1990), 223-255, <https://doi.org/10.30674/scripta.67178> [accessed 6 May 2020].

[7] Robert Kellogg, 'Introduction', in The Sagas of Icelanders, ed. by Örnólfur Thorsson (New York: Penguin Group, 2001), p. xxiv

[8]   Anna Birgitta Rooth, Loki in Scandinavian Mythology (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1961), P.4

[9] Snorri Sturluson, Edda, trans. by Anthony Faulkes, 3rd edn (London: Everyman, 1995), p.26

[10] Rooth, p.10

[11] Snorri, p.26

[12] Ibid

[13] Ibid

[14] For this dissertation, sexual deviance means a deviation from the perceived heterosexual norm.

[15] Rooth, p.149

[16] Thomas Laqueur, Making Sex: Body and gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992), p. 8.

[17] Carol J. Clover, 'Regardless of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern Europe', Representations, 1.44, (1993), 1-28 (p. 13).

[18] Judith Butler, Gender Trouble, 4 edn (Suffolk: Routledge, 2007), p. 34.

[19] Clover, p.14

[20] Snorri, p.61

[21] Ibid

[22] Stefanie von Schnurbein, 'The Function of Loki in Snorri Sturluson's ‘Edda.’ ', History of Religions, 40.2, (2000), 109-24 (p. 119), in JSTOR <www.jstor.org/stable/3176617> [accessed 20 January 2020].

[23] Clover, p.13

[24] Other Old Norse texts featuring this include The Saga of Bosi and Herraud ‘the peasant girl was sometimes on top.’

George L. Hardman, The Saga of Bosi and Herraud (2007) <http://jillian.rootaction.net/~jillian/world_faiths/www.northvegr.org/lore/oldheathen/071.html> [accessed 6 May 2020].

[25] In the Lokasenna, p.89, Loki claims he and Skadi were intimate, meaning this may not be entirely pseudo.

[26] Clover, p.13

[27] Ibid

[28] Preben Meulengracht Sørensen, The Unmanly Man: Concepts of sexual defamation in early Northern society, trans. by Joan Turville-Petre (Odense: Odense University Press, 1983). P.21

[29] Clover, p.19

[30] Ibid, p.12

[31] In Njal's saga Njal has his manhood insulted due to his lack of beard.

[32] Margaret Clunies Ross, Prolonged Echoes: Old Norse myths in Medieval Northern society Volume 1: The myths (Odense: Odense University Press, 1994), p.123

[33] von Schnurbein, p.116

[34] Rooth, p.187

[35] Snorri, p.48-51

[36] Ibid, p.35-6

[37] Clover, p.19

[38] Ibid, p.12

[39] Floke Ström, Nið, ergi and Old Norse Moral Attitudes (Edinburgh: University College London, 1974), p. 6.

[40] Ibid, p.7

[41] Ibid, p.36

[42] Ross, p.208

[43] Kathleen Self, 'Straightening Out the Gods’ Gender', in Irreverence and the Sacred: Critical Studies in the History of Religions, ed. by Hugh Urban and Greg Johnson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), p. 229

[44] Poetic Edda, p.85

[45] Ström, p.8

[46] von Schnurbein, p.122

[47] Ström, p.4

[48] Ibid, p.7

[49] Sørensen, p.79

[50] Ström, p.7

[51] Brit Solli, 'Queering the Cosmology of the Vikings: A Queer Analysis of the Cult of Odin and “Holy White Stones”', Journal of Homosexuality, 54.1, (2008), 192-2008 (p. 195), <https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360801952085> [accessed 4 February 2020].

[52] Clover, p.6

[53] Snorri, p.36

[54] Sørensen, p.20

[55] Snorri, p.35

[56] Anthony Adams, ''He Took a Stone Away’: Castration and Cruelty in the Old Norse Sturlunga Saga', in Castration and Culture in the Middle Ages, ed. by Larissa Tracy (Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer, 2013), p. 206

[57] Solli, p.200

[58] Ross, p.70

[59] Ström, p.8

[60] Snorri, p.26

[61] Ross, p. 64

[62] Despite being racially different to the Æsir gods, the casting of a non-white actor to play Loke in the film Valhalla (2019) sparked online criticism.

[63] Ibid, p.263

[64] Snorri, p.27

[65] Ibid

[66] Ibid

[67] Ibid, p.42-44

[68] Ross, p.64

[69] Ibid, p.220

[70] Clover, p.13

[71] Ross, p. 165

[72] Self, p.332

[73]Ross, p.101

[74] Rooth, p.173

[75] John McKinnell, Essays on Eddic Poetry, ed. by Donata Kick and John D. Shafer (Toronto: University of Toronto Press), p. 195.

[76] Ibid

[77] Kathryn Hume, ' Loki and Odin: Old Gods Repurposed by Neil Gaiman', Studies in the Novel, 51.2, (2019), 297-310 (p. 298).

[78] Snorri, p.54

[79] Kevin Melrose, Loki will be bisexual, occasionally a woman in 'Agent of Asgard' (2013) <https://www.cbr.com/loki-will-be-bisexual-occasionally-a-woman-in-agent-of-asgard/> [accessed 11 March 2020].

[80] Kieron Gillen et al, Young Avengers Vol.2 (New York: Marvel Comics, 2014). #15

[81] Brian Michael Bendis et al, Dark Reign (New York: Marvel Comics, 2008).

[82] Stan Lee et al, Journey into Mystery (New York: Marvel Comics, 1952). #85

[83] Matthew McAllister, 'Cultural Argument and Organizational Constraint in the Comic Book Industry', Journal of Communication, 40.1, (1990), 55-71 (p. 55).

[84] Mackenzi Lee, Loki: Where Mischief Lies (New York: Marvel Press, 2019), p.218

[85] Ibid, p. 205

[86] Ibid, p.265

[87] Ibid, p.9

[88] Ibid, p.5

[89] Nancy Hirschmann, '“Queer/Fear: Disability, Sexuality, and The Other.” ', Journal of Medical Humanities, 34.2, (2013), 139-147 (p. 140), in Springer Science Business Media <https://link-springer-com.ezproxyd.bham.ac.uk/content/pdf/10.1007/s10912-013-9208-x.pdf> [accessed 11 March 2020].

[90] Rooth, p.187

[91] Al Ewing et al, Loki: Agent of Asgard The Complete Edition, ed. by Mark D. Beazley (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020), #2

[92] Sandra Bem, 'The Measurement of Psychological Androgyny ', Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42.2, (1974), 155-162, <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.472.525&rep=rep1&type=pdf> [accessed 11 March 2020].

[93] Lee, p.265

[94] Ibid

[95] Jonathan Alexander, 'Transgender Rhetorics: (Re)Composing Narratives of the Gendered Body.', College Composition and Communication, 57.1, (2005), 45-82 (p. 50), in ProQuest <https://search-proquest-com.ezproxye.bham.ac.uk/docview/220712396/fulltextPDF/BDE4C525A8C64762PQ/1?accountid=8630> [accessed 11 March 2020].

[96] Lee, p.362

[97] Ibid, p.223

[98]Sonja K. Foss, Mary E. Domenico, and Karen A. Foss, Gender Stories: Negotiating Identity in a Binary World (Illinois: Waveland, 2013). P.40

[99] Lee, 264

[100] Terrence R. Wandtke, The Amazing Transforming Superhero!: Essays on the Revision of Characters in Comic Books, Film, and Television, ed. by Terrence R. Wandtke (Jefferson: McFarland, 2007), p. 7.

[101] Aaron Blashill, Kimberly Powlishta, '“Gay Stereotypes: The Use of Sexual Orientation as a Cue for Gender-Related Attributes.” ', Sex Role, 61.1, (2009), 783-793 (p. 784).

[102] Lee, p.4

[103] Ibid, p.5

[104] Lisa Walker, Looking Like What You Are: Sexual Style, Race, and Lesbian Identity (New York: New York University Press, 2001).

[105] Ewing, #3

[106] Ibid, #9

[107] Blashill, Powlishta, p.984

[108] Norma Pecora, '“Superman/Superboys/Supermen: The Comic Book Hero as a Socializing Agent.”', in Men, Masculinity, and the Media, ed. by Steve Craig(Newbury Park: Sage, 1992), p. 61-77

[109] Carol Stabile, '“'Sweetheart, This Ain’t Gender Studies” Sexism and Superheroes. ', Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 6.1, (2009), 86-92.

[110] Luciano Vecchio et al, Marvel Voices #1 (New York: Marvel Comics, 2020).

[111] McAllister, p.55

[112] Lee, p.408

[113] Hirschmann, p.143

[114] Lee, p.205

[115] Ibid, p.230

[116] Ibid, p.70

[117] Ibid, p.5

[118] Lee, p.80-1

[119] Lee, p.81

[120] Ibid, p.408

[121] Ewing, #13

[122] Ewing, # 16

[123] Jennifer Nye, '"The Gender Box."', Berkeley Women's Law Journal, 13.1, (1998), 22-256 (p. 229).

[124] Ibid, p.228

[125] Lee, p.218

[126] Ibid

[127] Ibid, p.9

[128] Ibid, p.387

[129] Ibid

[130] Ibid, p.401

[131] Mark E LaPointe and Meredith Li-Vollmer, '"Gender Transgression and Villainy in Animated Film." ', Popular Communication: The International Journal of Media and Culture, 1.2, (2009), 89-109 (p. 90).

[132] Sandy Schaefer, Loki Will Struggle With Identity & Control in Marvel Disney+ Show (2020) <https://screenrant.com/loki-marvel-disney-plus-show-plot-identity-control/> [accessed 2 May 2020].

[133] In Marvel Loki is the child of frost giant king, Laufey, adopted by Odin.

[134] Ewing, #5.3

[135] Ibid #5.4

[136] Ibid #1

[137] Ibid #10

[138] Ibid, #8

[139] Adam Green, 'Queer Theory and Sociology: Locating the Subject and the Self in Sexuality Studies', Sociological Theory, 25.1, (2007), 26-45 (p. 32).

[140] Lee, p.95

[141] Ibid, p.44

[142] Alexander, p.52

[143] Walter Simonson et al, Thor (New York: Marvel Comics, 1966). #353

[144] Ewing, # 1

[145] Ibid, #16

[146] Ibid, #1

[147] Lee, p.359

[148] Ibid, p. 408

[149] Ibid, p.407

[150] Ewing, # 17

[151] Ibid

[152] McAllister, p.46

[153] Neil Gaiman, Norse Mythology (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2017), p. 8.

[154] Tim Adams, Thor: Ragnarok's Valkyrie Is Bisexual, Tessa Thompson Confirms (2017) <https://www.cbr.com/thor-ragnarok-valkyrie-bisexual/> [accessed 5 May 2020].

[155] Bea Ciacoya, Brazilian Mayor Orders Armed Police Seize LGBTQIA+ Books, Leads to Protest (2019) <https://www.cbr.com/brazilian-mayor-orders-armed-police-seize-protest/> [accessed 5 May 2020].

[156] Rick Riodan, The Stonewall Award (2017) <https://rickriordan.com/2017/06/the-stonewall-award/> [accessed 5 May 2020].

#loki #loki show #loki series #norse mythology #norse loki #prose edda #poetic edda #essay #genderfluid #genderfluid loki #queer loki

[incarnateirony]

Pre-Rewatch Notes

So since I’m going to be doing a mix of in-timeline and full retrospective text value of the canon, one of the things I’d like to actually get out of the way is the Key Concepts of the eras, most explicitly Kripke and Dabb as the start and end.

The Key concepts are the single most important framework in media studies. They have evolved as a means of understanding a text by using a critical framework, rather than just making unconnected and meaningless observations. Throughout the course, you will need to refer to the Key Concepts and use the terms you learn when analysing media texts. One way to remember the Key Concepts is to use the mnemonic "RAILING". Representations, Audiences, Institutions, (Media) Language, Ideology, Narrative, Genre.

(also sometimes called MIGRAIN if using Media Language to clarify rather than spoken language)

With this as my note in front of the cut, I’m going to drop the rest behind one while I try to sort out the RAILING of the show before I even try to start establishing long term collective rewatch arguments on the canon. I do also invite some discussion on these, as in, if you feel my markers are off, or if I’m missing anything that I could probably negotiate the text.

Pulling, for my sanity, from here [x]

SO FIRST TO DEFINE:

Media Language This is how media producers communicate their ideas to the audience. Below are some examples to think about when considering media language:

Images used

Words used

Use of colour

Signs and signifiers

Connotative meaning

Use of sound

Iconography

Camera angles and picture composition

Institutions The companies who produce the media. Fox, Disney, CNN, the BBC, Warner Brothers etc will have a set of Institutional Values; beliefs on aspects of life e.g. their political stance or moral beliefs etc. Also, whether they have to make large profits for a board of directors. These institutional values will guide what their media products include. You should consider who made a particular media product and what impact this has on that product.

Genre The style of the media form.

A film could be Horror or Action.

A book could be Fantasy or Thriller.

A computer game could be RPG or Sports Simulation.

A website could be News or Social Networking.

Representation How media producers show a thing, person or group of people.

May be positive or negative.

Why have they chosen to show them in this way?

Think about the 5 w’s: who, what, where, when and why?

Audience

The people who buy and consume media.

Who are they?

What do they want from the media product?

How does the media product fulfill these wants?

Use theories such as Uses and Gratification theory.

Ideology Ties in with Institution.

What values and beliefs underpin the product?

How does this fit with the values of society?

Narrative How is the text structured?

Use Todorov’s Theory of Narrative Structure.

Use Propp’s Character Theory.

Use Strauss’ Theory of Binary Opposition

I’m going to use VERY shorthand notes on these moving forward.

So here’s what I see off the cuff:

KRIPKE ERA

Media Language Faded film stock to denote horror; darkness; emphasis on SFX like footsteps. Grim cinematic. Eventual christian imagery overlapping urban myth icons. Faded color palettes. Fairly classic color use (pink or white for femininity or purity, etc). Nostalgic classic rock/music. Nostalgia, general. Muscle cars. "Classic american masculinity." Hopelessness seeking hope.

Institutions WB, CW, and the timeline of 2005-2009. Kripke, Singer. Manners. McGee. Sgriccia.

Genre Horror, survival, drama

Representation Americana, working class america, "american masculinity", fraternity; Sam and Dean vs the world with occasional help from other friends or family in the life. Metanarrative hostility to issues like queerness reflective of both time and institution at the time.

Audience Originally targeted at young/teen men (to “not be like other girl shows on the network”), became split demographic. Split conservative and liberal demographic. Discussion on how these are handled will come up over the study.

Ideology Fraternal bonds. Arguably, family. Hero's sacrifice for the greater good.

Narrative Campbell, Hero's Journey; Rule of Cool; Christendom; Man vs Divine

GAMBLE

Media Language Film stock, brightness, saturation at fairly standard media level -- sometimes unstable. Standard cinematics. Residual christian imagery overlapping lovecraft. Decline in classic music from Kripke. Unclear or unreliable interpersonal messaging. Arguably southern gothic. Hopelessness.

Institutions WB, CW, and the timeline of 2010-2011. Gamble, Singer. McGee. Sgriccia. Norman Bee. Edlund.

Genre Teen Drama, Adventure

Representation Established characters Sam and Dean. Fraternity. Sam and Dean vs the world.

Audience Originally targeted at young women, became split demographic. Split conservative and liberal demographic. Discussion on how these are handled will come up over the study.

Ideology Brothers quarreling; fight monsters; I don't know. Did she know? "Everything is tragic but have some dick jokes"

Narrative Lovecraft. Does anyone know. "I need to make more episodes"

CARVER

Media Language Brightened film stock with increased saturation establishes fantasy setting. Smash cut interruptions to former grim cinematics offset more hopeful visuals. Fairly media standard lighting and color use in related fantasy cinema. Found family. Hope against hopeless odds.

Institutions WB, CW, and the timeline of 2012-2014 (arguably 2015). Carver, Singer. Glass. Sgriccia.

Genre Fantasy, Adventure, drama

Representation Widened character base. Widened hero's journey arcs (castiel). Masculinity messaging of the past has not vanished, but has dampened and become less hostile to the LGBTQ and woman audience. Regular Cast widened (Crowley, Castiel)

Audience Split gender demographic. Split conservative and liberal demographic. Split age demographic from targeting vs duration. Increasingly digital demographic and marketing; begins increasing queer, poc and other audience. International boom (Netflix deal, digital 2012+). Discussion on how these are handled will come up over the study.

Ideology Found Family, Hope against odds. Free Will highlighted.  Destructive or harmful relationships. Humanity. The human journey.

Narrative Self-established TV episodical, largely internal lore, residual christianized mythos or christendom. Castiel acquires first proper hero’s journey personal arc/lens. Multiple relationships vs world, man vs world

DABB

Media Language Carries from carver; largely identical but more close-up shots and interaction shots for drama focus. Internal color pallate unique to its own while still interacting with Carver standard media pallate.

Institutions WB, CW, and the timeline of 2015-2020. Dabb, Singer. Sgriccia. Buckner, Leming. S15: Berens. CW has begun rebranding into a “queer friendly” platform with unreliable results.

Genre High-fantasy, drama, arguably soap.

Representation Carries heavily from Carver, plus. Expansion of queer creatives adds queer voice to the text. Queer text manifests over time into show's canon text. Lack of metanarrative hostility has become space for queer text. Attempted routine inclusion of women, queer characters. While not a queer piece, establishes queer narrative with roots as far back as Kripke. While still maintaining strong leads, Regular Cast and other leading cast has expanded (Crowley, Castiel, Jack, other major recognizeable faces: Rowena, Wayward). It flirts with ensemble presentation without ever landing on it wholly.

Audience Split gender demographic skewing towards women. Split conservative and liberal demographic skewing towards liberal. Multiple generations of demographic from longevity. Primarily digital demographic and marketing (top 99.9% digital but a bottom live ratings performer on live TV outside of the CW); primarily queer, poc and other audience. International boom. Discussion on how these are handled will come up over the study.

Ideology Found family. hope against odds/defining the odds. Free Will vs authoritative power. Psychological rebuilding*. The family journey. The family unit. Non-nuclear families. (finale not withstanding)

Narrative Self-established TV episodical, largely internal lore, subverting christendom and authority with alchemy or gnosticism. Optimism vs Nihilism. Contrasting ending (see: Nihilism) Campbell. Other characters, like Jack, begin claiming narrative presence like Carver era Castiel, whereas Castiel maintains or expands on his. Man vs Divine vs Man IS Divine

These will be used to address the text during the large scale rewatch.

Each era has its own parameters to best address its showrunners’ visions in. Each era will receive snapshots unto itself, or snapshots also only in regards to how it adapts to the previous text. On the other hand, as half the goal is also a full retrospective to address the complete body of the text since the show stands as a complete body of word and I shouldn’t change my tools over and over again throughout for the complete-text study the same way I will by showrunner era.

I’m going to make a PITCH on the most likely way to give this a strong reading through to prepare what targets to keep an eye on as they evolve. This may change along the way if at any point I realize the first-glance overview was wrong, but

OVERVIEW MIGRAIN

Media Language The growth from hopeless dark into vivid potential; the lost heroes still oblivious to the world, their vision distant and dark to begin. Contrast faded dark to vivid and bright as much over timeline as Carver did between shots. Consider addressing the increased interpersonal camera work that blooms in later seasons for commentary in regards to the increased interpersonal complexity and growth of the cast.

Institutions WB, CW, and the timeline of 2005-2009 as the holdover of some audience being maintained with inevitable pressures from the outside world of 2020 forcing change.

Genre Survival, drama, fantasy

Representation Americana, fraternity, family; Split Hero's Journey Narratives. Late-end queer story affirmation demands a look at the body of the text for its queer journey throughout, though the work itself should not be expected to perform as an LGBT genre work but rather a Survival-Drama-Fantasy work with queer characters. Loved ones versus external forces.

Audience Too shifting to consider in the target read anymore.

Ideology Expanding knowledge. Growing expansion of the world first to find, then surpass and subvert God--or at least their intention. The growth out of expectations of work or behavior into passions and dreams. Finding and pursuing hope. Fraternal bonds. Family, Found Family. Queerness. Hero's sacrifice for the greater good, but to find and define what that greater good is, one must know the self through the family. Free Will vs authoritative power. Psychological rebuilding*. The family journey. The family unit. Non-nuclear families.

Narrative Campbell, Hero's Journey; Occasional intertext (On the Road, Vonnegut, Lovecraft). Varied mythos, best collected and then addressed and subverted through gnostic thoughtform per the ending.

Comments, critiques, criticisms, ideas to add, things I may be missing? 

#polol #the great rewatch project #RAILING #MIGRAIN #meta

[thefearofcod]

hey so i'm a gay christian(?), and i'm going to st. john's in the fall. i was wondering if you could give me any advice? (it's okay of course if you don't want to)

First of all, congratulations on your St. John’s-ening! It’s absolutely an unparalleled place and experience, and I wish you well! I can only tell you things from my own narrow experience, but I can tell you things I wish I’d known at the time. Also, all of this information is about four years out of date, since I’m A’15 and microcultures (is that a word? it is a word now) change incredibly quickly, especially in intellectual spaces and spaces with young populations. Some of it will still apply though!

First of all: GO TO GREEK ASSISTANCE. GO. GO TO GREEK ASSISTANCE! The Greek Assistants are lovely, helpful people and they are HERE TO HELP YOU! With one of the most time-consuming and work-intensive courses I have ever encountered. They will not think you’re stupid, and helping you helps them get even better. 

If you want a Program text from the library, get it early. They go like hotcakes. The library does not have enough copies even for everyone who doesn’t buy them from the bookstore. Like, go at least a week before your class needs the text (you can check in advance what seminar books you’ll need in the bookstore, they have a list for each year). If you can, splurge on that Complete Plato from Hackett Publishing, it is a sexy, sexy book and mad useful. 

If someone interrupts you during a mathematics demonstration, throw your chalk at them, I am completely serious. This is the only tutorial where this is permissible. 

The Johnnie Bubble is real and you will forget about the outside world. This is fine, and normal. 

If you are so unlucky as to be assigned Dreucker for a class, transfer immediately. He nearly made me drop out, fuck that guy and his terrible teaching style. 

Being a room Johnnie is fine. Do your homework, watch netflix, whatever. But do your reading.

Upperclassmen will be really friendly! They love freshmen, and befriending upperclassmen is a great way to meet people and get help with homework. Some of my best and most enduring friends are upperclassmen who adopted me.

The freshman dorms suck and I am sorry. The Program is racist and sexist as shit and that also sucks and is an inseparable part of Western philosophy. You cannot have Western philosophy without racism and sexism. Accept this. You do not have to like it, you do not have to agree with it, but is an integral and unchangeable and immutable fact about these materials. The only pure and free space is mathematics. 

As far as being queer and christian (I am sorry that I don’t know what your denotation of “christian(?)” means) I found St. John’s a pretty comfortable place to be a queer person. I know others who did not find it that way! You can join Pink Triangle, the LGBT+ group on campus, but my experience was negative (partly due to my own preferences and identity development). Generally people didn’t bother me about being queer, but I was very aggressively asexual and made sure people knew it. I also know a lot of people come out/transition after leaving or graduating from St. John’s, partly because it’s not worth the administrative hassle of transitioning while at the school, which is super unfortunate. 

You’re gonna meet a lot of more-intellectual-than-thou atheists. They will mostly be men, in my experience, and they will want to ~have a Johnnie discussion as fellow philosophers~ with you. This is just the “debating” that these dudes want to do elsewhere in the wild. You do not have to engage them, but you can if you want! I had lots of conversations that were low key dudes making fun of me, and also lots of conversations that were very thoughtful and influential to my spiritual and religious development, both at St. John’s. It’s a mixed bag.

St. Anne’s in the circle is a lovely, welcoming church that’s familiar with Johnnies, and very queer-positive. I highly recommend trying it, it’s where I and several of my friends went.

THIS WAS A LONG POST! If you wanna talk more, my inbox is open and also you can dm me if you’re into that. 

#st. john's #sjca #st. john's college #OLD MAN YELLS ABOUT ALMA MATER #other johnnies are welcome to weigh in on this! #Anonymous

[gendercensus]

Gender Census 2018 - The Full Report (UK)

This report is long! You can read a summary of the three regular questions here.

~

In 2018 I spaced out work on the survey into several smaller blog posts throughout the year, in the hope that it would be less exhausting, and I think it has worked! In this article I will combine all the UK data into one report, and compare it with the worldwide data.

The survey took place between 1st February and 25th March 2018, and there were 11,278 respondents, of which 1,535 said they were living in the UK (compared to 1,357 UK participants last year).

The spreadsheets are split this year. Links: questions one, two, three, four, and the original spreadsheet of all responses.

~

Q1: THE SPELLING OF NON-BINARY

The first question in the survey was: How do you think this word should be spelled? The options were:

nonbinary

non-binary

non binary

I don’t know/I don’t care

Other [text box]

The first three options, bolded, were randomised. I asked this question first because there was also a question about how people identify, and I had to choose a spelling for the checkbox option for nonbinary, and I didn’t want my choice for the survey to sway the results of this question. I also avoided using the word nonbinary in all promotional materials.

You can see and download the Google Sheet of the results here and you can see a more in-depth report here.

So what we can see is that people who identified as nonbinary were consistently more likely to prefer no hyphen than those who didn’t identify as nonbinary.

But we also see that UK participants overall spelled it with a hyphen, whereas worldwide participants (mostly USA, I’d guess) preferred no hyphen. That makes sense, because the British English conventions tend towards including hyphens.

Since the international preference is for no hyphen, and it’s an international survey, I’ll be spelling it nonbinary in future surveys.

~

Q2. IDENTITY WORDS

I asked, Which of the following best describe(s) in English how you think of yourself?

There were 23 checkbox options, and participants could check as many boxes as they wanted. You can see the spreadsheet of all 11,000+ responses for this question, as well as the graphs in more detail, here on Google Sheets and you can see the report about identity words only here.

The top five identity words in the UK were:

nonbinary - 57% (down 7.6%)

trans - 34% (up 1.7%)

transgender - 28% (up 1.8%)

genderqueer - 28% (down 5.5%)

agender - 23% (down 4.8%)

Nonbinary and genderqueer have dipped significantly this year, which I think is at least in part due to my efforts to make the promotional materials more inclusive and less biased. I didn’t use those words in promotional blog posts or as tags or in the introductory text on the survey itself, and I changed the title of the survey from Nonbinary/Genderqueer Survey to Gender Census.

Here’s everything that got over 1% worldwide, comparing the UK results to the worldwide results:

You can see a larger version of this chart by clicking through to the Google Sheet linked above.

All the top ten words were chosen less often in the UK, but we in the UK are apparently more comfortable with the words transgender, woman, and transfeminine - and we’re also more likely to not describe our genders at all.

I think the reason for this striking difference is that UK participants used fewer words to describe themselves on average - worldwide participants most often used 3 words, whereas UK participants used only 1.

In all there were 379 unique write-ins, of which two were words that were entered by over 1% of UK participants, which means next year the following words will be added to the survey’s checkbox options:

queer - 2.9% (2.8% UK)

genderless - 1.1% (0.8% UK)

demiboy - 1.1% (1.2% UK)

demigirl - 1.1% (0.9% UK)

gender non-conforming - 1.1% (0.3% UK)

People seem to want to specify demiboy or demigirl even when demigender is an option, so I think it might be wise to remove demigender from the list and see what happens. It might be that over 1% of participants will write in demigender, in which case I will re-add it to the checkbox list.

Gender non-conforming was a tricky one to count. I had sorted the list of write-ins alphabetically and I noticed that it was being entered many times but being spelled in a lot of different ways, and therefore wasn’t being counted properly. When I searched the worldwide list for “conform” I found 23 unique spellings, 15 of which had been entered only once. When they were combined there were 122 participants entering some variation, with “gender non-conforming” being the most popular, so I will be adding that to the next survey.

Fun UK facts:

73% of write-ins were entered only once, and 109 words were written in more than once.

38% of participants used the write-in box.

When the write-in boxes were used, on average people wrote in 1.6 new terms each (high compared to the 1.4 average worldwide).

14 people, or 0.9%, used all five boxes.

The mean number of identity words (including the checkboxes) was 3.8 each, and the most common number of identity words chosen/written was 1.

92% of UK participants chose 1-7 words.

~

Q3. THE TITLE QUESTION

I asked, Supposing all title fields on forms were optional and write-your-own, what would you want yours to be in English? I also clarified that participants should be currently entitled to use it, so they should have a doctorate if they choose Dr, etc.

There were 5 specific titles to choose from, plus a few options like “I choose on the day” and “a non-gendered professional or academic title”. Participants could choose only one, with the goal of finding out what, when pressed, people enter on official records forms and ID. You can see the spreadsheet of all 11,000+ responses for this question, as well as the graphs in more detail, here on Google Sheets.

The top 5 were:

Mx - 38.6% (up 1%)

No title at all - 27.4% (up 0.2%)

Mr - 8.1% (up 2.3%)

Ms - 7.8% (up 4.7%)

Miss - 5.5% (up 1.3%)

As is fairly consistent with previous years, we’re more likely to favour Mx and less likely to favour no title at all compared to worldwide participants generally. Anecdotally speaking I do hear that British systems and organisations are more insistent on titles than for example American ones, so perhaps we’ve collectively found that picking a neutral title will be less hassle for us than fighting for a titleless existence.

Of the 23 people (1.5%) who said that in an ideal world they prefer a gender-exclusive title, only 3 used the text box provided. The text box asked people to specify what that gender-exclusive title would be, and only one person gave a specific title: Pr.

So I’d say that we do not currently have a gender-exclusive nonbinary title yet in the UK, and the picture is very similar worldwide.

(By “gender-exclusive nonbinary title”, I mean a title that denotes a nonbinary gender, as generally speaking Ms denotes a female gender and Mr denotes a male gender.)

~

Q4. PRONOUNS

The fourth question was actually a complex set of questions, which started with Supposing all pronouns were accepted by everyone without question and were easy to learn, which pronouns are you happy for people to use for you? This was accompanied by a list of pre-written checkbox options. It included “a pronoun set not listed here”. and if you chose that it took you to a separate set of questions that let you enter up to five pronoun sets in detail.

You can see the spreadsheet of results for just the pronouns question here, and a more detailed report here.

Everything that was a pre-written checkbox option got over 1%.

Here’s the top 5 for the UK:

Singular they - they/them/their/theirs/themself - 73.6% (down 4.9%)

She - she/her/her/hers/herself - 31.7% (up 3.8%)

He - he/him/his/his/himself - 26.9% (down 2.9%)

Mix it up - 11.3% (down 0.6%)

None/avoid pronouns - 9.9% (down 0.4%)

It’s the same five as last year, but in a slightly different order - he/him and she/her have swapped places. Here’s the sets that were chosen by UK participants over 1% of the time:

As with identity words, we in the UK were more likely to use fewer pronouns each:

Neopronouns

Even when you only count the first form of each neopronoun set (xe, or ae, or ne), the most any neopronoun set got was 0.5%.

Here’s the top 5:

ze (singular verbs) - 0.52%

they (plural verbs) - 0.39%

ve (singular verbs) - 0.39%

ey (singular verbs) - 0.33%

ae (singular verbs) - 0.20%

In the end, the most popular neopronoun sets were in the checklist options, which makes sense - being able to check a box is much easier than having to enter five forms for each neopronoun set that you’re happy for people to use for you, as is remembering sets that you’re happy for people to use when talking about you. The popular neopronouns from the checklist options were:

Xe - xe/xem/xyr/xyrs/xemself - 7.9% (122 people)

Ze - ze/hir/hir/hirs/hirself - 5.7%

Spivak - e/em/eir/eirs/emself - 4.5%

Fae - fae/faer/faer/faers/faeself - 3.2%

In the UK we were slightly less likely to use neopronouns than participants worldwide.

I am extremely happy with the improvements to this question. It’s great to get more complete information about neopronoun sets, and to be able to say with certainty exactly how each neopronoun set is most commonly composed. Next year I would like to expand this question to collect data about how people tend to gender their neopronoun sets, as I did a few months back when I ran the pronoun-specific survey that helped inform this question.

If you’re not super familiar with neopronouns, you can see the more popular ones from the worldwide results in use here.

Here’s some fun statistics:

25 unique pronouns were typed into the “other” box more than once.

50 pronouns were typed into the “other” box only once. This is much higher than last year because we’re collecting more accurate information about variants now.

Including the checkbox options that’s 71 pronoun sets in total.

People chose on average 1.6 acceptable pronouns each, lower than the worldwide average of 2.

Most people (45%) chose only one pronoun, slightly less than last year.

About 76% of people were happy with only one or two pronouns - higher than last year’s 72%.

~

THE QUESTIONS I ASK

What should the third gender option on forms be called? - Still no consensus in that area. Nonbinary is consistently most popular, is at 57% this year, and is still twice as popular as the next specific word (genderqueer), so it’s promising. But there’s still almost half of UK respondents not identifying as nonbinary, so I don’t feel comfortable jumping to that conclusion just yet.

Is there a standard neutral title yet? - Not yet. Mx is still consistently far more popular than all other titles, but almost as many UK-based nonbinary people want no title at all. It’s really important that activists campaigning for greater acceptance of gender diversity remember to fight for titles to be optional, too.

Is there a pronoun that every nonbinary person is happy with? - No. The closest we have to a standard is singular they, and it’s important for journalists and anyone else with a style guide to allow it. But around a quarter of us are not happy with singular they, and 10.6% of us don’t like he, she or they pronouns.

Are any of the neopronouns gaining ground in a way that competes with singular they? - No. This year the closest is “Xe - xe/xem/xyr/xyrs/xemself” (7.9% compared to singular they’s 73.6%). Users of these neopronouns will probably not reach consensus for many years - language and especially pronouns can be very slow to settle and gain ground. Even if one neopronoun does become very commonly used, many will continue to use other neopronouns for a long time to come.

~

THIS YEAR IN REVIEW

The survey hasn’t changed much, but the way I approach working on it has.

Being disabled and moving house meant my energy levels were pretty unreliable. I took a bit-by-bit approach, processing the results for one question at a time and then writing up a report, before compiling everything into one large report. That’s why each question has its own Google Sheet! (Questions one, two, three, four, and the original spreadsheet of responses.)

And the number of people involved in the survey has increased such that I’ve needed to start paying for more stuff.

I crowdfunded for the survey fees again, but I included fees for the domain name and the email server so I can use proper mailing list, because Gmail wouldn’t let me email everyone about the results last year. There are just too many of you.

What I’ll do differently next year

I will make the wording in the promotional materials more inclusive. This year I made an image for the tweets and blog posts that had the words “male” and “female” on and there was some confusion over whether I meant gender or sex. (I meant both.) Next year I will refrain from using these words, and possibly use a non-text way to convey what I mean, so that potential participants aren’t put off by language that they feel excludes them.

I’m actually pretty happy with how I handled most of it. I think the software is probably the best I’m going to find, the site and domain and mailing list set-up is a big improvement, the wording of the questions and the answer responses seem to be working.

I think if I ask a one-off question in 2019 it’ll be family words, such as neutral words for aunt/uncle, nephew/niece, etc.

Closing thoughts

I continue to be a little overwhelmed when the responses start rolling in at hundreds per hour. I love mashing the numbers about and getting something informative and interesting out of them, and I really hope other people enjoy reading the results! You’re all fab for trusting me with your answers too. Thank you.

See also

A list of links to all results, including UK and worldwide, and including previous years

The mailing list for being notified of next year’s survey

~

SUPPORT ME!

I do this basically for free (the crowdfunded money went entirely on survey software and domain fees), so if you happened to stumble onto my Amazon wishlist and accidentally fall on an Add To Cart button… well, I would be immensely grateful. ;) If you wanted to go and check out Starfriends.org too I reckon Andréa would be pretty chuffed!

#nonbinary #language #nonbinary survey #gender census 2018 #results #pronouns #neopronouns #gender-neutral language #uk

[communistvashoth]

little. wafle about good omens and the queerbaiting thing

i want to preface this by saying i love both neil gaiman and terry pratchett; i love their books, i think they’re great authors, and i think they’ve both done wonderful, progressive things in their various works, good omens being no exception. i dont think good omens is awful and homophobic, im not trying to “cancel” anyone, i just want to share my perspective on why, maybe, in this instance, this time, neil gaiman has not handled this particular issue with all the grace and tact he maybe could have.

for the record, the stir about good omens and queerbaiting -which, from what i have seen, is a very gentle stir, more of a mild disgruntlement than actual, angry discourse- isn’t because “crowley and aziraphale didnt kiss/fuck on screen, therefore it’s not canon therefore it’s queerbaiting!”. i have seen literally no one say that. the reason people are put out, again, very mildly, is because it wasnt made canon in any way. it’s not that people think there must be kissing and/or fucking for a relationship to be canon. they could have said “i love you” or held hands or leaned their heads on each other’s shoulders or anything else like that. there are a million ways to communicate explicitly that two characters have a romantic relationship without showing kissing or fucking. and they also could have just not made them canon and not mentioned it, and be done with it. people would have been disappointed, but it wouldn’t really be queerbaiting.

the issue people have is that the possibility is brought up, but only as a joke; both the book and the show do this. someone consoles aziraphale on the street after seeing what they interpret as a break up between him and crowley, one of the angels calls crowley his boyfriend, shadwell calls him a pansy; in the book, aziraphale is literally described as appearing gay to people who meet him, anathema assumes he and crowley are a couple, and at one point, he’s called a f*ggot (which, im not pointing out as like a callout, it’s not shown as good, but it still happens). it’s just that when people said “hey, what about this, but genuinely?” that the response became “oh no, these man-shaped beings are actually genderless and don’t have sexualities and we won’t confirm or deny that they’re in love” which. is kind of a cop out. and i can respect authors leaving things ambiguous; no one is obligated to be explicit about things. but they’re not genderless anywhere else; they’re described as men, they look like men, they’re received and treated like men, they assume the roles of men, and they have their relationship called gay as a joke like men. if they’re not men enough to be gay, why are they men enough to be “f*ggot”?

the issue here, for many people, if being able to point to something and say “these characters are queer. this story is about queer love. queer love is valuable and beautiful and it belongs in stories, and it’s in this one, and you cant do anything about it.” saying “they aren’t queer but they aren’t not queer” does not give us that ability. 

AND THAT’S FINE

no one is obligated to make their work political like that. the problem arises when the interpretation “these characters are queer” is met with “no, they’re not, and you can’t prove they are” which it always, always is. characters are assumed heterosexual, always, period. queer interpretations will always take a back seat, they will always be seen as a bit weird and a bit ridiculous. so when there is nothing explicit in the text (meaning obvious, unassailable, indisputable) that marks a character or a relationship as queer, then it isn’t. it’s not canon unless it’s made canon. all the swelling music and longing looks in the world can be written off; if you have to write lists and essays as evidence that something is queer, it’s not canon. maybe it’s coded all to hell, but it’s no canon. and, again, that’s fine. what isnt fine, though, is actively making fun of the queer interpretation, within the text. if there is a joke or a jab from a villain about two people being “boyfriends” it only works if they’re not. if someone is called a “f*ggot” or “pansy” it’s only lighthearted if they’re not. if someone consoles a character about a break up, it’s only a joke if it’s a misunderstanding. so if those things are present in the text, and they are supposed to be jokes, they are textual evidence that the characters and relationship are not queer. and there are no equal and opposing jokes in support.

that is why people are unhappy. because they had the option of turning a joke of “look at these two guys, arent they gay, isnt that funny” into an actual queer story, and almost everyone wanted them to. and they weren’t afraid of pissing people off; they made adam and eve black, they gave god a woman’s voice, they made war a woman, they showed a quite brutal scene of jesus’ crucifixion, they made demons appealing and angels unsettling, they wrote a comedy about revelations, they were not worried about upsetting anyone. they could absolutely have made crowley and aziraphale queer. but they didn’t. they chose not to. neil gaiman chose not to. put that all together, and, yeah, that feels a lot like queerbaiting, especially since, from what i can tell, the crowley/aziraphale shippers have been the ones keeping their little fandom going for years. 

it’s not because people cant conceptualise of a romance denoted by anything but sexual intimacy. it’s because the story is full of gay jokes, but when people said, “so are they gay?” they got a noncommittal answer that every homophobic asshole will point to for the rest of time as evidence that there’s nothing queer in the canon, and they’ll be right. 

#my posts #good omens #good omens spoilers

[dunkerliciousness]

Reading between the Lines: The Bible as a product of its authors’ time

Author's Note: An English B.A. means I went to college to do a lot of reading. All I've done in the past four years is learn how to read and interpret text. Turns out, I'm not so bad at it. I graduated summa cum laude, so I didn't just "pass.” With that out of the way, let's dive in. This lesson is for Christians and non-Christians. There's actually classes on Bible as Literature offered at multiple universities and colleges. The Bible is no longer for the high courts to interpret and pass down on to the “common folk.” The Bible is for everyone. Like any text, it can be read and interpreted differently by everyone, but it’s important to understand the main points and how what we read affects us as the reader.

From a Christian point of view, as believers, we understand the Bible is representative as the Word of God. We also know that God did not physically write the Bible. The only text the Bible says God "wrote" are the Ten Commandments, and Moses broke them. Arguably, the Ten Commandments are the only "rules" that are plausibly God's actual Word. As for the rest of the Bible, it wasn't written by God; it was written by man, inspired by God. The problem with man writing the Bible is that man isn't God. Humanity is flawed, imperfect, and causal for human error. Subjectivity is man’s best and worst trait. I say man, because the only books in the Bible we have today were originally written (and then translated) by men. More on that later.

People are the products of their generations and their times. The values instilled into people by society can be shaken, but often times, people reflect what they believe, how they act, and what they write. When men wrote the Bible, they were products of their time. Notice that the entire Old Testament sounds pretty archaic: sacrifices, rituals, weird rules, and a bunch of men's names to show genealogy. It's the stories of old, the beginnings of the Christian faith that are important to understand, and the New Testament was written to show how the faith has changed with Jesus’ coming and going.

Today we face racism, sexism, and homophobia. Many Christians cite the Old Testament when it comes to why they believe this and that: Why people should still own slaves, why women should still be subservant to men, why queer people are wrong in their sexuality. Now that it’s the 21st century, explaining why racism and sexism are wrong sounds like a chore and a redundant thing to say, but I will focus on sexuality, because that’s arguably one of the main issues people face in the collective movement for furthering human rights.

The Bible verses that mention sexuality are commonly referenced from the Old Testament, but there are a few references of sexuality in the New Testament. The favored verse against homosexuality is Leviticus 18: 22, which states, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Let’s unpack that.

What the Old Testament denotes is a heavily patriarchal influenced society. The Old Testament mentions homosexuality a couple of times, though homosexuality is not the main argument of the Old Testament. Homosexuality is mentioned briefly while many other concepts are focused upon. To understand the Old Testament, we have to read it with the cultural and social perspective of the times. The Bible was written 2,000+ years ago, and like any society during that time (and today), society was substantially patriarchal in its values concerning gender and power. Men were the heads of their families and homes, and the only ones with power in government, church, and society.

Lev. 18:22, among many other quotes from the Bible, lies within the rules that guided their patriarchal society. Note the other rules about relationships between men and women (men are the heads and women should submit), the entire genealogy that excluded women’s names (since women’s names were invaluable in the grand scheme of a man’s value to the family), and how the women depicted in the Bible were seen as prizes to be won by men, gifts to be given by fathers, concubines (sexual servants), and valued by how many children (particularly sons) they could produce. The few women mentioned in the Bible were heroines in their own right, but considering the problems they faced, many of the problems they faced were direct results of patriarchal values of women’s worth and independence. That’s a separate topic for another time though.

When Lev. 18:22 said men shouldn’t “lie” with men, a patriarchal perspective of two men engaging in intercourse like they would with women denotes one partner’s submissiveness to the other. For one man to give up his power to another in a patriarchal society, where toxic masculinity defines worth based on men’s power, would be considered an abhorrent error, an “abomination” if you will. What made a man during this time was the power he held. To say a man’s power was lost because he had consented his power to another, to be vulnerable with another man, is damaging in relations to both men and women. If having sex with a man (or more specifically, being the submissive partner during intercourse), is seen as weakness and denotes inferiority, then women’s worth and power is nonexistent. Defining sex with a man, or being a submissive partner, as an “abomination” disregards our concept of love and consensual sex, where both parties are equal.

If we take what the Bible says literally, without regard to the cultural and social values of that age, we aren’t comprehending the full substance of the text. If you’ve ever heard the phrase “Read between the lines,” it’s because our teachers are trying to instill in us that more is being said than just what’s written. There’s several levels that go into written form, including social values and cultural understandings of communication. If we read the Bible with the same mind frame as when it was written, we can understand why certain rules were held above others, and why other sins weren’t mentioned altogether. 

There are many sins the Bible doesn’t list, not because other sins are less important, but because during those times, the authors of the Bible didn’t think to mention what we now understand as sinful. Sins that aren’t listed include slavery, domestic violence, pedophilia, poison, animal abuse, unethical treatment of patients by doctors, bullying, sexual harassment, battery assault, child abuse, etc. These are modern issues we face today; these weren’t issues that Biblical times faced because their social focus was different from ours.

Ask yourself this: How would the Bible be different if women wrote all the books, or if women had written some of the books? How would the Bible be read if we had all of the books available to us, not the ones the Christian Church hand-selected when it was translated into English centuries ago? When we read the Bible, the spiritual advice available to us still applies, but what other pieces of information seems out of place in our modern society? What can we learn from the history of Christianity, and how the faith has changed in thousand years? 

As a fundamental rule, Christians should read the Bible as a guide to understanding the history of Christianity and how their faith has been and can be shaped from reading the Bible. Despite how the Bible’s authors expressed their culture through a patriarchal lens, readers in this current era need to see past the perspective the authors are applying and understand the fundamental message of the Bible: Spread the love.

#spread the love #faith #religion #Bible #gay #queer #patriarchy #feminism #gender #equality #interpretation #English #human rights

[criticalinvert]

Queer chic is now so chic in metrosexual circles that the "straight queer" is everywhere to be found. GQ sketched out a "Spectrum of Gay Positivity" that ranged from "Active in Gay Causes" (Barbra Streisand, Elizabeth Taylor) to "Appropriating Gay Characteristics" (Markie Mark, Prince), "Professing One's Own Inner Gayness" (Kurt Cobain, Sharon Stone), and "Pretending to Be Gay" (Madonna, certain college students). "Fumbling disclosures of omnisexuality" were viewed as a necessary awkward stage through which the "cultural elite" was passing-part of the price of ultimate social acceptance and assimilation, "until gay culture becomes boringly familiar to Americans, like hip-hop in the suburbs and Protestant-Catholic intermarriage." This will not, it seems safe to say, happen tomorrow. But is what GQ dubbed the "queer-is-cool philosophy" a fashion or a sexuality? Or is there any difference?  "Queer" sounds quite different when used as a term for oneself than it does when it is shouted or sneered from the street corner. Its power as an aggressive generalization, a refusal to accept "a minoritizing logic of toleration or simple political interest-representation" in favor of a "resistance to regimes of the normal,"" makes the term a powerful theoretical tool for queer theorists. The word's in-your-face qualities, what lesbian playwright Holly Hughes called its "cringe factor,"93 have contributed to its popularization, against the theoretical grain, by people, especially young people, who are adamantly not interested in "theory." Yet as many participants in the new sexuality debates stress, "queer" has real drawbacks when specificity and representation are required. It is a postmodern label with roots in fashion and discourse, and an appealing omnipresence in early twentieth-century literary and cultural texts ("You're a queer one, Julie Jordan") that seems to validate the historical existence of "queer people" before the queer movement, and Queer Nation, took off. But despite its value as a political slogan, "queer" is not, finally and fundamentally, an easy political term. Lesbian and gay writers from Terry Castle to Eric Marcus have expressed doubts about its pertinence, since it erodes the very specificity they consider crucial. "The term queer has lately become popular in activist and progressive academic circles in part, it seems to me, precisely because it makes it easy to enfold female homosexuality back 'into' male homosexuality and disembody the lesbian once again," writes Castle. "To the extent that 'queer theory' still seems . . . to denote primarily the study of male homosexuality, I find myself at odds with both its language and its universalizing aspirations." "Queer performativity" has its own cultural power among those who know what "performativity" means. For the person in the street (or on the street corner), however, "queer" often remains, culturally and discursively speaking, a matter of style and rhetoric. It's popular with some young people and some academics, but its universalizing impulse is (designedly) at odds with its joyful claim of stigmatization. Precisely because of the ambivalently exclusive mantle of "chic," it's unlikely that "everybody's queer" will replace the cliche "everybody's bisexual" in the near future.

Garber, Marjorie. (2000). Bisexuality and the Eroticism of Everyday Life.

#marjorie garber #bisexuality #queer

[roidespd-blog]

Chapter Twenty-Four : T as in TRANSGENDER

Let’s run down our Queer alphabet. I did the G for sure because patriarchy. I did the L. The L was an interesting journey. Obviously, I did the B, I may have overdid it at times. Okay, are we done ? What do you mean, no ? T ? Uh ?

WHAT’S THE T ?

Transgender : denoting or relating to a person whose of sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex.

We previously talked about gender identity and how sometimes, it may differ from the sex you were assigned at birth. Well, still true but that’s just the basic info everyone is supposed to know about. The word transgender, coined by Psychiatrist John F. Oliven in his 1965 book Sexual Hygiene and Pathology, is actually as much an proper identity as it is an umbrella term to many variables in the Trans community. We’ll get to that in a minute.

4500 YEARS IN THE PAST (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ambitious Storytelling in a Amateurish Article)

In broad terms, the History of transgender people begins in ancient Sumerian and Akkadian civilizations, as texts from over 4500 years ago mention transgender priests and prostitutes (remember, oldest job in the world). Some reports suggest that the idea of a third gender came from prehistoric times. They were known Trans priests in Ancient Greece, Phrygia and Rome while an Roman Emperor called Elagabalus preferred the use of “lady” instead of “lord” when addressed to. Variables from the trans community umbrella comes from the fact that there is shared History between transgender people, intersex people and even Second Spirit individuals from the Navajo community. Hijras (India), Kathoeys (Thailand) and Khanith (Arabia) have importance and recognized identities when it comes to the question of gender around the world. They are reports of transitions from male to female and female to male as early as the 1800s, with musicians (Billy Tipton), soldiers (Albert Cashier) and painters (Lili Elbe) coming to terms with their identity reassignment.

Lili, in fact, is famous for becoming one of the first woman to go through vaginoplasty in 1931. She went to Germany to undergo four different operations over a period of two years. Her immune system rejected the final operation (construction of a vagina and implementation of a uterus), and her body developed an infection. She died on September 13, 1931. Her life was immortalized in 2000’s The Danish Girl written by David Ebershoff, followed by a movie adaption from Tom Hooper (2015).

To be honest, the History of Transgender people in the world is so vast and varied, I’m getting overwhelmed. The Tale of Two Brothers from Ancient Egypt. Tribes from West Africa who did not assigned gender to their children until the age of five (In Central Africa, one can be genderless until puberty). The great tradition of dan roles in China since at least the Mind and Qing dynasties. The story of Esther Brandeau/Jacques La Fargue from 18th century Canada. Frances Thompson, a formerly enslaved black trans woman, one of five to testify in front of a U.S. congressional committee in 1866. Zuni Ihamana We’wha who became a cultural ambassador of her/his people in 1896. Danica Roem… Oh Danica Roem. Remind me to talk about Danica Roem later.

And now, it sounds like we’re not defining Trans identity properly as I’ve just mentioned Intersex and Cross-Dressing performers. Well, History is messy. Although they officially differ from one another now, they were more obscure concepts back then (and before “then” was a “then”).

DO NOT CONFUSE (PRESENT EDITION)

The first notion that a ignorant could have, based on lack of informations and overbearing sense of historic confusion, is that Transsexual and Transgender are synonyms. In fact, yes, Transsexual is a term that was used for a long ass time to define transgender people. It has since been rejected by a big part of the trans community. For now, transsexual is a subset of the umbrella that is Transgender. For a transgender person, the notion that “sexual” is used at to refer to their gender identity is extremely reductive. If you are still confused and one day you meet a openly out trans man or woman, don’t put your fist in your mouth flipping a coin to figure out what term suits them best. Just ask. Politely. A Transgender individual is also not to be confused with Transvestites. Transvestite : Someone who derives pleasure from dressing in clothes primarily associated with the opposite sex. First of all, transvestite is kind of an outdated term that was used in such a negative way I almost find it insulting (although it shouldn’t). Know that transvestism has nothing to do with gender identity. It’s the pleasure to put on clothes that do not belong to your gender category. A transvestite gay man stays a gay man. In some cases (but not all), the act of transvestism is developed as a fetish and provokes sexual arousal.

One synonym of the term would be cross-dressing, which was coined after some members of the post-Stonewall Riots group Street Transvestite ActionRevolutionaries, founded by Sylvia Rivera (1971) complained about the use of the term Transvestite. One newly-named long-lost cousin derivative of this is the term Genderfuck (or GenderBender), in which an individual will dress regardless of the binary concepts of fashion and clothing.

Do not confuse Transgender with the Art of Drag. Yes, you’re straight but hyped, you kiki in front of RuPaul’s Drag Race from time to time because they’re so funny and flamboyant. Yes. Yes. Being a Drag Queen is basically being a Cross-Dresser, except that this is a vocation, a paid job if you are lucky. Drag Queens are performers, pretty damn good ones at that, and their gender and sexual identities have nothing to do with how they pay the rent. If you read the June 11th article on RuPaul, you’ll see the details on the scandal Ru created about transgender people. Know that some Drag Queens are transgender and they can keep on being fabulous Drag Queens. Oh, and Drag Kings are a thing too. They just don’t have an Emmy Award-winning show to popularize them.

I will talk about Intersex people and their ancestry and connections to the Trans community, but not today.

PROCCESS

As a Transgender person, you usually feel a disconnection at a very young age between who you are in your head and what body was given to you by a non-existent God Almighty. When a person starts to go into transition (Process of changing one’s gender presentation and/or sex characteristics to accord with one’s internal sense of gender identity — the “and/or” is crucially important) he/she/they makes a conscious personal decision. Careful, you cannot confuse Transitioning with Sex Reassignment Surgery (or SRS), which is only an option. Transitioning is a holistic process and includes many physical, psychological, social and emotional changes.

On the social side, the first step would be to come out. A gay man or woman does not simply go from one gender to another, he/she/they has to redo the entire terrible dance of announcing your gender identity. Through that process, a new name might be chosen by the individual, with the proper set of pronouns. Since it’s a process that can be years in the making, the person transitioning might start to wear different clothing and accessories, style their hair differently, ease themselves into his/her/their real self.

Whether of not he/she/they go through with SRS is totally up to the individual. In the times of Lili Elbe, you could not consider yourself a transgender person unless SRS was performed. You would have been a transvestite. Today, as the laws progressed (very slowly and very recently), only the decision and the social and psychological changes are factors into transitioning legally.

Also, if you ever wonder in a transperson went through surgery, just dont. IT’S NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, YOU DOUCHEFUCK.

On the medical side, the use of hormone therapy to create feminine or masculine characteristics is a major step into the transition (again, not an obligation). For trans women, surgeries can include breast implants, orchiectomy, laser hair removal, tracheal shave, facial feminization and penile inversion vaginoplasty. For trans men, male chest reconstruction, hysterectomy, phalloplasty and metoidioplasty are options to explore.

You also need a trustworthy doctor by your side to help you through your transition. Using hormones without medical guidance is dangerous and you may risk serious complications.

The point is, not all transgender people transition “completely” or even at all. The ways of some are not those of others. It may be a personal choice or a financial one, as those surgeries are very expansive and not always part of your insurance package (in the States, for example). Nevertheless, a person’s gender identity should always be respected no matter how they decide to transition socially or medically.

TRANS UNDER THE LAW

They are still a lot of places in the world where Transgender people are not protected under the law, where they cannot access the public bathroom of their gender based of bigotry ideas and religious fanaticism. There’s also discrimination in work places, many other public services, in health care.

In the United States, where you can be recognized as Trans, an Employment Non-Discrimination Act was stalled and failed several times over the last two decades. Each state now have choices of legislation in the matter. Mr. Orange is quickly taking back what was giving over the years to Trans people, such as the right to serve in the United States Armed Forces. Furthermore, Trans black women are still the most in danger population on record. As recently at early, the body of 26 year-old Chynal Lindsey was found. It’s the second unsolved murder of a trans black woman in the spam of a few weeks, fourth in three years in Dallas alone.

Did you know that until January of 2018, France was asking their transgender citizens to go through obligatory sterilization, a direct violation of human rights (decision made the European Court of Human Rights in April 2017) ? 20 countries in Europe were implementing that rule, while 36 still require mental health diagnosis in order to get legal gender recognition. Back to France. Laws to protect trans people started to be talked about as early as the late 70s. Twice, in 1981 and 1982, a law failed to pass. Meanwhile, transpeople were still considered psychiatric cases when in need of hospital care, and that until 2010. Since the 2016 case of a young trans woman who didn’t want to go through any surgery and still change her legal name, shit have moved around in the right direction. With the non-obligation to be sterilized came the possibility to change one’s name more easily, not based on any invasive medical procedures. You need to prove that that name represents your real identity, that’s it’s been used that others for quite some time and the change would harm your psychological well-being. New rules about minors who want to transition have also been add up to the law. They can change their names at age 12. The birth certificate can be modified at age 16. Transphobia is punishable through many updated laws when it comes to slurs, defamation, sexual harassment and discrimination.

And yet, trans people don’t feel safe. I wonder why.

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY NOTHING

2017 and 2018 were the deadliest years for Transgender Americans, with over 50 deaths in 24 months. Cases of Transgender people being arrested for crimes that were not crimes are basically limitless at this point. The Transgender community is still the most rejected of them all. Have you ever wondered how you would react if Pierre was suddenly in the process of becoming Vanessa, her real self ? The answer is not relevant. Vanessa would not have the support of her family, her uneducated friends would try to ditch her faster than you can say vaginoplasty and her boss would find a way to make her feel unwelcome. People have not been properly educated. They get easily confused with pronouns, so to understand the difficult process of gender dysphoria ?

Gender Dysphoria : the distress a person feels due to their birth-assigned sex and gender not matching their gender identity. My mama once told me that the fact that I was gay took time for her to process but she never stopped loving me. When I asked her “what if I was transgender ?” she replied “Oh no Alex. Not that. I don’t think I would accept that”. My mama’s no bigot. She is just so uninformed that she automatically rejects any foreign ideas. That’s why representation is so fucking important, so.

WE CAN BE HEROES

Long gone are the days where the only trans people on television were played by cisgender actors and were called “transvestite hooker #2”. It started with a bang with Hilary Swank in Boys Don’t Cry (1999), it slowly went to more recognition with Felicity Huffman in Transamerica (2005) to continue through Jared Leto in Dallas Buyers Club (2013). All fine performances by three cisgender folks. I’m not even gonna mention prior appearances of trans characters, they are just so offensive.

The real revolution started in July of 2013, when the character of Sofia, played by Laverne Cox, was introduced to the world by Netflix. A transgender character played by a transgender actress. She went on to be nominated for the Primetime Emmy Award for Guest Actress. Twice. The consecration came a year later when Cox made the cover of Time magazine. It was called a “transgender tipping point”. 

In 2014, Transparent debuted its first season on Amazon. Let’s not forget the Tambor scandal, yes, but it would be a shame to not celebrate the work of non-binary individual Jill Soloway, who gave trans people a platform — as except for Tambor and Whitford characters, all the trans characters were played by transgender people. in 2015, Caitlyn Jenner made the cover of Vanity Fair, officially announcing her transition. She’s a terrible person. I won’t say otherwise because she’s a trans women. A terrible person is a terrible person. In 2017, A Fantastic Woman won Best Foreign Film at the Academy Awards. First, it’s an incredible movie. Second, it served as a response from the government trying to erase the trans community from existence in the military. An incredibly realistic portrayal of a trans character in Shameless (played by the gorgeous Elliot Fletcher) in also to be noted. 

In 2018, Pose premiered its first episode. I’ve already talked about Pose so much. I’m not getting into too much detail again. It’s major.

I’ll just say this : I went back to work on Friday. I work at an english bookstore, you see. In the press department. And There she was. Indya Moore. On the cover of Elle US. My jaw dropped on the floor. A trans woman on the cover of one of the most popular fashion magazine in the world. I’m sorry but MILESTONE. 

Scarlett Johansson having to quit a movie where she was gonna play a transgender person because of the outpour of rage that followed ? PRICELESS MILESTONE. Janet Mock becoming the first transgender person to direct an episode of television ? MILESTONE TO INFINITY. Supergirl just introduced the TV’s first transgender superhero, played by Nicole Maines. I’ve said it before. Get the kids on board and then, jackpot. In France, activist-turned-actor Adrian de La Vega and actor Océan (who documentary feature is available for streaming right now!) are making incredible waves for the french trans community.

My god… DANICA ROEM ! This american journalist was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2017, becoming the first transgender person to both be elected and serve in any U.S. state legislature. She famously answered to a chance to attack her republican counterpart in the race (Bob Marshall, nicknamed the commonwealth’s “chief homophobe”) by these simple words : “I don’t attack my constituents. Bob is my constituent now.”

GET YOUR PRIORITIES STRAIGHT… WELL, TRANSGHT

Queer people, here’s my daily message on repeat : GIVE MORE TO THE TRANS COMMUNITY. Stop looking at yourselves in the gym mirrors and focus : Trans people be should OUR top priority. We are letting our siblings in the mud while we parade with pride. Enough. Each new Pride should be first of foremost about trans rights and how we can protect them. AS FAST AS WE CAN. Here we have brave men and women having the courage to live as their true selves, we are one of the same. No dancing on Robyn’s music until the entire crowd starts screaming “TRANS RIGHTS NOW ! TRANS RIGHTS NOW !” I’m not hearing you. LOUDER.

[unhingedthinking]

This is going to be a long winded and academically minded post regarding my research area and its application to my PhD, so apologies in advance if this is not up your alley. Just thought I’d throw it out to the internet to discuss/get some thoughts as there’s not exactly a large base of academics in my area at my university.

Any educhums who are interested in this line of thinking ( @undermybelljar​ are you using queer theory in your masters? I’d love to know what your take on this is), or academic type people, let me know what you think?

Here’s my deal. Presently for my PhD, I’m aiming on researching how teacher educators (lecturers, tutors, etc) within initial teacher educator programs (preservice teacher courses, particularly those of the undergraduate bachelors or graduate diploma variety) construct gender and sexuality in order to teach these concepts to preservice teachers. Now this is framed within a hella crazy witchcraft looking magic circle theoretical framework that incorporates the works of Dorothy Smith’s Institutional Ethnography, Michel Foucault’s notion of discourse (particularly archaeological digging through discourse), and Queer/Post-Queer theory.

The study starts with an IE mapping, before moving to a second tier analysis utilising discourse and queer framing. However, I’m having an issue with the ontology of queer theory from its theoretical standpoint towards destabilising normative practices.

From my understanding (and I’ll admit that my understanding is still not as in depth as what I would like it to be), queer theory is a theoretical standpoint that attempts to destabilise normative practices in order to understand how they operate within society (for example, how schools are inherently heteronormative - they are geared toward heterosexuality as the normalised lifestyle, which can be found in things like subject selection, school policies, social events, etc.). This is a useful tool, which was pioneered and moved from people who are from LGBT+ identified backgrounds, and has been used to progress ideas and reforms for the LGBT community for many years.

However, Like many other academics, I’ve come to view queer research as predominantly based in a sense of ‘woundedness’ - that we only approach queer research from a place where we must ‘fix’ issues faced by the LGBTQ community (such as school bullying, rampant homophobia, SSA suicides and drug addiction). I think it was Sedgewick that said something along the lines of everyone who goes into queer research is haunted by the deaths of LGBTQ youth. And while I think that is still a valid reason to do research within these areas for both political and social change, I’m more along the lines of thinking that have been slowly coming to the forefront of queer research in the sense that we need to move away from seeing LGBTQ people as something that needs to be fixed (re: a restorative approach) to more of LGBTQ being agents in the solution. 

This led me to the field of post-queer (sometimes referred to as after-queer). Now I should clarify that this is not a theoretical movement that denotes the end of queer theory. Rather it’s an ontological shift towards new ways of thinking of how to approach queer theory. There’s a thesis that I’m currently reading by David Ruffolo on post-queer perspectives that is really challenging me in terms of my thinking of discourses and the notion of how we socially construct the body. It steps through the ideas of Foucault, who is defined as viewing the body as ‘prediscursive’ (the body is already in being, it is merely interpreted by the discursive practices of society to represent particular discourses that enact power relations). It then moves to Judith Butler and her notion of performativity, defining her construction of the body as ‘discursive’ (the body and culture is constructed through social interactions that form a pattern over time to create normative notions of the body). The most interesting is Ruffolo’s own interpretation fo the post-queer body, which he describes as ‘dialogically becoming’. Essentially this boils down to the idea that we construct the body in such complexity that we cannot possibly understand everything, and therefore only interpret what we know and understand. This is based off of the works of Deleuze and Guattari and their notion of the war machine and nomadology, which is in a sense the notion that the body is culture, and we ‘destroy it’ only to recreate it with every new interaction. therefore, it steps away from Butler’s interpretation of the body in the sense that we are not simply just performing culturally recognised discourses of sex, gender, and sex categories in order to render the body intelligible within society, rather we are creating of identity within every new interaction - that we are in a permanent state of ‘becoming’.

Now if you’re still with me, I’m guessing you probably are thinking “Jarred, what the hell has this got to do with teaching presevice teachers?” Never fear, the answer to this is that I’m looking specifically at ‘enactment’ - how do we get from the constructions of gender and sexuality to the actual teaching of it. The Institutional Ethnography takes care of the how it is constructed and the means upon which it is taught through identifying the texts used to create these concepts and teach them. But I need to identify how these gender and sexuality constructions work within the teaching environment - how are they presented, are they reinforcing particular constructions, are they marginalising or omitting others? What are the implications of these in terms of normalising a particular viewpoint of gender and sexuality? How do these viewpoints become normalised? Why are they normalised? How are these discourses related in terms of power?

This is where my issue with queer theory kicks in. Whilst I understand that identifying these representations are important, I feel like I’m coming from a post-queer perspective more in the sense of labelling. Queer theory, for all of its uses, has become entrenched in this sense of ‘othering’. I’m talking about the sense that there’s this plethora of research over the span of the past 30 years that looks at how heteronormativity affects the lives of people who are homosexual, bisexual, trans*, intersex, gay, lesbian, etc. etc. There’s this sense that we’re so focused on seeing how visibility needs to be recognised as its own separate identity from heterosexuality and society itself, that I feel like we haven’t stopped to question “is it really necessary to define sexual identities wtihin queer research?”

Before you start shooting me down here and saying “of course visibility is important!” Let me break down my thinking in this question a little further, as this is where my tension between queer theory and post-queer theory is currently sitting. 

The strides in queer research have largely been driven by research that has visibly ‘queer’ subjects (by queer here I’m referring to same sex attracted, trans, intersex, or identities that fall outside of heterosexuality). This, while good, brings me back to the thinking of early PhD days where my supervisors were discussing the idea of discourse. The discussion went along the lines of “by defining something by what it is, you are also defining it by what it is not.” This notion has stuck with me and is probably what has been niggling at me about queer theory as a theoretical lens as I’ve slowly been developing the queer theory aspect of this research project. I’m of the feeling that while visibility is important, you should not have to be visible to access the same resources that those who choose to be visible do. There are a multitude of people who do not wish to be visible in their sexuality for whatever reason, from fear for their safety (physical, mental, financial, social, or otherwise), to those who simply feel that others don’t need to know their sexuality unless they are wanting to engage in sexual activities (this is not just physical btw). Or for the reason that they don’t feel like they fit the labels of LGBTQ, or because their sexuality is not a major part of their identity (which gets into the topic of homonormativity, which is an entirely separate debate). This last point is one that is probably close to a lot of people (myself included). Whilst I am definitely not heterosexual within the definition of the identity, I don’t define myself as queer, or homosexual, or bisexual, or any form of sexuality. I’m very much in the sense that my sexuality is not a core part of my identity, rather it’s something that floats around in the periphery that I don’t really think about. Which is why it irks me when everything comes back to the question of “how does this support people who are LGBT?”

My tension comes from this particular question. In my own theoretical underpinnings of how I want to approach queer theory is from this lens of post-queer. I don’t wish to define sexuality in the sense of heteronormative and nonheteronormative constructions. I use the term “gender and sexually diverse”, but with a difference from that which other scholars using the terminology employ it: I consider heterosexuality to be a part of my definition of gender and sexually diverse. Let me clarify that I don’t mean this in the sense that “oh straight people need a space here too”, but more in the sense that heterosexuality is still a sexuality, and therefore it should be included in diverse gender and sexualities without it being given the front and centre as the ‘ideal’ that is being put forward right now within western cultures. By utilising the term gender and sexually diverse, I feel like I’m not limiting my study to the rigorously policed identities that are LGBTQ. Instead, I am allowing a more flexible flow of mapping gender and sexuality constructions to occur and identify them through the constructions of the they are created in order to better understand how they create new ways of understanding how power relations within gender and sexuality construction that don’t rely on the explicit labels or integral sexuality identity to be visible to identify them.

I don’t know, I could be being too out field for this kind of thinking. I still haven’t delved deep enough into post-queer thinking to see if this is how they define it as well. Just an idea of where I want to take it within my own personal research and future academic work within this field of thinking.

I’m curious to see what others think (at least, if you’ve lasted this long in my overly long rambling), so if you’ve got a different take on this, let me know :)

#educhums #academic #queer theory #this is just spitballing here