bixqueen - Tumblr blog

bixqueen · 2 years

Note

yelena is aroace, why is it so hard for you to admit it???

I’ve been staying away from this because it feels like such a pointless thing to argue about. Despite me having my own tagging system that keeps me out of the show, character, and ship tags a seemingly endless amount of you have been ceaselessly hounding me for days, trying to police what I say and do on my blog. I've finally reached my breaking point so…here we go I guess.

Let’s start with the basics since it appears that most of you fail to grasp even that. There’s two distinctly different concepts that fandom conflates and/or tries to use interchangeably because evidently only a handful of us took a literature class in school. Time for a lesson.

CANON: Canon are the elements of a fictional story that are officially a part of it. Canon is IRREFUTABLE information provided directly from the media to the audience. In movies and TV this would mean things like action or dialogue that happen ON SCREEN. In a book or comic it would be things EXPLICITLY said or shown on the page. Canon isn’t fan interpretation/speculation, fix-its, headcanons, what-ifs, something an actor said at a con in front of 200 people or that they “thought maybe that’s a thing their character would do” at an interview in a press junket. Canon is what is IN THE TEXT. End of story.

AUTHORIAL INTENT & DEATH OF THE AUTHOR:

-Authorial Intent: An author can have an “intention” with a piece but that ends the moment the story is out of their hands and the reader/viewer takes ownership of it. Why? Because none of us see the world the same way. Literally. The author simply cannot control how an individual will read their work, cannot dictate how we embrace what they supposedly wrote, and cannot force us to throw out our own takeaway of the text. It is entirely possible that my experience with the text or the characters is vastly different than what they “intended” that to be and there is nothing wrong with that. Once art is out in the world it is going to take a life of its own. That is how subjectivity works.

-Death Of The Author: TV Tropes defines Death Of The Author as follows: “It holds that an author's intentions and background (including their politics and religion) should hold no special weight in determining how to interpret their work. This is usually understood to mean that a writer's views about their own work are no more or less valid than the interpretation of the reader.”

Now that we’ve established both those things let’s break down Yelena’s case in particular.

Let’s start with the “Ace” part. It is more than obvious that you guys are taking AUTHORIAL INTENT and confusing it with CANON. One of the authors wrote an obscure blog post where they expressed some thoughts. Let’s highlight key quotes from the post:

“Most scholars agree that the first official use of “aromantic” was documented in 2005. That’s thirty-five years after I was born, six years after Yelena was invented, and—fictionally--approximately ten years after Yelena would have come into being (in the version of events where she was born rather than cloned).”

Right off the bat, Authorial Intent is out of the window. The term didn’t even exist when they created Yelena ergo it is impossible that they set out to write her as “ace”. Next.

“But now, let’s talk a bit about Yelena. When I first invented her, I didn’t give much thought to her romantic life or sexuality because neither factored into the story I was telling at the time. Later, when I had lived with her a little longer and someone asked me if she might be ACE, I thought that actually made a lot of sense for her.”

This is an "afterthought" situation. I’m not saying this to undermine the writer as a person, saying they have ill will, or calling them a liar. But this is - as clearly stated BY THEM - an afterthought. Yelena was not created as an "ace" character. Next.

These are going to be two quotes:

“I like the idea of her being ACE and hope they go with that, but despite my 20+ years writing comics, there isn’t even anyone there I can mention that to. That’s not how comics work. Even if I said she’s X or Y or X and Y, Marvel might be a day away from releasing something that takes her in a totally different direction. Ultimately, my ideas about how Yelena identifies are no more right or wrong than yours.

I have a lot to say about how unfairly creative IP is handled in this industry, but that’s not what we’re here to discuss. What I do want to impart is that it’s a bad idea to trust multibillion-dollar corporations to represent you and your community.”

and

“I am a fan-fic writer and RPer, though, and I firmly believe that when you write or play or draw a character, you get to decide what is and isn’t true about them. No one can tell you you’re wrong (except, perhaps, your GM) – that’s the entire point. So if your question is really, “do you think it’s okay if I write/play Yelena as X or Y or interested in Z,” I am always going to support your choices. 100%. Do what you think feels right and makes sense. FWIW, you have my blessing."

The writer is LITERALLY TELLING YOU, in black and white, to headcanon Yelena as whatever you want because...

Their own ideas of Yelena are basically headcanons at this point.

They understand the inherent importance of representation and they agree that it would be cool that she could be this one thing but that they do not make and cannot make any creative decisions about what the character is or isn’t.

They are making it clear to you - the fan - that they do not get to dictate canon because they do not own the character. Disney/Marvel does. They are telling you that “you as an individual decide what her truth is and how you want her to represent to YOU” and yet somehow you guys turned that open invitation into “I must hound everyone who disagrees with my personal interpretation of how I want her to represent ME”.

Now, relevant quotes excerpted…beyond this one blog post there is no other actual canon evidence in any of the comics of Yelena verbalizing anything about her sexuality. At all. Anywhere. If you have it, please make me eat crow. Correct me. But I’ve been doing vast research on it for a couple of days now and have even asked people to provide it and no one can which is pretty strong evidence that there isn’t. All that anyone can come up with is the author's blog post and another interview where they have yet another throwaway sentence of Authorial Intent. This is it:

"PROBABLY MORE LIKELY". That is an opinion, my friends. This is all you have. Intent and Opinions does not canon make.

Now, onto my absolute fucking favorite part of this whole thing...

You want to know what IS canon? You want to know what you all conveniently and willingly choose to gloss over and never mention because it doesn't serve your narrative?

1) The fact that CANONICALLY Yelena is a lingerie model and a sex worker who owns a soft-core porn empire. [x]

2) The fact that in this scene she has an entire conversation with Natasha about how she chooses to use her body to sexually manipulate targets to get what she wants:

Interesting how I had to start doing research into Yelena to learn that because in this entire conversation about “representation” sex workers and sex positive, feminist women had never once come up. Funny how apparently sex workers don’t deserve a superhero then? Hmmmm...

I’m not saying one is more worthy than the other, just a point I figured was worth flagging because it just seems oh so very curious to me.

Let’s move onto the “Aro” part because this is the real doozy. This is the one y’all truly bent yourselves into a pretzel to come up with. At least there is some sort of something you can cling to on the "ace" front but on this one you really just went for the mountain of straws and started to grasp.

The "proof" you guys use of her being "aro" is a single panel of her saying "I'm not...anything". Here's the entire scene instead of just the one frame you guys use out of context:

I'm going to use two different sources here to debunk this one.

- This person had already read the whole series the panel you guys chose to extract that ONE frame from and completely misconstrue to support your point. Here are a couple of excerpts of the ask they answered:

“…It’s more people seeing that one panel and misunderstanding it.[…] The panel where she says "I’m not anything" is a reoccurring theme throughout this series specifically about her not seeing herself as the Black Widow and her dehumanization of herself. The full page itself is about the woman she was talking to goading Yelena by asking if she was into BDSM.”

I then had a DM conversation with the person to find out more because I wanted to get further context about the series as a whole since they had the full picture. I specifically asked them questions about this part. They said the following:

“The way she [the woman] degrades her [Yelena] and calls her worthless is supposed to be feeding into Yelena thinking she isn’t as good as Natasha and how she’s not truly the Black Widow. The "I Am Nothing" is the writers very badly trying to ham fist their way into having Yelena saying she is nothing as she is not the Black Widow, which is the main point of the comic."

Without having read the rest of the comic, if I were to see these panels in isolation, I would have a slightly different interpretation of the scene, because...again...no one digests texts the same way. This is a prime example of that. What I would gather from it is that Yelena would be saying “I am nothing” as in “I don’t label myself as anything” rather than literally just jumping straight to “I am aromantic”. Like…that is such a giant stretch that it’s almost laughable.

The second person I'm quoting is an AROACE person who made a whole thread on twitter agreeing that Yelena is NOT canon aroace and sharing pretty solid (and similar) factual evidence as to why.

[Full disclosure: I was sent this link as I was in the process of finishing this post by someone who knew I was writing it and I figured it was worth adding an Aro/Ace voice to the mix as well].

Here are some good excerpts:

"...in said interview grayson talks about yelena being asexual then proceeds to describe yelena as aromatic instead, making it clear that she doesn't know the difference between the two orientations..."

The writer then proceeds to break down and analyze the same misconstrued panels I was quoting above. She runs through several possible scenarios of what that scene could mean, all just as likely as the other. All valid interpretations. All different versions of Yelena as an LGBT character. This is the most important part to me tho:

"...once again think about the time and place yelena grew up in. you're going to try and tell me yelena knows what asexual is and what it means? muchless aromantic? she grew up in approximately 70s russia... expecting her to know her sexuality at that point is kinda weird?

now with all this in mind (especially the last three!) it pretty much completely erases any chance that those panels are meant to be her saying shes aroace. as far as im aware these are the only two pieces of evidence people try to use to confirm yelena as canonically aroace. both are very easily debunked.

i am by no means here to tell anyone not to write yelena as aroace, she's your character do what you want! i'm only here to educate people on this topic. and as someone who is BOTH aro and ace its absolutely my place to speak on this. [...] all i want is for this non-existent canon to stop being continuously shoved down everyone's throats."

And finally:

"i'd also just like to add the way a lot of people tend to handle this topic of conversation is very weird. if your first instinct when you see an aroace character is to say they cant be shipped or cant have sex... that's weird! aroace is a spectrum! not all aroaces are repulsed by sex and relationships! yes, some aroaces are! but not all of them. to immediately force her into that box with no evidence is extremely stereotypical! a very good majority of conversation based around aroace yelena is riddled with stereotypes."

I'm going to revisit the opening lesson for a beat because it has to do with my final point. Let me quote myself in case we already forgot:

"Canon is IRREFUTABLE information provided directly from the media to the audience. In movies and TV this would mean things like action or dialogue that happen ON SCREEN."

Why am I circling back? Because with this new wave of IP and adaptations that we're living in. So many pieces of IP are getting adapted from podcasts, comics, books, etc into TV/Film. Changes are always going to be made from the original to the screen. Always. ALWAYS. What is canon in one is not necessarily going to be canon in the other. They're two completely separate pieces of media. Every single time. They immediately become divorced and stand-alone from each other as soon as a derivative is created.

It's why you see things like couples being "endgame" in books but not in shows/movies. Or people being alive or dead in books but not in TV/films. Or major story points being changed. Or new characters being introduced or omitted from adaptations at all. They are not the same thing. Canon on text is one thing. CANON ON SCREEN IS ANOTHER. Shut up already about "what's canon here must be canon here" and learn the difference.

Do you want to know how much characters/relationships have changed from Marvel comics to the MCU? Let me list a few things that are canon in the comics just for quick references.

Black Widow had romances with Bucky, Hawkeye, and Daredevil.

Hela is Loki’s daughter not his sister.

Pepper was never married to Tony.

Black Window and the Hulk have never been on the Avengers together.

Natasha and Yelena are rivals not sisters.

I could keep going but I think you get the point. Marvel Comics are not the MCU. I'll repeat:

MARVEL COMICS ARE NOT THE MCU.

Simply because something happens or is true is one does not mean it must be true in the other. It is especially important to drive that point home in this case because "Yelena is aroace" isn't even a canon fact in the comics. It's farfetched at best. At best.

My goal with this is not to tell you to not headcanon Yelena as aroace. If that is important to you, dear god fucking do it to your heart's content. No one is trying to fucking take that from you. Matter of fact, if you want to string two whispers of a stretch together and pretend in your delusional little head that it’s “canon” be my guest. Where the issue begins is that you are now trying to militaristically enforce this “canon” myth when it is nothing more than that…A MYTH. And you are trying to force it on people who weren't fighting you on it to begin with. People like me who were just over here in my own corner of the internet minding my own business. I wasn’t invading your spaces, arguing with any of you, or trying to debunk any of your beliefs until you all insisted on coming to me with this bullshit over and over and over again.

All I - a casual viewer who had zero knowledge of the comics or the backstory - wanted to do was calmly enjoy and interpret these two characters and their relationship however the show had established them which was...AS A BLANK SLATE. Right now in the MCU they are non-denominational. They have never said Kate is [XYZ] and Yelena is [ABC] therefore I am free to construe them and pair them however I see fit. It is not up to you to tell me otherwise.

Now, with all that settled, leave me the fuck alone.

1K notes · View notes