#because her relationship with her gender is queer. because she is gender-variant | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

canichangemyblogname · 2 months

Text

I watched all eight episodes of season 1 of Blue Eye Samurai over the weekend. I then went browsing because I wanted to read some online reviews of the show to see what people were thinking of it and also because I wanted to interact with gifs and art, as the series is visually stunning.

Yet, in my search for opinions on the show, I came across several points I'd like to address in my own words:

Mizu’s history and identity are revealed piece-by-piece and the “peaches” scene with Mizu and Ringo at the lake is intended to be a major character reveal. I think it’s weird that some viewers got angry over other viewers intentionally not gendering Mizu until that reveal, rather than immediately jumping to gender the character as the other characters in the show do. The creators intentionally left Mizu’s gender and sexuality ambiguous (and quite literally wrote in lines to lead audiences to question both) to challenge the viewer’s gut assumption that this lone wolf samurai is a man. That intentional ambiguity will lead to wide and ambiguous interpretations of where Mizu fits in, if Mizu fits in at all. But don't just take my word for this:

Re: above. I also think it’s weird that some viewers got upset over other viewers continuing to acknowledge that Mizu has a very complicated relationship with her gender, even after that reveal. Canonically, she has a very complicated relationship with her identity. The character is intended to represent liminality in identity, where she’s often between identities in a world of forced binaries that aren’t (widely) socially recognized as binaries. But, again, don’t just take my word for this:

Mizu is both white and Japanese, but she is also not white and not Japanese simultaneously (too white to be Japanese and too Japanese to be white). She’s a woman and a man. She’s a man who’s a woman. She’s also a woman who’s not a woman (yet also not quite a man). But she’s also a woman; the creators said so. Mizu was raised as a boy and grew into a man, yet she was born a girl, and boyhood was imposed upon her. She’s a woman when she’s a man, a man when she’s a man, and a woman when she’s a woman.

Additionally, Mizu straddles the line between human and demon. She’s a human in the sense she’s mortal but a demon in the sense she’s not. She's human yet otherworldly. She's fallible yet greatness. She's both the ronin and the bride, the samurai and the onryō. In short, it’s complicated, and that’s the point. Ignoring that ignores a large part of her internal character struggle and development.

Mizu is intended to represent an “other,” someone who stands outside her society in every way and goes to lengths to hide this “otherness” to get by. Gender is a mask; a tool. She either hides behind a wide-brimmed hat, glasses, and laconic anger, or she hides behind makeup, her dress, and a frown. She fits in nowhere, no matter the identity she assumes. Mizu lives in a very different time period within a very different sociocultural & political system where the concept of gender and the language surrounding it is unlike what we are familiar with in our every-day lives. But, again, don’t just take my word for this:

It’s also weird that some viewers have gotten upset over the fact women and queer people (and especially queer women) see themselves in Mizu. Given her complicated relationship with identity under the patriarchy and colonial violence, I think Mizu is a great character for cis-het women and queer folks alike to relate to. Her character is also great for how she breaks the mold on the role of a biracial character in narratives about identity (she’s not some great bridge who will unite everyone). It does not hurt anyone that gender-fluid and nonbinary people see themselves in Mizu's identity and struggle with identity. It does not hurt anyone that lesbians see themselves in the way Mizu expresses her gender. It does not hurt anyone that trans men see themselves in Mizu's relationship with manhood or that trans women can see themselves in Mizu when Mama forces her to be a boy. It's also really cool that cis-het women see themselves in Mizu's struggles to find herself. Those upset over these things are missing critical aspects of Mizu's character and are no different from the other characters in the story. The only time Mizu is herself is when she’s just Mizu (“…her gender was Mizu”), and many of the other characters are unwilling to accept "just Mizu." Accepting her means accepting the complicatedness of her gender.

Being a woman under the patriarchy is complicated and gives women a complicated relationship with their gender and identity. It is dangerous to be a woman. Women face violence for being women. Being someone who challenges sex-prescribed norms and roles under patriarchy also gives someone a complicated relationship with their identity. It is dangerous to usurp gender norms and roles (then combine that with being a woman...). People who challenge the strict boxes they're assigned face violence for existing, too. Being a racial or ethnic minority in a racially homogeneous political system additionally gives someone a complicated relationship with their identity. It is dangerous to be an ethnic minority when the political system is reproduced on your exclusion and otherness. They, too, face violence for the circumstances of their birth. All of these things are true. None of them take away from the other.

Mizu is young-- in her early 20s-- and she has been hurt in deeply affecting ways. She's angry because she's been hurt in so many different ways. She's been hurt by gender violence, like "mama's" misogyny and the situation of her birth (her mother's rape and her near murder as a child), not to mention the violent and dehumanizing treatment of the women around her. She's been hurt by racial violence, like the way she has been tormented and abused since childhood for the way she looks (with people twice trying to kill her for this before adulthood). She's been hurt by state-sanctioned violence as she faces off against the opium, flesh, and black market traders working with white men in contravention of the Shogun's very policies, yet with sanction from the Shogun. She's been hurt by colonial violence, like the circumstances of her birth and the flood of human trafficking and weapons and drug trafficking in her country. She's had men break her bones and knock her down before, but only Fowler sexually differentiated her based on bone density and fracture.

Mizu also straddles the line between victim and murderer.

It seems like Mizu finding her 'feminine' and coming to terms with her 'female side' may be a part of her future character development. Women who feel caged by modern patriarchal systems and alienated from their bodies due to the patriarchy will see themselves in Mizu. They understand a desire for freedom that the narrow archetypes of the patriarchy do not afford them as women, and they see their anger and their desire for freedom in Mizu. This, especially considering that Mizu's development was driven by one of the creators' own experiences with womanhood:

No, Mizu does not pass as a man because she "hates women" or because she hates herself as a woman or being a woman. There are actual on-screen depictions of Mizu's misogyny, like her interactions with Akemi, and dressing like a man is not an instance of this. Mizu shows no discomfort with being a woman or being seen as a woman, especially when she intends to pass herself as and present as a woman. Mizu also shows the women in the series more grace and consideration than any man in the show, in whatever capacity available to her socially and politically, without revealing herself; many of the women have remarked that she is quite unlike other men, and she's okay with that, too.

When she lives on the farm with Mama and Mikio, Mizu shows no discomfort once she acclimates to the new life. But people take this as conclusive evidence of the "only time" she was happy. She was not. This life was also a dance, a performance. The story of her being both the ronin and the onryō revealed to the audience that this lifestyle also requires her to wear a mask and dance, just as the bride does. This mask is makeup, a wedding dress, and submission, and this performance is her gender as a wife. She still understands that she cannot fully be herself and only begins to express happiness and shed her reservation when she believes she is finally safe to be herself. Only to be betrayed. Being a man is her safety, and it is familiar. Being a boy protected her from the white men as a child, and it might protect her heart now.

Mizu shows no discomfort with being known as a woman, except when it potentially threatens her goals (see Ringo and the "peaches" scene). She also shows no discomfort with being known as, seen as, or referred to as a man. As an adult, she seems okay- even familiar- with people assuming she's a man and placing her into the role of a man. Yet, being born a girl who has boyhood violently imposed upon her (she did not choose what mama did to her) is also an incredibly important part of her lived experience. Being forced into boyhood, but growing into a man anyway became part of who she is. But, being a man isn’t just a part of who she became; it’s also expedient for her goals because men and women are ontologically different in her world and the system she lives under.

She's both because she's neither, because- ontologically- she fits nowhere. When other characters point out how "unlike" a man she is, she just shrugs it off, but not in a "well, yeah, because I'm NOT a man" sort of way, but in an "I'm unlike anyone, period," sort of way. She also does not seem offended by Madam Kaji saying that Mizu’s more man than any who have walked through her door.

(Mizu doesn’t even see herself as human, let alone a woman, as so defined by her society. And knowing that creators have stated her future arc is about coming into her “feminine era” or energy, I am actually scared that this show might fall into the trope of “domesticating”/“taming” the independent woman, complete with an allegory that her anger and lack of human-ness [in Mizu’s mind] is a result of a woman having too much “masculine energy” or being masculine in contravention of womanness.)

Some also seem to forget that once Mama and Mikio are dead, no one knows who she is or where she came from. They do not have her background, and they do not know about the bounty on her (who levied the bounty and why has not yet been explained). After their deaths, she could have gone free and started anew somehow. But in that moment, she chose to go back to life as a man and chose to pursue revenge for the circumstances of her birth. Going forward, this identity is no longer imposed upon her by Mama, or a result of erroneous conclusions from local kids and Master Eiji; it was because she wanted people to see her as a man and she was familiar with navigating her world, and thus her future, as a man. And it was because she was angry, too, and only men can act on their anger.

I do think it important to note that Mizu really began to allow herself to be vulnerable and open as a woman, until she was betrayed. The question I've been rattling around is: is this because she began to feel safe for the first time in her life, or is this part of how she sees women ontologically? Because she immediately returns to being a man and emotionally hard following her betrayal. But, she does seem willing to confide in Master Eiji, seek his advice, and convey her anxieties to him.

Being a man also confines Mizu to strict social boxes, and passing herself as a man is also dangerous.

Mizu doesn't suddenly get to do everything and anything she wants because she passes as a man. She has to consider her safety and the danger of her sex being "found out." She must also consider what will draw unnecessary attention to her and distract her from her goals. Many viewers, for example, were indignant that she did not offer to chaperone the mother and daughter and, instead, left them to the cold, only to drop some money at their feet later. The indignity fails consider that while she could bribe herself inside while passing as a man, she could not bribe in two strangers. Mizu is a strange man to that woman and does not necessarily have the social position to advocate for the mother and daughter. She also must consider that causing small social stirs would distract from her goals and draw certain attention to her. Mizu is also on a dangerous and violent quest.

Edo Japan was governed by strict class, age, and gender rules. Those rules applied to men as well as women. Mizu is still expected to act within these strict rules when she's a man. Being a man might allow her to pursue revenge, but she's still expected to put herself forward as a man, and that means following all the specific rules that apply to her class as a samurai, an artisan (or artist), and a man. That wide-brimmed hat, those orange-tinted glasses, and her laconic tendencies are also part of a performance. Being a boy is the first mask she wore and dance she performed, and she was originally (and tragically) forced into it.

Challenging the normative identities of her society does not guarantee her safety. She has limitations because of her "otherness," and the transgression of sex-prescribed roles has often landed people in hot water as opposed to saving them from boiling. Mizu is passing herself off as a man every day of her life at great risk to her. If her sex is "found out" on a larger scale, society won’t resort to or just start treating her as a woman. There are far worse fates than being perceived as a woman, and hers would not simply be a tsk-tsk, slap on the wrist; now you have to wear makeup. Let's not treat being a woman-- even with all the pressures, standards, fears, and risks that come with existing as a woman-- as the worst consequence for being ‘found out’ for transgressing normative identity.

The violence Mizu would face upon being "found out" won’t only be a consequence of being a "girl." Consider not just the fact she is female and “cross-dressing” (outside of theater), but also that she is a racial minority.

I also feel like many cis-het people either ignore or just cannot see the queerness in challenging gender roles (and thus also in stories that revolve around a subversion of sex-prescribed gender). They may not know how queerness-- or "otherness"-- leads to challenging strict social stratifications and binaries nor how challenging them is seen by the larger society as queer ("strange," "suspicious," "unconventional," even "dishonorable," and "fraudulent"), even when "queerness" (as in LGBTQ+) was not yet a concept as we understand it today.

Gender and sexuality- and the language we use to communicate who we are- varies greatly across time and culture. Edo Japan was governed by strict rules on what hairstyles, clothes, and weapons could be worn by which gender, age, and social group, and this was often enshrined in law. There were specific rules about who could have sex with whom and how. These values and rules were distinctly Japanese and would not incorporate Western influences until the late 1800s. Class was one of the most consequential features to define a person's fate in feudal Japan, and gender was quite stratified. This does not mean it's inappropriate for genderqueer people to see themselves in Mizu, nor does this mean that gender-variant identities didn’t exist in Edo Japan.

People in the past did not use the same language we do today to refer to themselves. Example: Alexander The Great did not call himself a "bisexual." We all understand this. However, there is a very weird trend of people using these differences in language and cultures across time to deny aspects of a historical person's life that societies today consider taboo, whether these aspects were considered taboo during that historical time period or not. Same example: people on Twitter complaining that Netflix "made" Alexander The Great "gay," and after people push back and point out that the man did, in fact, love and fuck men, hitting back with "homosexuality wasn't even a word back then" or "modern identity didn't exist back then." Sure, that word did not exist in 300s BCE Macedonia, but that doesn't mean the man didn't love men, nor does that mean that we can't recognize that he'd be considered "queer" by today's standards and language.

Genderqueer, as a word and as the concept is understood today, did not exist in feudal Japan, but the people did and feudal Japan had its own terms and concepts that referred to gender variance. But while the show takes place in Edo Japan, it is a modern adult animation series made by a French studio and two Americans (nationality). Mizu is additionally a fictional character, not a historical figure. She was not created in a vacuum. She was created in the 21st century and co-written by a man who got his start writing for Sex in the City and hails from a country that is in the midst of a giant moral panic about genderqueer/gender-variant people and gender non-conforming people.

This series was created by two Americans (nationality) for an American company. In some parts of that country, there are laws on the book strictly defining the bounds of men and women and dictating what clothes men and women could be prosecuted for wearing. Changes in language and identity over time mean that we can recognize that if Mizu lived in modern Texas, the law would consider her a drag performer, and modern political movements in the show creators' home country would include her under the queer umbrella.

So, yeah, there will also be genderqueer people who see themselves in Mizu, and there will be genderqueer fans who are firm about Mizu being queer to them and in their “headcanons.” The scene setting being Edo Japan, does not negate the modern ideas that influence the show. "Nonbinary didn't exist in Edo Japan" completely ignores that this show was created to explore the liminality of modern racial, gender, class, and normative identities. One of the creators was literally inspired by her own relationship with her biracial identity.

Ultimately, the fact Mizu, at this point in her journey, chooses to present and pass as a man and the fact her presented gender affects relationship dynamics with other characters (see: Taigen) gives this story a queer undertone. And this may have been largely unintentional: "She’s a girl, and he’s a guy, so, of course, they get together," < ignoring how said guy thinks she’s a guy and that she intentionally passes herself as a guy. Audiences ARE going to interpret this as queer because WE don’t live in Edo-era Japan. And I feel like people forget that Mizu can be a woman and the story can still have queer undertones to it at the same time.

#Blue Eye Samurai #‘If I was transported back in time… I’d try to pass myself off as a man for greater freedom.’#^^^ does not consider the intersection of historically queer existence across time with other identities (& the limitations those include)#nor does it consider the danger of such an action #I get it. some come to this conclusion simply because they know how dangerous it is to be a woman throughout history.#but rebuking the normative identities of that time period also puts you at great risk of violence #challenging norms and rules and social & political hierarchies does not make you safer #and it has always been those who exist in the margins of society who have challenged sociocultural systems #it has always been those at greatest risk and who've faced great violence already. like Mizu #Anyway... Mizu is just Mizu #she is gender queer (or gender-variant)#because her relationship with her gender is queer. because she is gender-variant #‘queer’ as a social/political class did not exist. but people WE understand as queer existed in different historical eras #and under different cultural systems #she’s a woman because queer did not exist & ‘woman’ was the sex caste she was born into #she’s also a woman because she conceptualizes herself as so #she is a woman AND she is gender-variant #she quite literally challenges normative identity and is a clear example of what sex non-conforming means #Before the actual. historic Tokugawa shogunate banned women from theater #there were women in the theater who cross-dressed for the theater and played male roles #so I’m also really tired of seeing takes along the lines of: ‘Edo Japan was backwards so cross dressers did’t exist then!’#like. please. be more transparent won’t you?

16 notes · View notes

dropout-if · 8 months

Note

Hello! I was wondering how queer relationships will be handled in your story? Will there be any difference between them and straight romances? For example, if my gay MC is romancing Jean, will there be some different dialogue than if my MC were a girl? I'm down to read no matter what, just like to gauge this when reading IF's! 😊🏳️‍🌈

Queer relationships are completely different from straight ones^^

Uma is probably the one with the least changes now that I think about it. They react to MC's gender but the variants are sort of similar.

Travis and Kai + Uma are the only three ROs who are openly out of the closet. They acknowledge MC's gender but they don't really care ajdka their attitude is the same regardless. Kai is more open with their very based "fuck homophobes" policy and they do give more reactions when out in public with MC. Maybe Fem!Kai more so than Male!Kai because of Liv^^ but don't quote me on that^^

Wanda doesn't hide the fact that she's queer but she's surprisingly not as open about it. People really don't like her so she takes a page off of J's book and has decided to remain in the closet just in case! Wanda and a female/enby!MC will often be mistaken as "friends" publicly.

Jade/Jean isn't really ashamed of being queer but they do feel a strange sense of empowerment by "fitting in" the spectrum of normalcy (cis white hetero). J is also kind of scared of their father not accepting that side of them. They see no positive outcome in coming out of the closet, and so they don't want to. Same-sex relationship/enby MC and J have a secret relationship instead of dating openly.

Statler has two completely different routes depending on gender. Their queerness is something they feel ashamed of, and they've repressed that side of them to the point where they can just... pretend it's not there. Statler has a lot of internalized homophobia. They'll never be outwardly negative toward any queer characters, all of Statler's hate is reserved to themself. It's a "Statler-thing".

#dropout if #dropout #ask #ros #j gray #kai alofa #statler amani #travis camaro #uma bharat #wanda pavon #gameplay

107 notes · View notes

figuring-it-all-out · 3 years

Text

Ok, I need to talk about genderfluid Loki in relationship to the “Loki” show. Just a disclaimer: these are feelings I have after episode 2 of “Loki” so this will probably age badly as the show goes on.

Spoilers for episode 2 of “Loki” and theories based on comic book knowledge. So, if you’re like my family & want to keep going into “Loki” with no other knowledge, feel free to skip. Also spoilers for “WandaVision” if you haven’t watched that yet.

For a while now, genderfluid folks on the internet have been waiting in baited breath to see if Loki would be canonically genderfluid on the show like they are in the comics (and Norse mythology). We’ve devoured every kernel of genderfluid Loki we could get, from set photos of Sophia Di Martino in the Loki costume to an ad for the show seeming to confirm Loki being canonically genderfluid. We’ve heard Tom Hiddleston discuss it, we’ve seen Marvel’s continued promise to feature more queer characters, & we’ve seen the creative team say Loki being genderfluid, “was never up for debate.”

Then, at the end of “Loki” episode 2, it seemed to happen.

And I’m already super worried about it.

If you’re hyped for what seems to be genderfluid Loki and you don’t want anyone to rain on your parade, that’s valid and awesome. But I suggest you maybe not read any further because I am...concerned.

To start, if this is confirming Loki as genderfluid, it’s treated as a plot twist which is less than great. Revealing that a character you thought was cis is actual trans (or at the very least gender nonconforming) is a trope that can be found in The Crying Game, Sleepaway Camp, “Nip/Tuck”, and Ace Ventura (among others). And it’s super problematic. Being trans is not a plot twist, being genderfluid is not a plot twist, it’s actual life for many people who are out and living it. The fact that everyone uses assumptive he/him pronouns for The Variant, that past variants of Loki seem to all be men, that Loki NEVER says, “Why do you assume the variant is a he?” and just the way the scene in episode 2 plays out, all of that gives the impression that Loki being a woman AND a man (albeit not necessarily at the same time) is some big groundbreaking twist. In my opinion that sensationalizes genderfluid identity, implying the reaction to a genderfluid person’s mere existence is jaw-dropping spectacle and not, “Oh, cool, you’re genderfluid.” So I’m less than comfortable with that. But bad writing while attempting to represent a marginalized community is still an effort which I appreciate.

You’ll notice I said IF this confirms Loki is genderfluid, because to be honest I’m skeptical that it does.

I think this might not be Loki, which means the show is using the character’s canonical genderfluid identity from comics and mythology as a red herring. Which is not awesome.

Everything I’m about to say is based in theory so I may be completely wrong and if I am I would be SO happy if I was. But there are a few reasons I think this woman might not be Loki.

The first is actually based on the fact that it’s a plot twist: Loki himself even seems surprised that the Variant they’re chasing is a woman. Why? Loki is over 1000 years old and knows himself pretty well. If he’s genderfluid wouldn’t he know it already?

Why I might be wrong: It would be nice if the next episode starts and there’s some dialogue between Dark-Haired-Loki and Blonde-Loki where the former is like, “Ah yes, I’ve been a woman before,” or something. THAT WOULD BE ENOUGH FOR ME. That confirms Loki IS genderfluid, has been genderfluid this whole time, and even if Blonde-Loki ISN’T really Loki the real Loki would still be genderfluid.

The way Blonde-Loki behaves suggests she’s not Loki. She doesn’t even want to go by the name Loki, she seems completely different from Dark-Haired-Loki, but genderfluid people aren’t different people when their gender changes.

Why I might be wrong: Honestly this could just be a case of less-than-great genderfluid representation on behalf of the writers if we do learn that Blonde-Loki IS really Loki.

This is a small detail but whenever Loki expresses their gender identity in the comics - to my knowledge - their hair color never changes. They’re still Loki, it’s really only a slight shift in presentation that makes them look more masculine or feminine. So they’re always raven haired.

Why I might be wrong: I mean like I said, this is a super small detail that really doesn’t warrant mentioning if it is confirmed that Blonde-Loki IS Loki, but since I’m skeptical it pinged on my radar.

Reason #4 why I think Blonde-Loki might not be Loki is something a lot of people have talked about. In foreign language credits for episode 2, Blonde-Loki is credited as Sylvie. In the comics, Sylvie Lushton is a mortal given Asgardian powers by Loki (or possibly a person who Loki created from magic, its kinda vague) who adopts the title of The Enchantress and becomes a superhero. The Enchantress is also a name used by one of Thor’s main villains in the comics who has yet to show up in the MCU (this villain is named Amora The Enchantress). Like many others, I think Blonde-Loki might really be The Enchantress prentedning to be Loki for yet-to-be-disclosed reasons (possibly a composite character of Amora and Sylvie or possibly just Sylvie). This would explain why Loki is surprised Blonde-Loki is a woman, why Blonde-Loki doesn’t want to be called Loki, and even why Blonde-Loki is blonde (both Sylvie and Amora are blonde in the comics).

Why I might be wrong: genderfluid people using different names when they’re different genders is actually a thing some of us do. It’s possible that if Blonde-Loki is Loki she just doesn’t like that name when she’s a woman. Marvel could’ve just gone with Sylvie as Blonde-Loki’s woman name because of the connection Loki & Sylvie Lushton have in the comics.

Another reason I might be wrong: the MCU has not been afraid to make unique choices when adapting characters to the big screen, such as the Skrulls heroic nature in Captain Marvel. It’s possible we’re working towards some Sylvie-Loki composite character going forward in the future. There are a lot of things that COULD happen that would explain why Blonde-Loki is credited as Sylvie even though she’s really Loki, but since I don’t want to risk being disappointed I’m trying not to rationalize it to myself.

If I’m right, & Blonde-Loki isn’t Loki, that would mean Marvel is queer-baiting audiences with the idea of their first transgender superhero before revealing that its actually a cis-white-lady as a twist. Essentially treating potential genderfluid representation the same way Evan Peters’ being Quicksilver was treated in “WandaVision”.

There are other ways for Loki to be meaningfully genderfluid in the show besides Blonde-Loki. Addressing it with dialogue, having Hiddleston-Loki change genders, stuff like that. And if you are feeling seen by the case file stating Loki is genderfluid or the fact that she/her pronouns are used for Loki in the Spanish subtitles for the show, that’s awesome. But I’m not going to give Disney or Marvel credit for it because in my opinion, if your representation can be easily removed for a theoretical release in China, it’s not representation its queer-baiting.

Marvel KNOWS what they’re doing. As mentioned above, the studio released ads that said Loki was genderfluid. The creative team have all talked about how they want genderfluid Loki. They’re already claiming Loki is genderfluid in the show! So they know people are going to latch onto Blonde-Loki as confirmation of Loki being canonically genderfluid in the MCU. And if that’s what she is that is SO GREAT! I really hope I’m wrong here, but if I’m right & this is the “Loki” version of Fake-Pietro in “WandaVision”, then they’re not just teasing fan-theories. They’re dangling the possibility of actual representation for a community that has to bite & claw to seem themselves in ANY media, before snatching it away for a twist. And that. would. SUCK!

#Loki #Genderfluid Loki #Genderfluid #Gender Fluid #Tom Hiddleston #Loki Spoilers #Loki Meta #WandaVision Spoilers #Mine

75 notes · View notes

blackgirlsuperherorants · 3 years

Text

With more articulation, I'm ready to talk about why the push for Lokius simply bothers me, and this can be said for other m/m or w/w ships that fans push to be canon so hard just because they ship it.

It's the framing. The framing that if Marvel doesn't do it (or whatever the brand is), it's because homophobia, and if other fans don't like it/ship it, it's because homophobia (even if they ship other queer ships and are queer themselves.) And the biggest problem with that is that it overshadows the REAL issue of lack of queer representation on screen in mainstream nerd media, especially from big things under the Disney umbrella (Marvel and Lucasfilm/Star Wars, especially.)

It makes it bad that your ship isn't canon instead of bad that there haven't been any queer romances on screen in the MCU.

And like, as a writer myself, I find myself dissecting the stories of other media all the time. I can watch an MCU movie or series and pretty much assess what direction the story is going in by the narrative points they're hitting. I knew Sylki was basically gonna happen (even if just a kiss) because narratively, that's what the show was doing as soon as they had that "what is love" conversation on Lamentis-1. It didn't mean I liked it. But I knew it was happening.

Similarly, there's no romantic undertones to Loki and Mobius. None. For Marvel to make them a couple, it would mean they'd be doing it simply because the two present as men and it would make stans happy. And while there's something to be said for fan service, it would be annoying to watch them cram two guys together who aren't romantic in the slightest. I'd much rather see Loki meet some guy and have the same type of undertones they were giving to Sylvie and form a real bond to where the kiss feels earned and warranted. Not just put him with the nearest man because "he gay lol."

And how you guys are claiming it's being queer that makes you want this is beyond me. It's not being queer that makes you want this. I don't want queer characters that fuck everyone of whatever gender(s) they're attracted to even when it doesn't make sense for them to. I want real love stories. I mean, yeah, sometimes we can have a slut character, because that's fun, too, but that's not even what y'all think Lokius is. You seem to want them to be in love. But why? Because he's the first friend Loki made that isn't through Thor?

I hate that, too, because I hate this idea that queer people cannot have friends of their same gender without wanting to fuck them. IDK how y'all are, maybe y'all are like that, but I almost never have wanted to fuck any of my friends. The only few exceptions have been when I tried to befriend someone I had a crush on (in which case, usually the friendship can't work, really, because I have a crush on them.) I also think it's okay if you can have casual sex with friends, or if you have a friendship that develops into romance, but Jesus, do you people not have friends that you don't want to fuck? I am bi, maybe more pan (gender kind of doesn't matter to me, I guess) and I'm friends with people of all kinds of gender identities and like... I love them as people, which is why they're my friends, but I DO NOT want to fuck them. Especially my closest friend. I talked about her, before, here, but she's like my sister. The thought of fucking her is gross, to me. Not because she's gross, but because it feels incestuous.

Loki shouldn't want to fuck Mobius just because they developed a friendship. And that's very much how it's written on the series. They almost dislike each other (or Mobius is at least indifferent to Loki) and then they become friends.

That's not to mention the power dynamic that exists, there. And I know some of y'all are subs, but yeah, it's a bit gross to imply a sexual relationship with Loki's captor.

But on to Sylki. It sucks that I feel like most of y'all hate Sylki because Sylvie is a girl, and not just because it's bad in other ways. Like, the reasons Sylki is bad have less to do with "it should have been Mobius" and more to do with it being a lazy 1980s action movie plot that should have never happened. I'm not as creeped out by the selfcest (as many of you wouldn't have been if she was a he, I'm almost positive), but what's bad about it is that they couldn't have a strong female lead character without her being the love interest of the main guy. She didn't need to be, especially because she was a Loki variant, anyway. There was no need for it to have romantic undertones, and there was no need for them to kiss. It was sexist more than it was homophobic (and I can't help feeling like y'all are kind of being biphobic in this case. Maybe I'll talk about that, later, but yeah.) It was sexist bullshit. And there's valid criticism that Sylvie is underdeveloped. She's just angry and something for Loki to project affection onto.

I was also hoping they'd do a "found family" type of thing with Sylvie and Loki and let her be like the sister he never knew he needed, but no, they had to go trope and make her the love interest. It was lazy and bad and basically went "If Loki girl, main Loki want bone!"

Basically, having the main character fall for a character just because of their proximity and gender is bad and I hate it (and it would have been bad with Mobius, too, but yeah.)

Both the Mobius and the Sylvie thing also feel kind of racist, to me, because the show has prominent Black women who aren't even presented as desirable to Loki. And y'all, of course, ship him with anyone but the Women of Color. Y'all can pull true love with Mobius out of your ass, but he couldn't possibly fall for the Black women. lol.

Anyway. Not every show needs ships, and this show shouldn't have had any. I hate it. It's bad.

I guess on the biphobia front, I have heard some takes that it's not biphobic because Loki being queer in the MCU which hasn't shown any queer relationships, and Loki being the first openly queer character means they shouldn't have shown him with a woman presenting character. Which, I guess I get where you're coming from... but I have also been in fandoms for a long time and I see mostly girls saying this shit, which is what leads me to feel like it's simply jealousy. It happens all the time when a long-beloved single male character/celebrity suddenly starts dating a woman. Everyone hates it. And like, we haven't seen Loki be with ANYONE in the MCU, because mostly he's been doing villainy and his dating life hasn't been relevant. If the demigod says he's bi, he can kiss a woman. Especially a woman version of himself. Like I said, I hate it for other reasons, but pretending it's because he should have kissed Mobius is utterly delusional. He probably shouldn't have kissed anyone. Not in this series. There was no reason for any canon romance, especially because the show has a season 2 and we'll have time to see Loki develop earned, deserved romance with someone.

I'd much rather see them create a character just to be his boyfriend than have y'all push Marvel into making Lokius canon, which is a nonsense ship that only happened because Mobius is the only prominent male-presenting character before we meet the other Lokis.

My sincere wish is for people to remember that their ships are just ships and to enjoy them without getting all self-righteous about it. I TOLD y'all that Lokius wasn't gonna be canon like 4 episodes back, and here y'all are acting shocked and like Marvel took something from you. NOBODY expected y'all to ship Lokius. It's not even queerbait.

You can make clear arguments as to why Sambucky was queerbait. It's there in undertones in the actual series.

You cannot watch Loki and tell me you thought it was queerbait, unless you think men can't have conversations or hug goodbye without being romantically involved. Which means, in my opinion, that you need to learn about healthy masculinity.

Again, this is not a defense of Marvel. They DO need to let characters be queer, for real, and not just by saying " A bit of both". Like, let Loki be queer. Let Deadpool be queer. Let these queer characters be queer on screen. Yes.

But please stop making it about your ship. I'd rather see a flashback of Loki dating a guy and see him kiss someone he loved back on Asgard than watch y'all force Lokius. Because my queer rep is not about your crackship. It really isn't. And the fact that y'all keep calling us homophobic for not liking your ship REALLY needs to be addressed.

Like, when will y'all stop? I got on Stucky shippers about this shit in the past. All of us gay as hell, too, we just don't like YOUR ship. A lot of us like other queer ships. A lot of us like queer ships in other fandoms, too, and even have queer OCs. YOUR ship just ain't it. Stop forcing it. Literally, most of the ship wars between MCU fans have been queer ship vs queer ship, not really queer ship vs straight ship. Like, the number one Stucky rival ship was Stony. Not Steggy. People are not homophobic for not wanting your ship.

Sometimes it's because they ship something else.

And sometimes, like me, it's because they want something to make sense narratively and not happen for the sake of it happening. It's always better writing to have a character meetcute a new love interest than to magically turn a platonic friendship into a romantic relationship. Like, even when the characters are straight. Like, when Moesha dated Hakeem. It was just weird, even if he was kind of a great boyfriend. He was just supposed to be her friend, and people didn't really like it because it didn't fit narratively.

And that's why ships for the most part should be left to fanfiction, with the exception of a few where fans are right to call out the writers for not making it canon because it's clearly bait (like what happened to Destiel shippers. To see Lokius shippers compare themselves to THAT was so ridiculous. Destiel shippers had a decade of evidence only to be let down by a criminally unfair ending. Lokius shippers saw two men have a deep conversation once and lost their minds.)

Anyway, I'm not saying don't ship Lokius. I don't even hate it, really. I just think it obviously shouldn't be canon, and fans pretending like they were robbed of it is ridiculous. Literally, Ao3 exists for this reason. I will never see Steve fuck Sam Wilson, so I wrote it into my fanfic. I am not mad that they didn't actually date in the main MCU storyline.

18 notes · View notes

discoscoob · 2 years

Note

You seem very fair and logical about the ship wars. I am a lesbian sylki shipper. I understood the frustration but chose to enjoy the story for what it is...which is still queer. I was more offended we finally got a lesbian rom com with KStew and the writing was...not great lol. Not to mention, the same rich white families appearing on screen. But that's just it. I'm a lesbian.

I don't fully identify as a woman and I land somewhere on the non binary spectrum but I haven't explored it so I'm pretty clueless about it. I would ship Lokius if Sylvie weren't around but I'm totally in love with Sylvie and want as much screen time of her as possible. My question is do you think the antis have base as far as the gender fluid complaint/trans complaints are concerned? I just want all angles to think more about it lol.

Thank you, I try my best.

I’m aware that there are people genuinely upset by the representation or lack thereof in the Loki series and their feelings are valid as long as they themselves are not encouraging biphobia or transphobia.

The show itself never promised us that there would be a same sex romance, that was written in an article by Pink News without any reliable source but I do believe they hyped up the genderfluid representation a bit too much for what it actually was in the end, which was just a single word on a profile.

How this relates to sylki as a ship, that’s where I struggle to understand the criticisms. I myself identify as bisexual and gender nonconforming, I’ve seen people say that sylki is bad representation because cis people say that genderfluid people should just date themselves and I’m not disputing that has ever been said, it’s just something I have yet to come across someone actually saying.

We have to remember that cis people watching the show, particularly uneducated cis people, aren’t looking at Loki as a walking talking label for bisexuality and genderfluidity and attaching everything he does within the show as representations for those identities, Loki isn’t even canonically labelled as either within the show itself, (he says he has experience with multiple genders but he doesn’t specify a label and his file states ‘fluid’ under his sex not gender.)

I’m aware Loki is canonically bisexual/pansexual and genderfluid in the comics and I think that they are both represented rather well in the comics as Loki is shown shapeshifting between different bodies to represent different genders, but let’s not forget that this isn’t possible in real life, genderfluid people in real life aren’t shapeshifters they can’t literally transform their bodies yet they’re still valid genderfluid people, so why isn’t Loki without his shapeshifting? It’s just a thought.

To me, Sylvie being a woman or female presenting doesn’t represent Loki’s feminine form or his genderfluidity, she is just a variant of himself who happens to be female.

Any genderfluid representation for Loki for me would have to come from himself, not another person. That’s why I don’t feel like their relationship is any form of genderfluid representation because it just isn’t.

I hope this makes sense.

9 notes · View notes

aster-ion · 3 years

Text

Sylvie x Loki Might Not Happen and Here’s Why

***SPOILERS FOR LOKI TV SHOW***

1. They are basically siblings

Even though they have different personalities, backstories, and physical appearances, that doesn't change the fact that they are the genetic equivalent of siblings. No matter what Timeline you're looking at, both Sylvie and Loki are the offspring of Laufey and whoever he had children with. We know this because they are Variants of the exact same person, meaning that if either of them were born to someone other than Laufey, they would have been pruned as a baby. And since they weren't, that means they must be just as genetically similar as siblings are.

Because of this, the idea of Sylvie and Loki engaging in any kind of romantic or sexual relationship is extremely disturbing to a lot of fans. It's too big an oversight to brush past, especially when the show has continued to remind us over and over that they are, in fact, both Lokis. Maybe if them being the same person wasn't such a major plot point, it would be easier to ignore the facts, but it is, and that means that Marvel is basically pushing either an incest or selfcest (depending on how you look at it) type relationship. And that’s extremely risque for a corporation as large as Marvel, especially with a character as beloved by fans as Loki.

2. It is terrible LGBTQ+ representation

And before anyone says anything, no, it is not because Sylvie is portrayed as female and Loki as male. I've seen a lot of Sylvie x Loki shippers say that the reason people don't like the couple is due to it being one between a male and female, but that's not true. Loki and Sylvie were both confirmed to be bisexual, meaning that they can engage in a relationship with anyone of any gender. It would be completely valid for either of them to pursue romance with someone of a different sex and still be bisexual. No one is arguing against that, and if they are, I definitely do not agree with them.

However, the problem comes in when you take into account Marvel and Disney's (who owns Marvel) long history of queerbaiting. There have been countless times that Disney advertises their "first gay character!" only for it to be a single line of dialogue or a brief shot. Marvel in particular has used the popularity of certain LGBTQ+ ships and headcanons in their fanbase to generate media popularity that they don't actually follow through with in their movies/shows. So when Loki was confirmed to be both genderfluid and bisexual in Episode Three, lots of people felt like they were finally getting a win for representation.

But those people, myself included, appear to have been let down again. The first two official queer characters had so much potential to go off and be with anyone they wanted, but instead, the show has set them up to be in a romance with each other. Now, this wouldn't be problematic on it's own, but when you take into consideration the questionable nature of their romance from Point One as well as the fact that the show has explicitly referred to it as "twisted," it raises the question of whether or not this is actually good representation. Because the fact is, in one episode the writers went “look, it’s two queer people!” and in the next, they said “their relationship is disgusting and demented.” Marvel’s first bisexual characters being borderline incestuous/selfcestuous does not sit well with me at all.

All of this is made even more confusing when you take into account the background of the Loki crew, most notably, the director Kate Herron. She also directed the Netflix series Sex Education, which has quite a bit of very well done representation of all kinds. So how is she managing to fail so badly on this project? It makes me wonder whether she truly is just losing her touch or if this is all a misdirection. Personally, I'm hoping for the latter.

3. It does not send the "self love" message people seem to think it does

The writers, director, and cast of Loki have said multiple times that the relationship between Sylvie and Loki is meant to act as a metaphor for self love. And in a way, that makes a lot of sense. Despite creating different identities for themselves over time, they are still ultimately the same person and therefore share a special bond because of it. And there's a lot of potential that can be done with that concept.

Loki is an extremely complex and intriguing character. He has experienced a lot of trauma in his past that has shaped him into the person he is today. And that person is clearly very broken. He has never given away or received any kind of love, with the exception of his mother and possibly his brother, Thor. Other than that, he's had no healthy friendships, romances, or perception of himself. It makes sense for him to be confused by this pull he feels towards Sylvie, who is both alarmingly alike and vastly different from himself.

Something this series does exceptionally well is breaking Loki out of his comfort zone. He is finally forced to see himself from other people's perspectives. It started with the file Mobius showed him in the first episode. Loki was able to view his actions apart from himself, and was hit with the realisation that he had been hurting people, and he didn't like that.

Loki is also confronted by the existence of the Time Keepers and the TVA, who describe him as an antagonist and nothing more. To them, his role is to make those around him look better, even if that means he repeatedly gets the short end of the stick. Mobius mentions that he disagrees with this and that Loki "can be whoever and whatever he wants, even someone good," adding another layer of depth as to who Loki could be in the future of the series.

Another huge moment for Loki's character development is while in the Time Loop Prison with Sif. Though he starts out annoyed with the situation and recalls not feeling apologetic when he cut off Sif's hair, the longer he is in the loop, the more he changes. Loki admits things to himself that we have never seen him say aloud, such as the fact that he is a narcissist that craves attention. Sif telling Loki over and over that he deserves to be alone makes Loki question whether or not he believes that to be true, allowing him an introspective moment where he really has to think about who he is.

Now with all of that being said, I'd like to tie in why this is important to the writing of Loki and Sylvie. They act as a mirror to one another, representing both the flaws and strengths of "what makes a Loki a Loki." For once, Loki gets an honest, unbiased look at himself without layers of expectations or self doubt. On Lamentis, he calls Sylvie "amazing" and praises her for all her accomplishments. That's a huge moment for him because it shows that despite also finding her irritating, he can look past those traits and see someone worth being a hero underneath. And through that realisation, he begins to understand that he can also grow to love himself. That kind of character development for Loki is incredible to watch, and it's the kind of character development I want to see from this series. Unfortunately, them possibly engaging in a romantic relationship will ruin it.

Whenever I'm feeling insecure about myself and my abilities, the solution has never been to look at who I am through a romantic lens. Self love is an entirely different type of love from romantic love, so if the series tries to push this relationship as a romance, it will fail to truly represent the arc that they are trying to show.

4. Nobody likes it

This one's a little on the nose, but it's true. Almost no one likes this ship, and more than that, most people actively hate it. Yes, there is a small minority that like Loki and Sylvie together, but there is an overwhelmingly larger group that is disgusted and angry by the fact that the show paired them up.

After Episode 4 aired, I ranted for about an hour and a half with a friend about how much we didn't want them together. My aunt whom I have never texted reached out to me to say that she hated their relationship. My homophobic neighbour came over and told me that she would prefer any other romance to this. Friends that I haven't talked to much since school let out for summer have all agreed that they collectively dislike Loki x Sylvie. This ship has brought people together purely because everyone hates it more than they hate each other.

There is no denying that the general feedback for Loki and Sylvie being a couple has been negative, even if you support them getting together for some reason. So if there are so many people out there who don't like it, I'm confused as to how it would be approved by a team of professionals.

5. The contradicting information we have gotten so far

Before the release of Episode Four, Kate Herron said that the relationship between Loki and Sylvie was “not necessarily romantic.” During the interview, she continued to refer to them as friends and people who found solace and trust in each other.

However, after Episode Four, the head writer, Michael Waldron, and other members of the crew spoke up about Sylvie and Loki. They said things like “it just felt right that that would be Loki’s first real love story” and “these are two beings of pure chaos that are the same person falling in love with one another.” These kinds of comments very heavily imply something romantic, directly contradicting what Kate Herron said. Even Tom Hiddleston, the actor for Loki, has assessed the situation, highlighting the differing viewpoints. He’s also said before that the end of Episode Four ultimately has Loki getting in his own way.

Now, this could all just be a misdirection on either side to build suspense for the show, but as of right now, it is entirely unclear who is telling the truth. Though it is more likely that the statements made by Michael Waldron are more accurate (as he is the writer), there is still a slight possibility that Loki x Sylvie won’t happen. I’ll link the articles I’ve found on this topic below so you can read them and decide for yourself.

Kate Herron Statement - https://www.cbr.com/loki-sylvie-relationship-not-romantic/

Michael Waldron Statement - https://www.marvel.com/articles/tv-shows/loki-sylvie-in-love

Tom Hiddleston Statement - https://thedirect.com/article/loki-tom-hiddleston-sylvie-romance

6. It is still salvageable

The odds are not in our favour, I’m afraid. It is highly probable that the show will put Loki and Sylvie in a romantic relationship with each other. Yet there is still a way to salvage it and turn their bond into something incredibly satisfying. Like I mentioned in Point Three, the relationship between Loki and Sylvie has the potential to be incredibly empowering and provide both characters some much-needed growth. And I believe that while unlikely, it can still do that.

The only mention of them being romantically interested in each other came from Mobius, who at the time was angry, betrayed, and doing anything he could to get Loki to talk. Then, at the end of the episode, right before Loki is about to confess something important to Sylvie, he is pruned. This results in no explicit confirmation from either Loki or Sylvie that they are in love with each other. The audience is left not knowing whether Mobius was correct in his speculations, and honestly, I don’t think Loki knows either.

Loki is no expert on love, as I explained earlier. It is entirely possible that he doesn’t grasp how he feels about Sylvie and defaults to romance because of what Mobius said. There is undoubtedly some sort of deep bond forming between them, and I would love to see that being explored in the next two episodes. I would love to watch Loki’s journey of realising that he doesn’t want anything romantic with Sylvie, and was simply confused by the new things he was feeling towards her. Loki even says “this is new for me” when talking to Sylvie at the end of Episode Four. Him momentarily believing that he wants to be a couple with her then shifting into them becoming friends who help each other grow is still a reality that could happen. And ultimately, I think that would benefit them both as characters as well as strengthen the overall message of the show.

In a show about self love, acceptance of yourself, and figuring out who you want to be, Loki very much needs people who support him. He has that in Mobius already, and now he’s beginning to have it in Sylvie as well. I just hope that it is done in a way that resonates with the audience and subverts expectations, which just cannot be done through some twisted romantic relationship. I’ve spoken to others watching the show and seen people talking online, and everyone seems to agree that Loki and Sylvie work much better as platonic soulmates or found family than a couple.

Of course, my hopes aren’t that high up. While I’d love for this to happen, I’ve been let down by Marvel before and wouldn’t be surprised if they went for the easy route of pairing characters up rather than dealing with the emotions correctly. Still, I have hope for this series. Everything else about it is wonderful and perfect in every way. It has the potential to become a masterpiece and easily the best thing that Marvel has ever done. However, this romance would ruin it for me and so many others. We already feel incredibly disappointed by Loki x Sylvie being suggested, so I can’t even begin to fathom how people will react if the show makes it canon. I’m begging Marvel to please do better than this. They have a wonderful story to tell and a wonderful team to do it, and I hope from the bottom of my heart that they don’t throw that away.

#marvel #loki #sylvie #mobius #loki x sylvie #loki x mobius #kate herron #michael waldron #disney #lgbtq #representation #tva #loki tv

27 notes · View notes

emptymasks · 3 years

Note

Yep. Like. I totally feel it when shows and movies pull the “bury your gays” trope. They wait right until the end to reveal one of the characters is gay and in love with another character or something and then kill them off straight away. It just hurts my heart. I hate it. I physically can’t watch scenes of hate attacks on gay people. Like in IT Chapter 2 when the couple are attacked at the beginning. It makes me feel sick. These things do effect us and can make us feel awful.

Like the fact Loki can say he’s pan/bi or whatever but we are never gonna see him with a guy, it makes me feel like gay people should always be behind closed doors. Like we should hide. Whereas straight people can show their intimacy. And they say he’s gender fluid on a piece of paper but never delve deeper into it imo. And so many people in the fandom are now making out he’s like, not gender fluid? Or pansexual? That he’s a straight man or something and when he changes shape he’s a straight women. Gosh it’s so weird.

Well they didn't even say "genderfluid" on a piece of paper though. That's the big problem. They said "sexfluid" which isn't a real gender identity and now a whole load of the audience thinks Loki is not genderfluid and is instead "sexfluid" and that he's 'sexfluid' because he's a shapeshifter and genderfluid isn't a real thing. Or it is a real thing, but Loki isn't genderfluid he's 'sexfluid' didn't you read the thing in the show? Ugh.

Like of course it's biphobic to say a bi man can't date a bi woman, no one's saying that isn't still bi representation. But it's weird that they boast about them being queer but then don't want to show any same-sex relationship. Not that Loki is a man or him being with a man would be a same-sex relationship as he's genderfluid, but the show is acting as though Loki isn't genderfluid: using he pronouns for Loki variants like Sylvie they don't know the gender of yet (I know it was probably to trick the audience, but we still would have been tricked if they had used they/them because we all know everyone would have assumed the other variant is male by default), Mobius calling Sylvie Loki's "female self" which is straight up just fluidphobic. Showing Loki and Sylvie together while the director confirmed it won't be brought up that he's bi again, the writer said Loki is falling romantically in love with Sylvie, while refusing to ever use they/them or she/her pronouns of have Loki say or show in any way that he is genderfluid lets cishet fans and homophobic fans watch the show without "LGBTness shoved down their throats". It allows people who don't like LGBT+ representation to still believe the characters are cisgender and straight.

#loki discourse #loki series

11 notes · View notes

byronicbi · 3 years

Text

Loki spoilers under the cut, along with some opinions in regards to Sylvie and the approach to LGBT+ rep the show has taken.

Now, for starters, we're still one episode from finishing the season and things may be clarified then, but thus far I'm more than a little disappointed regarding some things that I, granted, psyched myself up for and probably shouldn't have.

First: the absolute delight I felt at seeing Loki's sex listed as Fluid on his official TVA file. It's brief, it's in passing, and while performing a preferred gender does not make one cis, the little spiel about "have you ever met a woman variant of us" just sits wrong with me for many a reason. This remark indicates that we're still going off a binary: male Lokis and one Loki who is female, Sylvie, whom the writers and showrunners continue to insist that she is not a Loki despite being a variant. At no point is our variant's gender addressed in the actual story however, which means that every pair of eyes casually watching can assume he is a cisgender male because there is nothing to say otherwise beside a brief glimpse during the title sequence.

Now, we still don't know Sylvie's nexus event. I've seen theories about it relating to her being a "good" Loki (by playing to save Asgard), but there is an overwhelming sense that her crime against the Sacred Timeline has to do with her being "born a girl". And while I understand the "girlboss" commentary they're trying to convey - if this IS her nexus event - as an afab who is now genderfluid, I find the idea disheartening.

They could have done something amazing with Loki's gender identity, they did it with his sexuality ("a bit of both"), but I wholly understand that this isn't what the story is about. I wish it was. I wish we could have characters express who they are without making a big deal out of it, with said character's agency, but I'll let that slide. It's that clear marker of "Sylvie is different from us because she's a cis woman and we're all male" when at least our variant is meant to be genderfluid that really makes me sigh. Disappointed but not surprised.

Second: Loki's bisexuality. My genderfluid bisexual ass got called biphobic because I called Loki and Sylvie's interactions 'comphet'. First of all, I genuinely enjoy them as a romantic couple. I ship them. I also enjoy them as chaotic siblings. I just enjoy their interactions and their relationship, whatever kind of relationship it may be. Now, it is EXTREMELY important to note that a bisexual man being involved with a woman makes him no less bisexual, and vice versa. And I respect that? I've dated both men and women before and I've never been any less bi for it.

My issue here ties back to my previous point about visibility. As powerful as "a bit of both" was, to me as a queer person, it is so easily written off by the casual viewer. By what I've experienced through canon storytelling, Loki and Sylvie do not come off as romantically interested in each other. There is love, but it is a love devoid of fragile and toxic masculinity. It feels like a love divorced from the expected heteroromantic norms, and this is coming from someone who writes romance and has studied the tropes and imagery related to it for years. And I feel like we need to explore this kind of relationship, especially in regards to a character like Loki who is literally just learning how to be a functional person. Hell, even Sylvie mentions how new she is to the concept of friends. I view this as a genuine friendship, and frankly I'm tired of the militant approach a lot of people are taking by stating "either you ship them or you're biphobic".

I'm not very good at organizing my personal feelings into words so bear with me here.

When I said they're 'comphet', it's because the average viewer, queer but mostly straight, can look at them and go "oh yeah they're a couple". Versus, say, Loki and Mobius who have shared an equal if not slightly more profound bond (namely due to the length of their relationship) and people will cry out "just friends, stop trying to make it more".

Do you see my point?

I'm not erasing Loki's bisexuality. I wouldn't dream of it. But I wanted to see it explored by forcing viewers to go "oh he's queer" rather than having them comfortably sit back and ignore it. I'm tired of me voicing who I am only for people to sit back and treat me as if I were some Wish brand woman who vacillates between straight and lesbian.

Again, this show isn't about the presence of queerness (although, how can it not be when we're witnessing Loki change into someone who loves and accepts himself) in the universe, but the individuals behind the show made queerness important. They chose to. By listing him as genderfluid. By having him say he's had both princesses and princes. So far it's felt like I was offered a nice comfy rug to stand on six hours into my eight hour shift working the cash register, was allowed to touch and feel its cushioned surface, but it was never actually given to me to use.

I love Loki with all my heart and soul. It has brought me so much unspeakable joy and laughter, it's made me cry, it's sparked my desire to create. This show has made me care for every single one of its characters, and their journey, and I am forever grateful for that. But that does not mean that, as a queer person, I should not criticize it's approach to queerness. It's a tiny step, but we have so much more to go.

And also - Disney, you promised he would have both female and male love interests on this show. So unless you're giving me a second season where our more stabilized Loki variant DOES tap a little bit of both (or any other mixture of gender identities) we're gonna have to have a serious talk about how you fucking market your shit

Anyway. So yeah.

Give Mobius a fucking jet ski.

#loki spoilers #a very personal post this is not meta this is not meant to be a breakdown of its characters it is literally just my personal thoughts #and feelings regarding THINGS.#text.#negativity cw #not really but just to make sure.

9 notes · View notes

theories-by-val · 3 years

Text

Why Loki and Sylvie are actually a legitimate canon ship

In the last episode of Loki we see Loki and Sylvie kiss, and me die of happiness for like two seconds until she pushed Loki into the TimeDoor, after which I screamed for a full minute.

A lot to unpack here. First and foremost, the kiss itself, aka: the conditions under which it happened and why it happened.

If you go back and look at the scene, Loki is opening up. He tells Sylvie that he just wants her to be okay and *sniff sniff*. I'm not crying, you are!

But anyway, Loki tells her that he just wants Sylvie to be okay, which is heartbreakingly adorable, but there's more behind that.

Throughout the series, we see Loki trying to come to terms with his feelings and the fact that his feelings were for Sylvie, a variant of himself, and were so intense was extremely confusing for him and that scene is basically him finally accepting them.

You can see a tear on his face before Sylvie kisses him, which further proves my theory.

Plus, it was Sylvie who initiated the kiss, so do with that what you will.

Anyway, the kiss happened because that moment was Sylvie's realization of exactly how deep her feelings for Loki ran, although it is kind of sad how obvious it is that Loki loves her more than she loves him.

You can say that Sylvie used the kiss to manipulate and distract Loki, but that theory doesn't really make sense.

The issue with that theory is that Sylvie didn't need a distraction or to manipulate him, because Loki's guard was down, and he was opening up.

She could've pushed him straight into the TimeDoor if she really wanted to, but she chose to accept her feelings first. And you can see how much her heart is breaking to push him into the TimeDoor by her face, which looks absolutely devastated after the kiss, and not because the kiss wasn't good, I'm sure they both thoroughly enjoyed it, but because, like I said, she knew what she had to do, but she didn't want to.

Plus, when Sylvie was also questioning how much she could trust Loki in this scene, and if she didn't actually love him, she would have killed him, because she knew Loki wouldn't even try to hurt her.

If that wasn't enough reason for you, then here's some more.

Sylvie makes Loki happy, and that should be all that matters. I get it, Mobius and Loki already act like an old married couple, but I'm like that with my besties but doesn't mean I want to marry them.

Both characters have already openly said that they only see each other as friends, and besides, there's a very high chance that Mobius has kids of his own since the TVA stole him from his life. So why would you want to break up a happy family?

Same thing with Clintasha shippers! Clint has a fucking family! With 4 kids! Like-

Just because two people are friends does not mean they like each other. That's just not how it works!

I personally think it's because they had Loki come out as bisexual, which is pretty amazing, and I as a bisexual am extremely ecstatic. But that is literally the entire point of bisexuality! You like both men and women, and I get it, you want to see a queer relationship in the MCU, and I'm sure we will get one soon, but having a character come out as bisexual and then immediately date someone of the same gender is not a very good option from a business standpoint.

So here's a little breakdown. The MCU has never had any queer characters so having every character be straight and then jumping to a character dating someone of the same gender is too big of a jump. The issue is that it's just really risky. When you make a big step like this there's a 50-50 chance of getting a lot of backlash. And when you break that big step down into smaller steps there is a, say, 80-20 chance of getting a lot of backlash. And to a big company like Marvel, that is significantly better.

I think what angers me is that grown-ass people don't take a second to look at how such things would affect the plot or the actual real life company and just go off on internet rants talking about things like this.

Anyway, I think it's time to wrap up this post. Let me know what you thought of it, and consider following if you enjoyed this post and want to read more!

Love ya, Valentine

PS: Here's a cat meme:

#loki laufeyson #marvel mcu #mcu loki #loki series #loki #sylvie #sylvie laufeydottir #love is a dagger #loki and sylvie #sylkie #lady loki #pro sylki #marvel

8 notes · View notes

lokigodofaces · 3 years

Text

thoughts on loki ep 3: lamentis

under cut for your convenience

my first thought when i saw C-20 at the beginning was the Framework...i might be a bit too obsessed with an aos/Loki crossover...

C-20 was sorta able to find out something was wrong. from what Sylvie said, that's pretty impressive.

i wonder if Sylvie uses magic similar to Wanda's. like if Wanda just uses it on a bigger scale. the mind illusions thing checks out. and i saw on youtube that another patron looks like Evan Peters, so maybe they're connected? but most likely they just hired a dude that happens to look like Evan Peters.

going back to that, the glitch in C-20's illusion was like the glitches in WandaVision

if this really is similar to Wanda in canon, that means Sylvie and other Lokis might be nexus beings (y'know, the very thing i shout about in tags because i want)

Okay, so Sylvie tried to enchant a minuteman, which means she must have assumed the TVA operates on the same physics as the timeline. So neither Lokis thought magic could possibly be impeded.

good action sequence with Sylvie and minutemen and Sylvie and Loki

dudes...Renslayer can't fight. she literally did a horrible job.

Sylvie really thought the TVA valued Loki and that they really wanted/needed him to stop her. so she threatened to kill him, just for Renslayer to give the go ahead. shows how little the TVA cares and it echoes Odin.

Lamentis 1 sounded cool because that is a very sci-fi-ey name. It means the star the planet orbits is called Lamentis and the planet is the closest planet. That's how we name lots of planets outside the solar system. so i appreciated that.

okay, lamentis is literally just the bi flag. but still lots of purple so i will claim it as ace as well.

teleportation! and actual magic! yay!

okay, are they setting up a Loki/Sylvie romance? the way they framed the two when Sylvie tried to enchant Loki was how it's often done with kisses

Sylvie said with strong minds she has to do what she did to C-20 to enchant them, but she couldn't even do that with Loki. Which shows how powerful Loki is and how powerful the mind stone is.

i will die for more of Loki and Sylvie being chaotic together

Sylvie she said is an alias. Does this mean she is genderfluid but is female more often than male? i'm told some genderfluids are one gender more than the other, and i've considered Hiddleston's Loki to be predominantly male. Could Sylvie be the other way around? & born Loki but haven't changed her name? or have different names for different genders? and doesn't want to be called Loki when she's female because that's not her name as a woman?

literally i can't tell if they're setting up romance or sibling stuff.

i never thought i'd hear the word "savvy" from Loki. but, hey, if Jack Sparrow can say it, i'll allow it.

the effects for the gun that woman used look similar to Daisy Johnson's quakes. for a second i hoped for an aos crossover, but then i remembered that marvel hates it's non-Disney+ series.

i like the differences between Loki and Sylvie. Loki is less confrontational and more likely to mischief his way when Sylvie is more likely to rip the bandaid off and get it over with, if that makes sense. i think that Sylvie might just be so tired from living on the run, only going to apocalypses that she just wants to get it over with.

love is a serious theme throughout this episode. again, are they setting up a Loki/Sylvie romance? or will it be platonic or familial or something else?

Loki is very clearly not okay with the fact that so many people are being left to die, and i'm here for it

so the whole thing to get on the train i think is setting those two up to be a good duo. between illusions and enchantments, they can do a lot. and Loki was able to get them part of the way, and Sylvie the rest. i think it could be foreshadowing both of them needing to use their skills to work together.

never have your back to a door, i guess

Sylvie's reaction to Loki saying he wasn't told he was adopted. man, she was worried. she knows that that is messed up and i think she feels bad for Loki. she's probably imagining how her life would be different if she didn't know she was adopted.

sounds like Odin and Frigga weren't the adopters of Sylvie. Maybe the Lushtons? i don't know anything about them, just that Lushton is Sylvie's last name in the comics. so, yay for her for not having trash parents. unless they were, then sorry for Sylvie. at least they told her she was adopted. but if the Lushtons adopted her, how did they fall across a frost giant? especially the daughter of Laufey?

i've seen suggestions that the post man Sylvie is with could be Stan Lee since a couple cameos were of him as a post man. Maybe a younger post man, but he has less of a lifespan (if he is actually human in universe. i still like to think of him as the One Above All who just really likes to see the drama of things) than Sylvie, so she could be with him for a long time. maybe that's why Stan is always cameoing. he's just trying different things to try to find his love. and maybe he has a longer lifespan (he was in First Avenger) but not as long as Sylvie's so she still was there for most his life but he's dying soon. I actually like this headcanon a lot, i think it's sweet.

YAS BISEXUAL LOKI YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW HAPPY I AM! but i'm also scared my parents will find out. they're anti-queer. my siblings saw it, & they aren't supportive either but they operate on an "ignore it" policy, so they don't really care as long as it isn't a big deal.

also it is heavily hinted Sylvie is bi as well.

yes, i will continue to headcanon Loki as greyromantic and asexual. deal with it. i will change my language from panromantic to biromantic since the director specifically said he was bi.

also, it sounded like the director might be bi as well. good for her, taking a character she saw as bi and literally making it canon.

i knew Tom could sing, he was on Broadway. but i had never heard him sing i don't think. he has a good voice. petition to make a musical with Loki. watch the episode "Duet" of The Flash. i want something similar to that. can Sophia sing? throw her in too if she can!

translation of the norwegian suggests romance between Loki and Sylvie

was i expecting an "ANOTHER" reference? no. am i glad we got it? yeah, that was a nice touch.

turns out "full" means drunk in Norwegian according to a youtuber? but don't quote that. Loki says he's full, not drunk at one point.

what were they serving on that train? Thor couldn't get drunk on Earth. heck, Steve couldn't. so it must've been a heck of a drink they were serving

ok, the dagger metaphor i actually really liked. could be a shakespeare reference?

the fireworks thing with Frigga was cute

okay, i don't like Frigga much, but this has confirmed that Frigga was, maybe possibly, better than Odin. Frigga at least believed in Loki. but then her betrayal was so much worse.

wait, i just realized. Loki gets a fight scene on a train. a superhero genre staple is a fight on a moving vehicle (bonus if it's a train). yay! Loki hasn't had this trope yet in any of his appearances. off screen before Infinity War, and i don't count his attempt to murder Thanos on the Statesman. but we can add that to his list of superhero tropes.

i feel like the TVA needs to make stronger tempads...

okay, Loki threw the dagger horribly because he was drunk, right?they aren't saying he has horrible aim, are they?

falling out of a moving vehicle is also a superhero trope...at least it went better for them than it did Bucky

i relate to Sylvie screaming in the middle of nowhere

Loki being gentle with Sylvie and letting her talk to him. gosh. i love it. was not expecting to see Loki from my fics make an appearance.

Sylvie explained the enchantment to Loki, which i think was a poor decision for her.

she said C-20's mind was hard to navigate to her original memories. maybe the TVA does something to the TVA agents that join them. maybe if Loki proved useful, they'd do it to Loki.

or maybe variants lose memory over time. Sylvie says something about her memory being like blips of a dream, but I don't remember the context. maybe over time variants lose their memories and only retain a few things. Sylvie is well down that process, Loki has had hardly any change, and those working for the TVA only have a few things to remind them.

Mobius absolutely was a jet ski enthusiast in the '90's when he was arrested, and he loved Josta.

Casey liked Boku juice, a sign he was from the '90's.

whoever makes the uniforms is from whatever period that style of suit was popular ('80's?).

if anyone isn't a variant, it's Renslayer. she knows more than she should, i'm sure of it.

C-20 likes margaritas now, i'm sure of it.

Mobius has an interesting relationship with Renslayer. I wasn't sure if it was romantic or what. Maybe Renslayer looks like his lover from the '90's so he is flirty with her because of the faint memories he has.

Loki immediately catches on to the TVA agents not knowing they're variants. they think the Time Keepers created them. he knows that, Sylvie didn't. this immediately tells Loki that the Time Keepers are messed up.

possible redemptions for Mobius? B-15? C-20? when they find out they're variants?

so does C-20 know now? she kept saying "it was real" when Mobius found her in Roxxcart. maybe she had dreams of her life before, and Sylvie showed her that they were real?

the whole scene in the city was wild. so much color, lights, people, action, it was wild

Loki being protective of Sylvie, helping her up and wrapping his arm around her, i'm here for it.

loved the bit where Loki used telekinesis to stop the tower from falling on them.

there was a bit where Loki and Sylvie fought & their moves mirrored each other and gosh that was a nice touch.

Loki's reaction to the Ark's destruction. standing there in defeat while Sylvie walks away. wow. Tom. you are amazing.

and what the heck why did the episode end there?

can't wait for the next episode

more of TVA being evil being shown, loving it.

really, is Loki/Sylvie a thing? i have a hard time seeing romance some times, so let me know.

can we please get a Kang tease?

great lighting & cinematography. beautiful. lovely. also good action. shout out to the stunt doubles since they don't get enough credit.

okay let Loki & Sylvie be friends (or lovers, i'm fine with that) and let them burn the TVA down together.

aaaaaaaaaaa how are we half way through?

also, have the TVA fixed all the messed up timelines yet?

oh wait i gotta talk about this. the minutemen don't remember their names. i doubt Mobius's name was Mobius Mobius Mobius. Casey is probably not his real name. The Clone Wars fan in me was already screaming, but now it is even more.

#loki (2021)#loki (2021) spoilers #loki (2021) review #loki laufeyson #tva loki #sylvie laufeysdottir #mobius m mobius #ravonna renslayer #hunter c-20 #hunter b 15

3 notes · View notes

recentanimenews · 4 years

Text

Sympathy for the Devilman: The Legacy of Go Nagai's Magnum Opus

I've always had a thing for villains. Unlike my brothers, as a kid I'd always choose the "bad guy" action figures. If they went for the ninja turtle Leonardo, then I'd go for the uber-buff Super Shredder. I personally identified with villainy because of how it connected to the idea of "evil." I personally see evil as a generalized concept that expresses antagonism toward violent and dominant societal structures. Due to a coercive religious upbringing, I now see how my younger self unconsciously found ideologically-oppositional comfort in "evil" art. This eventually led me to one of my most cherished pieces of fiction: Devilman.

Devilman has left an indelible mark on manga and anime creators over the last few decades, inspiring major industry heavyweights such as Hideaki Anno, Kentaro Miura, and Kazuki Nakashima. The series was created by Go Nagai, a manga auteur also responsible for Mazinger Z, Cutie Honey, and Violence Jack (which is a Devilman sequel). Although Devilman retains much of the explicitness native to Go Nagai's usual fare, it uses these graphic elements uniquely to deliver a haunting, unforgettable, and compassionate message.

Let's explore the surprisingly relevant political and social significance of Devilman, along with a few of its animated offshoots. Read on but be forewarned, this article contains major spoilers!

Devilman (original manga, 1972)

via Seven Seas Entertainment

The Devilman manga is a dark antiwar narrative in deep contrast to the standard monster-of-the-day, "evil fights evil" set-up of the anime (which ran at the same time as the manga). Ryo Asuka — who turns out to be Satan, the leader of all demons — helps convince the world that anyone dissatisfied with the status quo could turn into a demon and needs to be killed. Every nation starts a war with each other, and Japan creates the "Demon Busters" to murder anyone suspected of being a demon. This plot twist is the most explicitly political angle in Devilman and a clear critique against the genocide of marginalized peoples. One page features a taste of the global hate brewing around the world: a collective white desire to murder Black communities, the renewal of German anti-Semitism, and hatred for any protestor. There are also many moments that display the horrors of historical genocide when Akira and Ryo travel through time.

Devilman builds additional nuance around this theme with Ryo's character. In the manga's final scene, Ryo describes how demons were once oppressed by God, and that they in turn preyed upon humans in the same way that God preyed upon demons. Ryo recognizes that he continued the same cycle of genocidal hate and marginalization he once suffered. This is a striking moment that functions as a cautionary warning against abusing imbalanced power dynamics, and how even once marginalized groups are still capable of enacting horrors against those with less power.

via Seven Seas Entertainment

Ryo's character also made a groundbreaking stride in the representation of marginalized gender and sexual identities. His true form as Satan is easy to interpret as trans, possessing emotional, mental, and physical traits that defy the standard gender binary. The manga also makes it clear that Ryo considers Akira more than a friend, and is actually in love with him. Amazingly, Go Nagai does not use Ryo's trans-coded self or his queer love for Akira as fodder for insulting or disrespectful commentary from other characters. Ryo's gender-variant form is certainly mentioned, but it's never negatively framed or conflated with his murderous attitude toward humanity. Additionally, the manga never suggests Ryo is evil because of his romantic feelings for Akira (a simple, yet important distinction). It feels all the more impressive when you remember that this was made in 1972. Devilman's subversive portrayal of non-normative gender and sexual identity could still be considered groundbreaking even by today's standards.

Devilman OVAs

The first OVA, The Birth, covers Ryo and Akira's discovery of demon existence, with a very brutal early sequence that shows the bloody survival-of-the-fittest origins of life on Earth (which beautifully expands upon and mirrors the same sequence from the manga). It concludes with a gore-soaked finale where we see Akira's fateful transformation into Devilman. The sequence is filled with face stabs, top-notch body horror, and decapitations galore as Devilman rips apart demon after demon in a nightclub setting.

The second OVA, The Demon Bird, had the same crew that worked on the first OVA and contains a very similar feel. This OVA is more action-oriented than the first since it doesn't spend time on the build-up and exposition leading to Devilman's initial appearance. The animation and art design is probably even better than the first episode, which is most notable during the fight with Sirene. On a side note, the Manga Entertainment dubs for these first two OVAs are absolutely essential if you're seeking a fun evening with fellow anime nerds with a decent sense of humor. Their typically sleazy dubs — where Manga Entertainment excessively hyped up the seedier, more "adult" side of anime in order to market their products as wildly different from cartoons for kids — contain an assortment of unnecessary profanity and generally crude dialogue compared to the Japanese source material, to great comedic effect.

The third OVA, Amon: The Apocalypse of Devilman, is based on Amon: The Darkside of Devilman manga, an alternate-universe offshoot by Yu Kinutani. This OVA contains a reworked version of the end of Devilman and has a much darker edge compared to the first two OVAs. This entry in the series has an ugly, grim quality to it – such as the horrific depiction of Miki and her brother getting slaughtered by an angry mob — that initially felt off-putting to me. I started to enjoy it more on subsequent viewings however, when I remembered that, well, the entire Devilman mythos is pretty damned bleak in general. I think the desolate mood would have been more bearable had Akira felt like the compassionate, tragic hero of the manga.

Actually, overall I'd say that Akira's portrayal is one of my biggest complaints about these OVAs. He displays a cold lack of care for human life — like in the Demon Bird when he unconcernedly tears through an airplane while fighting Sirene and allows its passengers to presumably plummet to their deaths — that for me, offsets one of the biggest strengths of Devilman's core: that although Akira has the body of a demon, he never loses the tender heart of a human. With that in mind, let's explore Devilman Crybaby.

Devilman Crybaby

Devilman Crybaby is my favorite animated incarnation of Devilman, period. I might be in the minority with that opinion, but I think there's a lot to love. Masaaki Yuasa is already one of my favorite recent anime directors — Kaiba, Mind Game, and Lu Over the Wall are highlights — so it's no surprise I'd be head over heels for his take on a classic Go Nagai story.

Yuasa impressively shifts the '70s setting of the original into modern-day Japan: The group of surly highschoolers from the manga are replaced with rappers and smartphones are everywhere. In the hands of a lesser writer, a modern setting would be no more than a cosmetic, surface-level change of scenery to an already-written narrative. In contrast, Yuasa avoids this trap by using the modern setting to make incisive social commentary relevant to our times: social media is the means for both horrendous and beautiful moments in the show. It leads to Miki's murder when she posts on Instagram to defend Akira, but also serves as the online catalyst that unites Devilmen across the globe (in contrast to the original manga, where a set of demon-possessed psychic monks unite the Devilmen). Yuasa explained this in a 2018 Japan Times article:

"Today's situation is a lot closer to 'Devilman' than it was when Nagai wrote it in the '70s," he says. "The popularity of social media means people are a lot more connected, for good and bad – like someone getting shot over a video game. We learn about unarmed black people being killed by police, people being tortured and the rise of nationalism in politics. In Japan, too, where a lot of problems are openly blamed on foreigners.

"But it can also help spread good that we wouldn't otherwise know about. We see people coming out as gay or trans on social media, and there's a greater opening up and acceptance of different opinions and lifestyles."

Another beautiful aspect of the show is how Yuasa amplifies the queer elements present in the manga. Ryo and Akira's relationship feels even more loaded with romantic undertones, and Yuasa also introduces two queer characters unseen in the original manga. One of the characters is named Miki Kuroda, initially portrayed as a jealous antagonistic foil to the Miki we all know and love. Miki Kuroda changes as the episodes progress and she becomes a Devilman, and we eventually see her sacrifice herself in an attempt to save Miki Makimura, who she confesses her love to before dying. It's refreshing to see a queer woman represented in a story that previously had none, and incorporated in a way that feels organic and thoughtfully integrated within the larger narrative.

In contrast to the Akira of the OVAs, I absolutely adore this incarnation. Yuasa did a stellar job showing not only Akira's horny goth-jock side but also his compassionate traits. As the name implies, there's a lot of crying in Devilman Crybaby, and Akira is responsible for at least half the tears throughout the brief 10-episode series. Akira evokes such intense compassion and cares for people around him, which is a noticeable deviation from his cold demeanor in the OVAs. The human heart at the core of Devilman is on full display here, taking the emotional elements from the original and turning the volume up to 11. Though the art style and setting might be drastically different from what you'd typically expect of a Devilman remake, Yuasa did a masterful job honoring the source material while injecting it with fresh life and even fresher modern resonance.

What other aspects of Devilman — or its many incarnations — did you find important or interesting? Let me know in the comments below!

Do you love anime? Do you love writing? If you have an idea for a features story, pitch it to Crunchyroll Features!

By: [email protected]

#Anime #News #Latest in Anime News by Crunchyroll!

6 notes · View notes

azdoine · 5 years

Text

A followup on Henry Darger

So about a week ago I made some pretty brusque posts about Henry Darger -- an outsider artist infamous for his depictions of young gender-variant children, both as epic innocent heroes and as victims of graphic violence.

Last night, my copy of Henry Darger, Throwaway Boy by Jim Elledge came in the mail, and I am deeply conflicted about it.

On the whole I think that Throwaway Boy was a necessary book, as a sympathetic, queer, and exhaustively-researched reading of Darger and his work, but it was also a deeply frustrating book.

Elledge presents a strong account of historical queerness during the time of Darger’s life, but he views historical transfemininity as something primarily or solely imposed upon cis gay men, rather than something which might have existed for its own sake; and this colors all of his analysis, not just of Darger. Elledge misgenders and deadnames infamous historical trans women such as Jennie June, claims the hermaphrodite as a figure and symbol primarily of male homosexuality rather than gender-variance more broadly, and, evil of evils, unironically uses the word “transgendered”.

Nevertheless, Elledge presents an almost irrefutable argument that Darger was queer; almost certainly trans feminine, IMHO, although Elledge reads and presents Darger as a cis gay man, perhaps not unfairly.

Elledge’s research contributes a number of items to this end and others, which he relates to the reader:

Henry “Extremely Neurotypical” Darger

Henry “was a little too funny and made strange noises” with his “mouth, nose and throat” during class. He wanted his classmates to think he was a clever, fun-loving boy and hoped they would laugh. His plan backfired. Instead of being invited into the fold as he’d hoped, the other boys and girls were so aggravated by Henry that they gave him “saucy and hateful looks.” Some even told him that, if he didn’t stop it, they’d put him in his place after school.

...

Henry was also called on the carpet for moving his hands up and down and back and forth in the air, gestures that the adults around him probably identified as masturbatory, although he described them as “pretending it was snowing” or “raining.”

The Boyfriend Situation

Henry was proud to boast that “every evening and Sunday afternoons off” he “went visiting a special friend of mine”--”special friend” giving an important clue as to their relationship. In the early 1900s, gay men often used “special friend” and similar phrases as codes for their mates, and with that phrase, Henry cast his and Whillie’s liason as romantic and almost certainly sexual. By also bragging that they were together “every evening and Sunday afternoons” that the two didn’t work, Henry hinted at the intensity of their relationship. Like any couple in love, they spent every free minute that they had in each other’s company.

Marie

Henry... feminized himself in a variety of ways, both in his first novel and in its source materials. Midway through The Realms, Henry included a scene that he borrowed from his childhood, and in it, he depicted himself as "Marie," an adult woman recalling her mother's death when she was a child...

Clearly echoing the scene of his mother's deathbed, Henry depicted himself as a "frightened little girl" who had been "inflicted" with "a wound" in her "soul" that had "never healed." He also revealed that he understood why his father had abandoned him over over and over: because [his mother's] death had "driven" [his father] "insane and he knew not what he was doing" when he threw Henry away. Despite the many times his father abandoned him, Henry, adopting the persona of the mature Marie, was tender and understanding towards his father's grief.

Of Pretty Style

In the penultimate volume of The Realms, Henry added another scene... It’s a memo written by two of his characters, Detectives Fox and West...

Henry depicted himself as one of “the two little girl children of pretty style” who were his father’s daughters. The second “little girl” was his sister, whom he never knew... his anger over his father’s “insanity” and his “foolish grief” that stemmed from “the loss of his wife” comes through loud and clear. In stark opposition to Marie’s recollection, the detectives assert that the father wallowed in his grief and ignored his children, putting their emotional and physical welfare after his own.

Annie Aronburg

To familiarize himself with Church doctrine before taking communion, Henry carefully copied a Roman Catholic catechism word for word from a published edition into a notebook that has been called his Reference Ledger. He wrote an introduction to the catechism that he copied, but he signed it with the name of one of his most important characters, Annie Aronburg, whom he named after his favorite aunt. This is not the only time that Annie had "authored" one of Henry's texts. Two pages into the introduction to the catechism, Annie makes an interesting claim: "I am the full writer of the manuscript as far as it goes of the Glandelinians and the rebels at the child labor places, and will have them published as soon as I can." She, according to Henry, wrote The Realms, and... she thinks it's good enough to publish.

Henry continued to use Annie as a persona, a resource, and a guide outside of the novel for decades. After Sister Rose left St. Joseph’s in 1917, she and Henry corresponded for a short time. One of the things that makes their correspondence so important is the fact that Henry doctored her letters to him so that it appears that she was not writing to Henry at all but to Annie Aronburg. The original version of one, dated June 19, 1917, begins:

My dear Henry

Both of your letters reached me and I am grateful for your kind thought. I am glad that you are trying to be an even better boy since I left.

Henry's doctored version of her letter became:

My dear Aronburg

Both of your letters reached me and I am grateful for your kind thought. I am glad that you are trying to be an even better girl since I left.

He would also revise other documents, such as his discharge papers from the army, by crossing out specific words and inserting others so that the documents referred to Annie, again metaphorically transforming himself into her.

Webber George

Despite all the similarities between Henry and the Vivians, the character who represents Henry most strikingly is not any of the Vivians... but Webber George...

Webber shares more important attributes with Henry than any other character Henry ever created. Henry established the link between himself and Webber almost immediately...

Of all the similarities between Webber and Henry, being a “thoroughly bad boy” is the most important and, ultimately, the most revealing. Henry admitted over and over again how “bad” he had been as a child and gave plenty of examples, but he could never bring himself to reveal why. After strongly linking himself to Webber, Henry made an amazing revelation about Webber and, by extension, about himself: “One cause mainly of the boy being bad, and a foolish one at that was that was because he was angry at God for not having created him into a girl which he wanted to be more than anything else.” Henry’s anger at God, which began when he was five or six years old, was certainly caused by the physical and sexual abuse he suffered, by the jealousy he felt because other children’s parents were taking care of them while his father ignored him, and by the general mistreatment he experienced, usually at the hands of adults. Yet Henry was also angry--which became manifest in his “thoroughly bad” behavior--because he wanted to be female instead of male, just as his ten-year-old doppelganger Webber did...

Webber’s desire to have been born female rather than male was Henry’s. Webber’s anger was Henry’s, too. Webber transferred his anger from God to those around him. He couldn’t lash out at the Divine, so he lashed out at any little girl around him because a little girl “had many advantages which [a little] boy did not...”

Henry pushed the envelope even further a few pages later. He actually entered the narrative and spoke directly to the reader as himself in nineteenth-century fashion. In the process he essentially admitted that he was part of Chicago’s queer subculture. “The reader may think this”--Webber’s desire to have been born female--is “strange,” Henry wrote, but “the writer knows quite a number of boys who would give anything to have been born a girl.”

#henry darger #henry darger throwaway boy

47 notes · View notes

flying-elliska · 5 years

Note

What are the important bisexual characters that you said helped you? I am having a hard time finding good bi representation in which they aren’t considered promiscuous or unstable

Hiya anon ! What a quality question, thank you ! Here’s another mini essay about bi rep lmao. If there are some that I forgot please tell me ! And to everyone, tell me about the bi characters who made an impact on your life, I’d love to know !!!!

Okay so.

- When I answered the anon and talked about the characters that helped me come to terms with my sexuality, I talked about two in particular. Jack Harkness from Torchwood is depicted as very promiscuous, and somewhat instable. He still meant a lot to me because a) him sleeping around was never that much of a problem, it was because he was from the future, where things were different, which I thought was refreshing and b) his instability was because of the weight of being an immortal hero. Also fanon!Dean Winchester from SPN, as an older, more macho, emotionally witholding, badass dude written as bi meant a lot to me, but he doesn’t really avoid that stereotype either. But at least they were heroes. However, I can understand wanting bi characters that actually don’t fit that stereotype, because bi people irl aren’t all like that, even if there is nothing wrong per se about sleeping with a lot of different people, or having mental issues to struggle with. And that was a while ago and now we have more and more cool characters ! Such as :

- Rosa Diaz from Brooklyn Nine-Nine. One of the best portrayals of bisexuality on TV imho. She didn’t start out as bi, she was this tough, cool, scary but with a heart of gold cop who had a lot of other plotlines before. But then, since they saw that a lot of wlw got this vibe from her, were really into her, and the actress came out as bi herself, they decided to use this. So it was super organic, and the way they introduced the subject was true to Rosa herself ; she’s a super private person, she doesn’t like anybody knowing about her life (it’s actually a running joke and Rosa Diaz has been implied to not even be her real name). But then she is dating a woman, and struggles with her parents not understanding and her coworkers find out, help her and support her. Her gay captain is there for her in his typical stoic but hilarious way. They organize game night with her when her parents won’t anymore. We see her crushing on women and dating, but it is treated exactly as the other character’s love life, they never make a big deal out of it. She isn’t the token queer character. She says outright she is bisexual and there is a specific point about her mom not understanding it’s not a phase and thinking she’ll end up with a man anyway, which #relatable. The focus is on the team as found family. Also right now she’s dating a butch woman, which is awesome since they are so underrepresented on TV and I hope we see more of her. That show really is my comfort show, it’s still bloodly hilarious and it really transcends the format to say some really deep woke stuff too, but never in a way that feels on the nose. Everyone should watch it tbh.

- Korrasami ! Oh my god, I was so blown away when they got together. They’re two characters from the animated series Legend of Korra, they start out as rivals in love who have feelings for the same guy, but as they have to fight baddies together, they become bestest of friends, and both fall out of love with the guy. Then in season 3 and 4, their relationship becomes central to the show, as Asami stands by Korra through some really tough shit. Also, they’re both ultra badass and fight really well together. A lot of fans started reading their chemistry as romantic, but we’d never thought they’d actually go there. But the show ends with them walking into the ‘sunset’ (well, the spirit lands) together, holding hands. Now, it was never completely explicit on the show BUT they were dealing with a lot of censure from the networks and you have to be willingly obtuse not to read it as romantic. And after that the creators drew them on dates, and there is a comic series in which they are shown kissing, talking about their feelings, introducing each other to their families, etc. It made me feel so validated when it happened, and I just adore the whole ‘love triangle ditches the middle one and fall in gay love with each other’ trope. (is it a trope yet ? it should be.) It’s still a kids show at its core, but it has amazing depth and deals with some very deep shit. Korra starts off as a bit annoying but she has a really cool development, she’s a girl character we need more of - brave, dynamic but also brash and reckless and action driven in ways that are almost always exclusively shown for boys. And Asami is a more typical girly girl but she’s also a brilliant engineer and has a spine of steel and she’s also very slyly funny. They’re amazing. And the comics are super cute.

- Now there are a lot of characters who are bi/pan that I love, and are good characters in themselves, but their arcs do intersect in some ways with promiscuity and mental instability. I’m thinking about Even from Skam and all his remake variants, Magnus Bane from Shadowhunters, several characters from Black Sails, Sarah Lance and Constantine from Legends of Tomorrow, Eleanor Shellstrop from the Good Place, Bo from Lost Girl, Ilana from Broad City, Joe McMillan from Halt and Catch Fire, God/Chuck from Supernatural (lmaooooo), several characters on Penny Dreadful, or in a totally different category, Vilanelle from Killing Eve or Hannibal from the series (who are hella bad guys but it’s never linked to their sexuality, and are also incredibly compelling to watch.)

And even though these characters taken individually, I would argue, are good rep because they’re complex and layered and interesting and never one-dimensional (and watching them feels incredibly empowering at times)....it’s still a trend. I feel like when writing a character that is attracted to multiple genders, there is always this sort of...tangle of tropes that writers default to, unconsciously. Some negative and some positive. It used to be this trope of bis being villainous, instable, jealous, flaky, immature, perverted, manipulative, cheaters, amoral, greey, etc...and then it evolved into something of a reclaiming and subverting this trope. So now you feel like the Bi Character kind of has to be badass, glamorous, seductive, often superpowered or extraordinary in other ways.. And they also for multiple reasons (they’re immortal, they’re sensitive artist souls, they’re from the future, they’re psycho, they’re exccentric comic relief, they’re daring adventurers and pioneers) don’t care about social norms which allows them to sleep and fall in love with whomever. And so they tend to have those super busy romantic/sexual histories and very troubled backstories. In the past it was a bad thing, now it’s often presented as this positive, enlightened or at least fun and badass thing. They’re heroic, with big hearts, a tremendous lust for life and a cool rebellious attitude. They’re complex, dramatic, tortured. Which can be super cool, too.

But it would be nice to have more ‘normal’ bi characters. I mean, boring bisexuals need to see themselves represented too ! Our sexualities don’t give us super powers. At the same time, it is true that bisexual ppl have higher rates of mental illness, which deserves to be explored, but it would be nice if it was actually articulated and not just part of this trope. But still. We need rep, I think, that is more grounded and varied. So I think that’s also why I read a lot of fanfic. (I was really into the idea of bi Steve Rogers for a long time, partly also because he’s both very mentally resilient, kinda boring in a good way, and very unexperienced in terms of sex/romance, which is pretty much the opposite of the trope)

- I think books, and YA in general, are a good place to find these ‘normal bis’ characters. I’m thinking in particular of Leah from Leah on the Offbeat by Becky Albertalli (from the same book series that gave us the ‘Love, Simon’ movie) which is a super sweet coming of age/romance story about a super normal teenager who just happens to be also into girls (esp her best friend) and is loud and funny and very lovable and has zero doubts about being bi. You also have Adam Parrish from the Raven Cycle, another one of my forever faves ; he has an abusive family so PTSD from that but it never feels tropey, and it’s completely detached from his sexuality. He has magic powers, too. But his character feels completely opposite to the trope. He’s hardworking, somewhat withholding, prickly (and sometimes awkward), ambitious, determined, down to earth, and has a beautiful love story with another boy. And also Jane, from Jane Unlimited by Kristin Cashore, also really cool ; she’s a nerdy, smart girl who is actually inspired by Jane Eyre who has cool adventures in a weird house where we can follow her on different paths depending on the choices she makes, several of which are love stories. And finally the main character from The Seven Husbands from Evelyn Hugo, kinda fits the trope yeahhh since she’s a super glam actress who well, has seven husbands but it’s a pretty clever deconstruction since it turns out (slight spoilers) that Evelyn is actually through most of her life faithful in heart to the same person and the rest is mostly out of necessity, and her story feels very real and raw and down to earth.

- I don’t go there yet but I really want to check out Crazy Ex-Girlfriend and Schitt’s Creek which I have read have very good bi rep. And I want to catch up on Orphan Black (Cosima and Delphine both don’t have exact labels but they’re multi-gender attracted and they’re this cool couple of scientists in a relationship that gets a happy ending). I will never forgive what they did to Lexa so I stopped watching but I do think that Clarke Griffin from The 100 is very good bi rep. Alexia from Skam France, meanwhile, is a bit of a boundary case for me because, even though she’s presented as the ‘weird one’ from the group, very colorful and liberated and exccentric, she’s still a very normal teen who’s happy and comfortable in her own skin, which is awesome.

- Disclaimer, I included characters in here that are also pan/omnisexual or don’t have a label but are attracted to several genders, for the purpose of this discussion i don’t think the difference is all that relevant at least to me (i mostly identify as bi for the sake of simplicity but tbh i could also fit under pan so i feel represented by all those characters). But I understand the importance of characters that state their identities more clearly and with pride.

- So in conclusion : there is nothing wrong with having a sexually active life or struggling mentally (even tho that one is not fun). And I do love all my badass casanova time travelling super powered bis.

But we need more bi characters that don’t fit that trope. We need bi characters in children’s shows, or that don’t have more than one relationship, or that don’t have a relationship at all, to break the tendency to always show bisexual ppl as overly sexual. We need bi characters in committed relationships to break this idea that bi characters are bound to cheat or can’t be satisified with only one person. We need bi characters that are mentally stable and successful and happy, to show that it’s possible. We need bi characters that are boring, bookish, nerdy, ordinary, clumsy, not particularly seductive, socially awkward, rule-sticklers, etc...to show that bi people are not all party animals, or doing it for attention, or to be wild, rebellious and socially progressive. It’s just a sexuality, it doesn’t say anything about your personality. Even though there are some correlations with MI or being bi might bring you in contact with more progressive ideas and to see life a bit differently, there is nothing automatic about it.

- In conclusion, reading testimonies from real people also helped me a lot. It’s a very dated but I got the book “ Bi Any Other Name: Bisexual People Speak Out “ when I was struggling with my own sexuality and it helped a lot, to read that even back then (1991) you had all sorts of regular ppl claiming to be bi and that it was not a phase or a fad or whatever.

#bisexuality #bi rep #media representation #bi pride #lgbt #bi characters

15 notes · View notes

prince-of-beach-city · 7 years

Text

An Analysis of Queer Characters and Relationships in the Children’s Cartoon Steven Universe

On November 4th, 2013, on the popular cable channel Cartoon Network, a new children’s cartoon, Steven Universe, premiered. It was about a young boy named Steven Universe and three alien caretakers known as the Crystal Gems. Nearly four years into its run, with four seasons and counting, Steven Universe is one of the most popular shows on Cartoon Network, amassing a huge fanbase of all ages, eagerly awaiting each new episode. Proponents of the show would highlight its gripping story, its colorful animation, and its character development. What really makes it stand out, however, is its portrayal of LGBTQ+ characters and relationships which I would argue are the most respectful portrayals on television today.

That last point makes Steven Universe stand out because it is so rare to see respectful portrayals of the queer community on television. It was a little more than ten years ago that most queer characters in popular media were being stereotyped profusely (Raley and Lucas 31). Even today, movies like Lego Batman are attacked for allegedly being gay propaganda (Fitzgerald). Children do not very often see positive queer characters in their cartoons, with most characters and relationships being put in a cartoon to be the butt of a joke (Sheng Kuan 101). Steven Universe, however, has always unashamedly portrayed queer characters and relationships. With same-sex relationships such as Pearl and Rose Quartz, Ruby and Sapphire, androgynous characters like Stevonnie, and even gender-creative kids like the title character, Steven Universe has the most respectful representations of the queer community ever seen in a kid’s show.

The show did not start out portraying queer relationships. By all accounts, the first season was mostly the same as any other cartoon on Cartoon Network: each episode did not seem to connect with each other in a larger story and the characters didn’t seem to change or develop as time went on. As the show continued however, it was revealed that there were many underlying plots involving Steven Universe and his alien guardians, the Crystal Gems. The first plot to reveal any sort of queer representation was the story of the Crystal Gem Pearl and Steven’s mother, Rose Quartz. This sentence is put here to avoid plagiarism. Over the course of several episodes, starting with episode 45, “Rose’s Scabbard,” it is shown that Pearl had intense feelings for the Crystal Gem leader, Rose Quartz, willing to leave everything behind to stay with Rose on earth. Even after Rose’s death, Pearl is still shown to have feelings for her, even though Rose eventually fell in love with someone else.

This relationship establishes Pearl as lesbian. Both Pearl and Rose, although technically existing as alien rocks with no gender, both identify as female, and thus their relationship is a same-sex relationship. Although never explicitly stated, it is generally assumed that the intense loyalty Pearl had for Rose was closest to the feeling of love. In one study done for the Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, twenty-six classic Disney movies are examined for stereotypes. The authors found that among the twenty-six movies, there were no queer relationships shown (Towbin, et al. 40). They studied the most famous Disney classics, and thus the most likely to influence the children audience (Towbin, et al. 25). By portraying Pearl as a lesbian, Steven Universe has more queer representation than those twenty-six movies collectively. Even if it is argued that Pearl’s relationship with Rose is more like the relationship a knight and their monarch, Pearl is still shown to be a lesbian when she gets the phone number of a mystery girl in the episode “Last One Out of Beach City.”

Another example of a queer relationship would be the relationship between the two Crystal Gems Ruby and Sapphire, but first the concept of fusion must be explained within the context of the show. The process of fusion is described as two gems fusing by being in perfect synch with each other, which is usually accomplished through dancing together. Fusion is generally considered to be the most intimate action two or more gems can do together, and it is sometimes considered the gem equivalent of sex. Throughout the first season, it is shown that gems like Pearl, Garnet, and Steven have the unique ability to fuse with other gems to create new and usually bigger gems. Pearl and Rose Quartz, for example, could fuse to become the gem Rainbow Quartz.

In the first season finale of the show, “Jail Break,” the audience is first introduced to the characters Ruby and Sapphire. Separately, they were shown to be gems that nobody had ever seen before. When Steven reunites them, however, this exchange occurs:

Ruby: Did they hurt you?

Sapphire: No, no, I’m okay. Did they hurt you?

Ruby: Who cares!?

Sapphire: I do!

Then, Ruby kisses Sapphire’s tears away and they fuse into the gem Garnet. This action of kissing away tears indicates that the relationship between the two gems is a romantic relationship, as that is an action is generally considered to be too intimate for any other type of relationship. Garnet had been a part of the main cast from the start of the show and although there were hints that she was a fusion, that revelation caught most people off guard. Those that did notice it did not expect the two gems that made Garnet to be in a romantic relationship. If the above exchange didn’t convince the audience of the romance, Garnet’s musical number in the same episode where she brags that she is “made of love” certainly cemented the type of relationship that exists between Ruby and Sapphire.

Although Ruby and Sapphire’s relationship is considered to be the most stable relationship of the show, it is never idealized or shown as unrealistic. Even though they spend most of their time fused into Garnet, Ruby and Sapphire do occasionally argue. This is shown in the episode “Keystone Motel” when the couple split apart because they disagreed about Pearl. In a different episode, “The Answer,” Garnet tells Steven about how Ruby and Sapphire became a couple and how their relationship’s beginnings were just as awkward and strange as any human relationship. In Sheng Kuan Chung’s article, "Media Literacy Art Education: Deconstructing Lesbian and Gay Stereotypes in the Media.," Chung describes that the media is how most children learn about queer relationships (Chung 99). By portraying Ruby and Sapphire’s relationship as realistically as possible, the show Steven Universe provides a good example of a healthy queer relationship for children to learn from, something rarely found in children’s media. It is also worth noting that “The Answer” was later made into a children’s book.

On the subject of fusion, there is one other fusion that is often seen representing the queer community. Usually, fusion is only possible between two gems. However, the main character of the show, Steven Universe, is only half-gem, the other half being human. Because of this, Steven has the unique ability to fuse with gems as well as humans. He finds this out in the episode “Alone Together” when, while dancing with his best friend Connie, they accidentally fuse together to form a new being: Stevonnie. Stevonnie is, as Garnet describes, a unique being created by the bond between Steven and Connie, with a personality that combines traits from both of them. Physically, they are androgynous as well as attractive enough to catch the eye of both guys and girls.

Because Stevonnie is a fusion of a boy and a girl, their gender does not really fall into the usual gender binary. In the show, Stevonnie has no specified gender and the only pronouns used to describe the have been “they” and “them.” In an online interview with Meredith Woerner, the show’s creator, Rebecca Sugar, said that Stevonnie challenged “gender norms as an individual.” This implies that Stevonnie is a transgender individual who, by conventional standards, is not completely a boy or a girl. A study was performed in 2015 about the effects of transgendered characters in popular media, like Stevonnie, on LGBTQ+ youth. The study found that such characters “have significant implications” on the lives of transgender youth by helping them in “rehearsing and negotiating their transgender identities” (McInroy and Craig, 614). What is more, it was found that there were more stereotypical examples of transgender individuals in traditional media, such as books and television, than there were authentic, respectful examples (McInroy and Craig, 614). Because of this, the authentic, respectful transgender Stevonnie is a rarity on television.

Granted, not all children know they are transgendered when they are born, but many transgender individuals start out as gender-variant children. In his article about gender-variant children in media, Tony Kelso defines a gender-variant, or gender-creative, child as “a youngster whose activities and verbalizations disclosing hints of personal identity are incongruent with the gender expectancies that have been socially constructed by the society or culture of which she or he is a part” (1063). In other words, a gender-creative child is a child who does things that don’t match up with their designated gender identity. An example of a gender-creative child would be a girl who likes to play with cars.

Steven Universe is a good example of what a gender-creative child is. Instead of sports, he likes to read. He develops emotional attachments to his stuffed animals. He cries openly and wears his heart on his sleeve. All these things do not conform with what society views as masculine, yet the fact that he is a boy is never called into question. Steven’s most gender-creative moment came in the episode “Sadie’s Song.” In that episode, Steven, in an attempt to save his friend Sadie from a performance she doesn’t want to do, dons her outfit and takes to the stage in her place. This outfit includes a turquoise crop-top with a matching skirt and high-heels and full makeup, including a purple star reminiscent of David Bowie. The characters at the performance smile and cheer, not seeing anything wrong with Steven in a skirt. Once more, Steven Universe created a character to represent a group of people that, as Kelso points out, are not represented often on television (1078).

So, as shown above, Steven Universe has a wide range of characters and relationships that represent the LGBTQ+ community; however, critics of the show might ask why such representation matters? Why is it so important that Steven Universe have so many examples of LGBTQ+ representation? The answer is: no other television show has ever had that level of representation for the queer community before. Amber Raley and Jennifer Lucas did a study in 2006 examining several prime-time television shows for their portrayal of gay and lesbian characters (Raley and Lucas 27). The method they used to judge each show’s portrayal of queer characters was an adaptation of C. Clark’s model of social group media representation, originally used to examine black representation (Raley and Lucas 23). The authors of the article found that “Gay male and Lesbian characters were represented in 7.5% of the dramas and comedies” that they examined (Raley and Lucas 31). The characters’ portrayals in the shows put them in stage two of Clark’s model where the characters are shown as persons of ridicule (Raley and Lucas 32). Steven Universe, on the other hand, never ridicules its LGBTQ+ characters, putting the show in stage four of Clark’s model, respect, where such characters as Pearl or Stevonnie are “seen in diverse roles that go beyond the socially acceptable stereotypes” (Raley and Lucas 25).

There is also the question of why it is so important that a show with severely above-average representation of LGBTQ+ characters is a kid’s show. As Kelso put it, “homosexual or transgender identity formation generally begins in early childhood” (1059). Children need to be educated on the different characteristics of the queer community and, unfortunately, they can’t find any information anywhere other than the media. Kenneth Wald explored, in 2002, how many school districts had members of the LGBT+ community as teachers or as school board members and the correlation of that to the local school district’s policy on sexual orientation (Wald 147). Wald found that when a school system had more LGBTQ+ teachers, they tended to have better policies concerning sexual orientation (Wald 154). He also found that only 38% of the 123 school districts examined had openly LGBTQ+ teachers (Wald 159). As such, most of the school districts examined did not have appropriate queer representation and thus students were deprived of a source of information by which they could educate themselves about the queer community. For students such as these, especially those students that are queer themselves, shows like Steven Universe are needed to provide a positive view of the LGBTQ+ community.

Works Cited

“Alone Together.” Steven Universe, written by Katie Mitroff, Hilary Florido, and Rebecca Sugar, season 1, episode 37, Cartoon Network, 15 Jan. 2015.

“Jail Break.” Steven Universe, written by Joe Johston, Rebecca Sugar, and Jeff Liu, season 1, episode 52, Cartoon Network, 12 Mar. 2015.

“Keystone Motel.” Steven Universe, written by Paul Villeco, Raven Molisee, and Rebecca Sugar, season 2, episode 12, Cartoon Network, 14 Jul. 2015.

“Last One Out of Beach City.” Steven Universe, written by Hilary Florido and Lauren Zuke, season 4, episode 6. Cartoon Network, 8 Sep. 2016.

“Mr. Greg.” Steven Universe, written by Joe Johnston and Jeff Liu, season 3, episode 7, Cartoon Network, 27 Jun. 2016.

“Rose’s Scabbard.” Steven Universe, written by Raven Molisee, Paul Villeco, and Rebecca Sugar, season 1, episode 45, Cartoon Network, 9 Mar. 2015.

“Sadie’s Song.” Steven Universe, written by Raven Molisee and Paul Villeco, season 2, episode 17, Cartoon Network, 17 Sep. 2015.

“The Answer.” Steven Universe, written by Lamar Abrams and Katie Mitroff, season 2, episode 22, Cartoon Network, 4 Jan. 2016.

Fitzgerald, Michael. "Warning! The LEGO Batman Movie Is Propaganda Pushing a 'Gay Agenda': WATCH." Towleroad. Broadblast Corporation, 24 Feb. 2017. Web. 09 Mar. 2017.

Kelso, Tony. "Still Trapped in the U.S. Media’s Closet: Representations of Gender-Variant, Pre-Adolescent Children." Journal of Homosexuality, vol. 62, no. 8, Aug. 2015, pp. 1058-1097. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00918369.2015.1021634.

McInroy, Lauren B. and Shelley L. Craig. "Transgender Representation in Offline and Online Media: LGBTQ Youth Perspectives." Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, vol. 25, no. 6, Aug/Sep2015, pp. 606-617. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/10911359.2014.995392.

Raley, Amber B. and Jennifer L. Lucas. "Stereotype or Success? Prime-Time Television's Portrayals of Gay Male, Lesbian, and Bisexual Characters." Journal of Homosexuality, vol. 51, no. 2, Aug. 2006, pp. 19-38. EBSCOhost.

Sheng Kuan, Chung. "Media Literacy Art Education: Deconstructing Lesbian and Gay Stereotypes in the Media." International Journal of Art & Design Education, vol. 26, no. 1, Feb. 2007, pp. 98-107. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1476-8070.2007.00514.x.

Towbin, Mia Adessa, et al. "Images of Gender, Race, Age, and Sexual Orientation in Disney Feature-Length Animated Films." Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, vol. 15, no. 4, Dec. 2003, pp. 19-44. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1300/J086v15n04_02.

Wald, Kenneth D., et al. "Sexual Orientation and Education Politics: Gay and Lesbian Representation in American Schools." Journal of Homosexuality, vol. 42, no. 4, Feb. 2002, p. 145. EBSCOhost.

Woerner, Meredith. “Steven Universe Guidebook Spills The Secrets Of The Crystal Gems.” io9, io9.Gizmodo.com, 14 May 2015, io9.gizmodo.com/steven-universe-guidebook-spills-the-secrets-of-the-cry-1704470546. Accessed 14 Mar. 2017.

#my writing #research paper #steven universe #heard some people might be interested

7 notes · View notes

zorilleerrant · 4 years

Text

I’m trying to put together what I’m even looking for in a book, because I can’t find it. (Recommendations welcome. Anything I can read in an electronic copy, including fanfic and webnovels.)

SFF - read broadly. magical realism counts if it’s on the more magical end, near future counts if it’s on the more futurism end. comics genres also welcome. horror-inflected welcome but strict horror is eh

I can’t do historical fiction. I can usually deal with Ye Old Timey alternate world or time travel. absolutely okay with current-day or near future stuff from the past tho

YA is okay if it’s not minced oaths YA. no MG. absolutely will not read anything the author refers to as “new adult”. adult preferred

can’t cope with anything that’s got cops in it right now, regardless of whether they’re the good guys or the bad guys. this includes SFF variants, TLAs, and military personnel

nothing by NTAB SWM. I’m happy to read anything by disabled/neurodivergent men, queer men, or moc, but I cannot deal with anymore NTAB SWM I just won’t trust the story

woman perspective character. it’s okay if she’s not the mc or protagonist as long as the story is centered around her (nbs are also okay if they’re written by nb authors)

no women being sexy lamps. it’s okay if men are sexy lamps, as long as some men are actually fleshed out in the narrative

no “not like other girls” bs, dismissal or derision of femininity, women pitting themselves against each other, or “popular girls” tropes

none of the “men and women are just different” or “it’s a man thing”/“it’s a woman thing” or implying that men and women just can’t understand each other or have some natural/innate distinctions between them

minimal romance. some dating/marriage/family in the c plot is okay, but no women’s motivations that have to do with any erotic entanglement or plans for relationships/family

no worlds that just pretend systemic oppression and class differences don’t exist, or completely get rid of the hegemonic group (stories with no men, no white people, no straight people, etc.). they don’t have to be the main plot/characters and I would prefer they weren’t, but it has to be clear they exist in the context of the story

no identity dichotomies. stories that imply that everyone is gay or straight, in a wheelchair or completely abled, black or white, etc. suck. I’ll accept things that imply there are only two genders because people trying to shoehorn in nb characters is generally much worse

no white savior narratives. or the thing where they’re ‘rescuing’ disabled/neurodivergent people. or ‘liberating’ sex workers.

nothing anti-sex or anti-sex work generally, including sterilized narratives that imply no one’s having sex or encourage people to wait until marriage

nothing preachy. I’m fine with strong political/social messages, but nothing that reads like an essay that was fictionalized to trick people into reading it

no unearned happy endings, especially cheesy endings. but also no unearned unhappy/shock endings. bad endings really ruin good books

I need to know. why I’m interested. not just a series of character identities and the promise that “it’s so diverse!!!”

also don’t give me any racefaking authors I will check. this goes triple for “asian-influenced” books

anyway it’s possible this book doesn’t exist and even if it does there’s no guarantee it’s either entertaining or artistically sound, so like. anyway I need a librarian to help me I think

0 notes

victormendesbcu-blog · 5 years

Text

Queer Theory

Queer theory is a field of critical theory that emerged in the early 1990s out of the fields of queer studies and women’s studies. It challenges the way that heterosexuality is considered “normal” and explores identities or behaviour that might be considered “other” or deviant. Queer is an umbrella term for anyone who is not heterosexual or cisgender.

Heteronormativity

Heteronormativity referes to a set of related cultural assumptions:

The “normal or “natural” form of attraction and relationships is one man and one woman who: normally or naturally embody conventional gender roles and norms and have sex whereby the man’s penis penetrates the woman’s vagina, other forms of sexuality and gender are less normal or natural than this (or not normal or natural at all) thus people are assumed heterosexual unless proven otherwise. This heteronormativity is reinforced by the media and how its depictions are usually always straight couples.

Stonewall

The stonewall riots were a series of spontaneous, violent demonstrations by members of the gay (LGBT) community against a police raid. They are widely considered to constitute the most important event leading to the gay liberation movement and the modern fight for LGBT rights in the United States.

In 2015 a movie about the stonewall riots was released. The trailer got a lot of backlash and criticism for majorly casting white cis men as the leaders of the revolution. Sexuality intersects with a variety of other factors such as gender, race, culture, religion etc. And everyone has different experiences.

Paris is Burning is a 1990 american documentary film directed by Jennie Livingston. It chronicles the mid to late 1980s ball culture of New York City and the African-American, Latino, gay and transgender communities involved in it. Some critics consider the film to be an invaluable documentary of the end of the "Golden Age" of New York City drag balls, and a thoughtful exploration of race, class, gender, and sexuality in America. In 2016, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant”.

Pose is an American drama television series set in the late 80s. It looks at the juxtaposition of several segments of life and society in New York: the African-American and Latino ball culture world, the downtown social and literary scene and the rise of the yuppie Trump milieu. The first season was met with critical acclaim upon its premiere and included the largest cast of transgender actors for a narrative television series with over 50 transgender characters.

The AIDS epidemic

The Aids epidemic caused by HIV was first noticed in young gay men in Los Angeles, New York City and San Francisco in 1981. Starting in the early 1980s, AIDS activist groups and organizations began to emerge and advocate for people infected with HIV in the United States. Though it was an important aspect of the movement, activism went beyond the pursuit of funding for AIDS research. Groups acted to educate and raise awareness of the disease and its effects on different populations, even those thought to be at low-risk of contracting HIV. This was done through publications and “alternative media” created by those living with or close to the disease.

The Silence=Death Project, most known for their iconic political poster, was the work of a six-person collective in New York City: Avram Finkelstein, Brian Howard, Oliver Johnston, Charles Kreloff, Chris Lione, and Jorge Soccarás. They created the Silence=Death poster using the title phrase and a pink triangle, which during the 1970s had become a gay pride symbol reclaimed by the gay community from its association with the persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. The pink triangle is still present in the queer community today — it’s used in AIDS memorials across the globe, and remains a lasting symbol associated with ACT UP and the epidemic.

Reclaiming Oppression

A lot of people believe theres power in taking back words and symbols used against them. If someone reclaims the word and calls themselves “queer” or “homo” as a term of empowerment or endearment, then it feels like it can’t hurt them.

Gender performativity

The term "gender performativity" was first coined in American philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler's 1990 book Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. In Gender Trouble, Butler sets out to criticize what she considers to be an outdated perception of gender. This outdated perception, according to Butler, is limiting in that it adheres to the dominant societal constraints that label gender as binary. In scrutinizing gender, Butler introduces a nuanced perception in which she unites the concepts of performativity and gender.

The Bechdel Test

The bechdel test is a measure of the representation of women in fiction. It asks whether a work features at least two women who talk to each other about something other than a man. The requirement that the two women must be named is sometimes added.The test is named after the American cartoonist Alison Bechdel in whose comic strip Dykes to Watch Out For the test first appeared in 1985. Bechdel credited the idea to her friend Liz Wallace and the writings of Virginia Woolf. After the test became more widely discussed in the 2000s a number of variants and tests inspired by it have emerged.

Bury Your Gays trope

The Bury Your Gays trope in media, including all its variants, is a homophobic cliché. It is the presentation of deaths of LGBT characters where these characters are nominally able to be viewed as more expendable than their heteronormative counterparts. In this way, the death is treated as exceptional in its circumstances. So it can be fairly said that, in aggregate, queer characters are more likely to die than straight characters. Indeed, it may be because they seem to have less purpose compared to straight characters, or that the supposed natural conclusion of their story is an early death.

1 note · View note