Tumgik
#anyways this is personal and not at all related to spn
persefoneshalott · 5 months
Text
One of Dean's most frustrating trait for me is that he's against immortality and has these idea of what's 'natural' 'what's dead should be dead' etc (sam excluded ofc) This is why while he'll go and sacrifice himself to save Sam he'd never be like 'oh hey if we do this spell, dead Sam can come back and live in my brain and both our spirits can live in the same body' or some freaky shit like that, if he ever ran into something like that and thought it was the only option to save Sam he'd just book it out of his own body so that Sam can have it. whereas Sam would be like fuck yeah this is a great first step before I find a better way to get him back and as we know from canon would be willing to have innocent people die so Dean can stay alive
6 notes · View notes
Text
I’m never gonna get over the guy in s3e15 who, when asked if he wanted to catch the guy who stole his kidney, asked if it would get him his kidney back and when he was told no decided he didn’t care that much ab catching the guy bc what’s the point
16 notes · View notes
sexybabystevie · 1 year
Text
how you know things are bad - i deeply miss dean winchester
5 notes · View notes
scoobydoodean · 3 months
Note
am I the only one who thinks the very existence of crossroad demons in canon makes it clear that selling your soul for someone else is not even something that's particularly unhinged? they have people out there making demon deals for far less than bringing a family member back from the dead lol it's just that demons are very invested in fucking with the winchesters and poking at dean's perceived neediness and vulnerability and his and sam's codependency. maybe it's just terminal deangirlism but I have never really bought into him being particularly needy or clingy I think he's baseline normal but everyone else acts like he's smothering them
Context
Copying my tags also:
Dean's main way of saving Sam is by sacrificing himself? And I think a lot of that reflects Dean's struggles with depression and suicidal ideation. Sam isn't the only one Dean has been shown to be willing to sacrifice himself for when he was at a low point. He was ready to die for Layla in 1.12 and he was ready to die in 13.05. Both emotional low points where he was struggling with his own sense of worth. 2.22 is a low point Dean has been building to all season. His worsening depression is very clear. 9.01 is simply... severely misinterpreted in terms of Dean's perspective. He risks his life every day. He stood between max and his mom in 1.14 also with a gun pointed at his chest
And yeah people in SPN make demon deals a lot. Sam says he tried to make a demon deal to get Dean back in 4.01, but no demon would deal. He also tried to re-open the Devil's Gate from 2.22 (which would let out hundreds of demons yet again to wreak havoc on the world). John made a demon deal to save Dean's life, and many fans don't even think he cares about Dean. Bobby made one, Bela made one, etc.
I could go through the whole show to prove Dean being a Needy and Clingy and Smothering person simply is not accurate... or, because I'm tired of making up people's arguments for them and proving a negative by going through a whole show is very annoying (and I am technically already doing that very extensively through a series of searchable tags), I could just say fans who think this way are incorrect.
If they don't think they are, they're welcome to give me examples of Dean actually being a uniquely horribly needy and clingy and desperate and demanding person who forces people to stay with him forever and ever because he doesn't care what they want and desperately wants to control their lives. I've certainly seen people try to make the argument before, but without fail each time they point to examples that are 1) not even remotely unique to Dean (and he's usually the weakest example and I can think of multiple for other characters showing behavior that is objectively more extreme) 2) presented in an intentionally misleading or mind-blowingly out of context manner 3) woefully (and often rather deliberately) mischaracterizes Dean's motivations.
Anyway, feel free to stream related tags I track:
#sams motivations
#taurus sam in the flesh
#In which Sam is not a helpless little waif with his hands cast over his eyes being carried along by the tides of the immutable sea
#sam the hunter
#sams moral compass
#projecting displaced aggression and scapegoating in spn
spn revisionisms
#demons lie
#youre such a control freak
69 notes · View notes
rifa · 2 months
Text
Came into SPN a decade and a half late. I'm somewhere in season 4? I have blacked out many times but am retaining some information, this is happening to me against my will - my spouse will not let me leave the room while it's on
Anyway here are some thoughts in no particular order while half drunk after getting home from heavy metal wrestling (no relation to spn)
- I understand why there is so much incest shipping. Like what else do you do with these content?
- I have seen Mr Castiel on tumblr since the dawn of time and had no idea that he had a Mr tough guy deep voice. Pardon me.
- I saw Cas and Dean have one convo and I felt the thousand years of suffering shippers have carried. I'm one of you now.
- I'm a vancouverite who worked in film, as a result most of my attention is pointing out the filming locations every episode
- highlights of previous include: pointing out thr local medieval goth steam punk store in the background that has inexplicably remained opened for over 20 years, bridge studios when they did the TV studio hauntings episode (the best episode) and finally the 10000000 times they filmed out of the extremely haunted for real ex psychiatric hospital that gets used for film sets now (it's fucking haunted I've experienced it)
- I learned that all the mix cds my spouse has been playing in the car are SPN Playlists. I thought they were into classic rock. I'm a fucking fool.
- its painful how off the actual occult touch stones are. Samhain pronounced "Sam Hane", tarot cards as omens of death, Astral projection being the same as being a ghost and doing ghost fight club? Bruh
- I cant believe McG is a producer. Yall know he did Charlie's angels right? Then had himself as a character in the show?????
- I dont care about demons and I can't keep track of them and I don't fucking care to honestly
- which person was in charge of casting the exact same looking white woman for every role? Was it McG?????? I cannot tell them apart
- every neighborhood is either the neighborhood I live in or the one I lived in when I went to highschool you know how much worse this show is when they exist in the same city as you????
- I always think about how every film person i met who ever worked on the show told me Jensen was very nice and cool. This is film lingo for "the other actor is a douche" just throwing that out there
- is drinking demon blood affecting Sam's choice in bad shirts??????
- why am I so invested in Dean??????? Why can't he just be a film PA forever, no one understands how nerdy and breedable is he
- Dean literally has a boy pussy good for him
- I was shocked about salt bullets 4 seasons in. I swear I've been paying attention, just not that closely
42 notes · View notes
nameslikeguns · 5 months
Note
Omg literally same... Jared's gone through a redemption arc in my mind. Lol It's amazing how many things changed for me since I decided to Come Back Home and finish watching spn after so many years.
I like him AND his hair now.
Exactly the same for me! I'm never escaping the Deangirl allegations and I genuinely enjoyed Sam my first watch through back in the mid2000s but started sliding back at S4/5 cause I was overly invested in Dean and took Sam's character arc as a personal betrayal and not just Sam processing his grief in a human if albeit destructive way. But I was also like 19, so. And got into Destiel (though I still dabbled in Wincest).
But I've been friends with this person for nearly as long as I've watched Supernatural and I spent years dunking on Sam and Jared with them. It was a common inside joke between us. It was petty and childish and it's literally only the last few months when I've been rewatching and getting back into fandom has changed my tune. I really thought I'd go insane over Destiel again but I feel nothing about them. It's wild.
But I got a lot of my information secondhand from this friend, so the Winchesters prequel debacle was excellent fodder for us until I watched an interview where Jensen explained why he hadn't told anyone but that friend group treated it like Jensen specifically targeted Jared and hated him. You too are susceptible to propaganda, kids.
It's kind of funny to talk to them about the later seasons and how they think the show was too forgiving of Sam on every front and routinely sidelined Dean which in some ways I agree but I also see the narrative biased towards Dean's opinion over Sam's. Also, I just had zero idea about how the story truly ended and how insane Sam and Dean were for each other until the end cause this friend is very into Destiel and all we talked about was the Destiel "confession". And it was like—nothing haha. Compared to the 7 minutes of incest and their heaven being each other.
Anyway, I think Jared is a fun guy, Sam is so much more interesting than I ever gave him credit for, Jensen/Dean is still my no.1 bae, it's just weird navigating these conversations where my friend is trying to bait me into Jared roasting hour and I'm gripping the table trying to play both sides.
(Also my friend has a whole thing about Jared living in Texas and portraying Walker and how it makes Jared right-wing and I won't speak to any of that cause Jared stops existing for me outside the sphere of Supernatural and Supernatural related things but it's a huge point of contention for my friend.)
48 notes · View notes
eisforeidolon · 4 months
Text
In regards to that post [X]:
We could talk about the same old fallacies - OMG, Dean's siren is a guy! Yeah, a brother. OMG, Dean was supposed to say I love you in the Crypt scene! Yeah, it was removed and replaced with what the writer explicitly said was the less OOC version of what he meant anyway, "We're family". We could talk about the blatant absurdity of statements like "Dean liked men it happened on my screen" which bear no resemblance to the SPN that aired. But we've done that before and others have got this reiteration of it well covered.
So I wanna focus for the moment on this particular even more repulsive gem: "Like he literally doesn't need to verbally tell us he's bisexual we just know. He may not know but we do. This is an unmovable fact sorry."
It tells us a few things. One, this person is a fucking idiot. Two, this person, yet again, thinks that ~*interpreting*~ sexuality from the way someone looks/stands/makes eye contact/eats pastry/whatever numbnuts conspiracy bullshit you like? Is more valid than how a character identifies and is identified by those who created him. People can just look at you and know what your sexuality is better than you do, there's nothing repulsive about that idea at all! I've got a mountain of shiny pennies that says if Dean had literally never interacted with a man for the entire span of the series, they would have insisted it was because he was so afraid of how much he wanted to fuck them. There was no way the writers could have written Dean that someone like that would have accepted as actually heterosexual, because that's not what they personally wanted, so that's not what they were going to see.
I'm not saying there aren't things that might be said about how relatively questionable some of the gay jokes in SPN are, especially in the early years in terms of making queerness a punchline. But if we're going to talk about that? We need to do it not only in the cultural context of 2005 rather than 2023, but in the context of portrayals of real world men - and particularly those in fairly rural settings who aren't going to be particularly conscientious in the way they rib each other. Which becomes a whole other discussion about where to draw lines when you're writing fiction and dealing with things that might be realistic but also potentially offensive.
Furthermore, I'm not saying there aren't things that might be said about how SPN continually used romantic tropes for platonic relationships and how it's not entirely absurd for that to land different with the audience when the characters are not blood-related. Except that discussion needs to include not just how maybe the writers shouldn't have treated it as such a joke that a relationship between two male characters might have been possible, but also how fans should absolutely not have equated a relationship being theoretically possible with any specific relationship they wanted being owed to them. Especially in the context of those romantic tropes being used so so so much more between brothers all the fucking time setting the tone. As well as how it's not just problematic to treat the possibility of homosexual relationships as a joke, but problematic to insist literally any closeness between two male entities is gay, reinforcing all kinds of nasty toxic stereotypes about sexuality and masculinity which underlay a lot of modern adult men's issues with expressing their emotions and having genuinely close and open relationships outside of their romantic partners. I've seen fans wonder how heterosexual dudes can watch this show and love the brothers' relationship without seemingly noticing the weird undertones of how claustrophobically intertwined they are, and I think it's very much that when it comes to wanting a fantasy of platonic closeness, they're looking for realism as much as most women reading trashy romance novels are - but that's a whole other digression and this is already too long.
At the end of the day, not only was SPN not created in the cultural context of Very Online Tumbrites in 2023, convinced that nothing should ever be is heterosexual and every fictional story should be about them and what they want? The fact their ostensible original point misses is the real world and most other media of 2023 aren't like that either! Some of these shippers come across like they've literally never seen two adult male friends interact with each other or any actual love stories in media - and it's not just early 2000's television characters getting this treatment from entitled shippers who want to use representation as a weapon against creators as to why they're owed things they absolutely aren't.
43 notes · View notes
Text
The Schrödinger's SPN Revival
So, recently there’s been a lot of talk on here and twitter because a couple articles have been published citing Jared and Jensen (or just Jensen in one POS article) mentioning discussing possibilities for a revival. Does this make it any more likely to happen or closer to being realized? I don’t know, but the guys have been mentioning it off and on for years already, so I’m not sure it’s any more likely now than it ever was. Also, with networks and the whole industry in seeming disarray, even if J2 want to get a revival going, I’m not sure it will happen.
But, let’s speculate anyway. Shall we?
Tumblr media
(I CANOT get the link to work for some reason!!)
My thoughts on this, under the cut.
I’m no authority on anything in the TV industry, but I have watched our little show a lot, so I have thoughts. Let’s take look at each person on this poll.
Kripke - Obviously, he understands Sam and Dean. He created them after all. But, would I trust him with the revival? Well, judging by The Boys, he seems more focused on shock value than tight storytelling these days, so I’m not sure I would want to see an SPN on a streamer that he ran. It might become a case of all fireworks and little to no heart. Also, if he had ended the series in Season 5, both Sam and Dean would have been trapped in the cage forever. Not exactly a happy ending. Still, is he capable of manning a revival snd doing a decent job? Yes. Would I totally trust him with it? Maybe. Maybe not. Do I think he even has time to do it? Not really.
Jensen - Come on, people! If you want him to reprise his role as Dean, then he isn’t going to be the showrunner. Also, he’s an actor, not a writer, so it’s not even in his wheelhouse. So, no. This wouldn’t be a good idea. And after The Winchesters, I think it’s extremely unlikely that he’d be put at the helm in this way. The only upside to Jensen being a show runner? We know damn well Destiel would be ignored as vigorously as it deserves.
Robbie Thompson - Exhibit One: The Winchesters. So, no. Also, while he has written some episodes that I like of SPN, he was always trying to make the show something it wasn’t, whether it was Fairytale time with Charlie or trying to shoehorn romance into a platonic brother love story, he’s shown that he shouldn’t be trusted with the OG show in a position of power.
Sera Gamble - Season 6 while having some absolute bangers, was also a bit of a mess in some ways. And Season 7 was more so. How much of this was due to Gamble hersel and how much was due to Singer tugging at the reins, I don’t know. She is a proven showrunner, so I believe she could do it. She actually understands and enjoys Sam, so that would be a huge relief for those of us who actually care about Sam and want to see him get his due on screen. Also, she has never written Dean badly from my observations, despite certain past claims by “some people” on women not writing male dialogue well. In a lot of ways, I think she could be a good choice. But, would she be interested even? I have no clue.
Andrew Dabb - NEXT!!
Jeremy Carver - For reasons relating to Season 11, I would like to see him helm a revival. He can clearly follow through with a connected and coherent arc. However, for reasons relating to Season 8, where he had characters do a few hugely out of character things for the story’s sake? No. For Season 10 snd the bore thst it was for me personally (though that potentially had something to do with pressure that came from Singer)? No. All in all. I think he’d be capable of ruining a revival, but something tells me he isn’t particularly interested and they guys may not be that ready to chose him, either (purely just my gut).
Robert Singer - No. I believe he interfered with Gamble and Carver’s plans; I just don’t know to what extent. And worst of all, he did nothing to help steer Dabb away from the mess that was much of Seasons 12 to 15. Also, he’d probably bring Buck-Lemming with him. And can I just say a big, “Fuck no,” to that.
Again, all of this is just me rambling. I have no real idea how likely any of them would be to come back for a revival. And I also don’t know how much J2 would want any of them to run a revival, or whether they’d want to just get someone new who might be more likely to listen to their ideas. I don’t even know if J2 would have an easy time agreeing on who would make a good show runner from that list because I think they might not even agree on who they considered to be better writers, or be better candidates to showrunner. For example, I think Jared might be more enthusiastic about Gamble than Jensen would. And Jensen would probably welcome Singer more than Jared would. Again, I don’t know any of this for certain, but it just my impression based off of things they’ve said over the years.
If a revival happens what do I want?
First, it sounds to me like if there is one, J2 want to be a big part of it with Sam and Dean as central focus. This is what I would want. I watched the show for them. I stuck it out through the rough seasons for them. The only way I would watch a revival was if it heavily featured both Sam and Dean. Second, I think I would enjoy if they did a revival during the years (according to J2) between Episodes 19 snd 20. I would like this because it would make the likelihood of angel or demon interference minimal. And this would be the more likely scenario for us to get a more old-school creature hunting revival. We could still see Jody and co for those who care about that. There would be no need for Cas or Jack to show up, which I would prefer. Yet, it would be easy enough for them to make a brief appearance if J2 wanted to pander in that way. Also, I’m so very sick of Angel BS, and this seems like the best way to avoid it. Third, I could be interested in a bit of a prequel with John and the boys, if they could find a way to include J2 without making it convoluted and pointless. Finally, if they come back from heaven for some reason, I think it would be hard for the revival to have much in the way of stakes. And I really wouldn’t want a huge dose of Cas, which we’d potentially have in that case.
Anyway, here are my thoughts on the potential revival, thoughts thst no one asked for admittedly. Lol.
If anyone read this far, what are your thoughts on a revival. If it happens, who should run it and what would you want to see happen?
26 notes · View notes
lol-jackles · 5 months
Note
https://www.tumblr.com/lol-jackles/731390752226148352/li-1-i-revisited-a-former-favorite-tag-of-mine
How do you think Jensen might be feeling in relation to Jared (or about himself) now that TW failed? If it was a way fir him to be "good enough" for Jared …
Also, I know you’ve been asked this before, so I won’t ask you to weigh in on whether J2 are still real friends. I think they still consider each other friends, but probably more in an extended family way, where you care and have shared history but don’t really talk overly often. Of course, Jared often mentions on interviews or at cons that he and Jensen were just texting "the other day," but for me that could mean anything from yesterday to three weeks ago, so I don’t see it as proof they talk all the time.
Anyway, my other questions was based off the fact that Jared and Jensen are getting increasingly more sentimental, or at least nostalgic, telling stories about back in the early days of SPN at cons during panels and their M&G. Do you think they play-up on their old memories because they don’t have many good new shared experiences to talk about, or do you think now that they haven’t worked together for a few years, they are truly starting to miss it and each other as cast mates? Or a secret third option where they are just trying to stir up fan nostalgia (even though J2 fans live that shit 24 anyway), and telling stories is easier than dodging strike-breaking questions?
Jensen probably self-soothed that The Winchester failure is mainly due to a combination of the SPN spinoff curse and bad timing due to Zaslav's reign of terror, burst of the streaming bubble, and the WGA-SAG strike. As for his post TW relations with Jared, my pet theory of psychology is there are two motivators of human behavior - love and fear. Codependency is where love and fear get messed up between it, sometimes fear gets disguised as love in that they fear that unless they control others, they will not do what they need them to do in order to feel loved. And it is attracted to those who “need saving” through control of their behavior. So kids, study your fears, lean to control or dismiss them as necessary. Set the people in your life free from you control.
To answer your other question... First, time and distance sanitize memories and paper over issues in their friendship. The thing about friendship is a lot of red flags are tolerated that is not tolerated in marriages. My friends can be late, or bad with money, or have significant differences of opinion on a variety of issues, because if it gets too bad, I can just not hang out with them anymore. But with life partners you have to trust and rely on them 100%, because there’s so much more at stake - buy property together, comingle finances, raise a child or bunch of cats or both, so you can't ignore the red flags.
Second, shared experiences are the basis for many deep and casual relationships rather than actual compatibility. It's why we still go to high school reunions because nobody else in the world knows what you’ve experienced other than your classmates, even if you hated them back in the day. Or thought you hated them. Again, time and distance sanitize many things and you and the kid you never talked to in high school are reminiscing and laughing together over nostalgia. So it's not surprising that Jared and Jensen have some nostalgia for the SPN days because it was 15 years of high school. So the answer to your question is option #2.
Third, in general, men don’t have many male genuine friends.  I hated the movie I love you, man because it was too familiar - Paul Rudd’s character doesn’t have male friends to be his best man for his upcoming wedding so he goes out looking for one. So even though Jared and Jensen’s friendship is more on the codependency level, it’s still more than what most actors could have in the industry. Aso, it's easier for Jared to be the bigger person because he’s currently in much better position: a lead actor who is able to film in the city of his choice.  Very, very few lead actors can demand to work in their referable city of choice and even then, the best they can ask for is L.A or N.Y.C.  David Duchovny got X-Files production moved from Vancouver to L.A and he still left the show.
23 notes · View notes
maggot-monger · 10 months
Text
lucifer gender symbolism essay part 1: mostly non-spn background, context, & caveats
masterpost
this section is about historical non-spn representations of lucifer as a feminine/female figure, and associations between lucifer/satan/etc and female and feminine entities. my purpose in this section is to connect lucifer supernatural to a bigger cultural phenomenon to give some context to the rest of the more spn-centric parts.
the devil presenting femininely is part of a cultural tradition that i expect kripke, various supernatural writers, and others involved in the making of supernatural were at least partially aware of. there are enough nods in supernatural canon to theology, mythology, and pop culture about the devil that it seems reasonable to suppose that the devil appearing with a variety of gender presentations was not a totally unfamiliar concept to the show’s creators, and might be deliberate seasoning stirred into the character we ended up getting.
part i: historical fem!lucifer part ii: lucifer as a cultural figure and gender norm breaking part iii: some of lucifer supernatural's various other political parallels
HISTORICAL FEM!LUCIFER
whether or not biblical angels have sexes or genders such that using gendered language to describe them even makes sense is a whole topic, but anyway. a lot of the early history of the figure of satan/the devil/the antagonist/etc is as a male figure, or at least written about using masculine terms. i’m going to take the male representations as a given and not go into all that here. i'm focusing on the other ones.
let's start with names. specifically, “lucifer” and “the morning star” (both in relation to the figure we know as the devil and not)
the roman goddess diana is sometimes known as “diana lucifera.” i’m just pulling from cicero’s discussion of that via wikipedia but here:
... people regard Diana and the moon as one and the same. ... the moon (luna) is so called from the verb to shine (lucere). Lucina is identified with it, which is why in our country they invoke Juno Lucina in childbirth, just as the Greeks call on Diana the Light-bearer. Diana also has the name Omnivaga ("wandering everywhere"), not because of her hunting but because she is numbered as one of the seven planets; her name Diana derives from the fact that she turns darkness into daylight (dies).
so, this isn’t about biblical lucifer, but still, the name has connections to a goddess here, and specifically in the context of childbirth (a traditionally gendered process).
the morning star is venus, a planet associated with one of the major roman goddesses, venus, whose femininity is important. this is kind of a circuitous connection; to the best of my knowledge, the reason for the connection between the devil figure and the morning star stems from the planet’s trajectory through the sky-as-seen-from-earth, that makes it look like it is falling from highest heaven downward, which is relevant symbolism. afaik, though, lucifer’s connection to that planet has nothing explicitly to do with any other goddess’s/god’s/other figure’s connection with it, so this is kind of a mood point. nonetheless, the two are connected now, even if they weren’t at origin. this planet is also associated with the goddess inanna/ishtar, as well as various other religious and mythological male figures. 
so, there's that. now for representations of the devil as such ~
the reason i personally hopped onto the fem!lucifer train originally was lucifera, the representative of pride in edmund spenser’s the faerie queene, which i read the semester in college before i first watched spn! so that was a fun convergence, and made me especially excited when spn lucifer was played by women in their first three appearances. here’s part of a description of lucifera:
And proud Lucifera men did her call, That made her selfe a Queene, and crownd to be
this isn’t much, but it establishes her as a regal bitch immediately. she’s an interesting fixture i think, and afaik one of the earliest depictions of the biblical figure of lucifer as a feminine figure.
a lot of medieval paintings of genesis 3 depict the serpent as a kind of naga, with a long snake body and a woman’s face and torso. the serpent from genesis isn’t necessarily the devil, but because a lot of lore connects the two, including supernatural itself, that seems like as much fair game to mention here as most of the rest of this. medieval and renaissance depictions of figures that are more explicitly the devil are often sexually ambiguous, sometimes with breasts and a beard and a mouth instead of genitalia, among other interesting setups.
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
satan appears in female forms in a lot of folklore. this usually seems more instrumental than anything — as in, satan appears as a hot woman to seduce some guy to evil — but honestly, who’s to say if she just likes being a girl sometimes. regardless of the reason, this creates a cultural image of the devil as gender-shifting. lucifer spn appearing as sarah to nick and jess to sam etc is a good example of this trope.
there have been various other more recent pop culture depictions of satan/lucifer/the devil as a feminine figure, an androgynous figure, or as a woman specifically, some of which are outlined here. others are presented in per faxneld’s article “woman and the devil: some recurring motifs,” which i can’t link because it’s behind an academia paywall but i recommend it if you can get a hold of it. 
probably there are more examples, but i feel like this is enough of a survey to prove my point that historical depictions of lucifer/satan/the morning star/whatever you want to call this figure are not exclusively male and masculine.
tl;dr: lucifer the mythological figure and the appellations lucifer/the morning star are not uniquely masculine, and they have long histories of genderweirdness. depicting the devil as a feminine, female, androgynous, or ungendered figure is part of an established cultural tradition. imo, picking up evidence that lucifer supernatural is being represented as a feminine figure is not a reach.
LUCIFER AND GENDER NORM BREAKING
cw for discussion of irl sexism in religious doctrine (and some mentions of homophobic and transphobic sentiment with religious underpinnings) through much of this section.
so, ok. the intricacies of scriptural feminism are wayyy beyond what i am adequately educated on to speak about in depth. i’m also much more familiar with christianity than other religions, so i will mostly be speaking to that unfortunately. but. i gotta talk about it a little, because it’s important culturally as background for why fem!lucifer is an established trope.
an example of someone who knows more than me writing about this, as a jumping off point: 
Phrasings like ‘Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord’ (Eph. 5:22), and the ways in which they have been used to serve patriarchal ends, make it easy to see why some feminists would later view God as the protector of patriarchy (and, occasionally, Satan as an ally in the fight against it).
— Woman and the Devil: Some Recurring Motifs (Per Faxneld)
this is basically the foundation for a lot of this. god the father is the patriarch, who demands subjugation from men to him, and from women to both him and to men. satan, god's antagonist, might plausibly want the opposite of that.
in john milton’s paradise lost, satan as the serpent certainly uses an anti-patriarchal angle when trying to tempt eve to eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, telling her that there is no reason she should be lesser than adam, or even lesser than god, that eve is smart and impressive already, that god can’t really be all that great if he is jealous enough of his creations to deny them their full potential — and so she should eat the fruit for the sake of knowledge, and of power. this obviously doesn’t go well; milton did not intend this to make eve or satan seem admirable at the time. but idk, i’m not a 17th century protestant. imo what satan as offering was pretty sweet; i don't feel like there's much wrong with it. i got got by milton's trap lol. satan’s motives were rotten in PL, but even so, he kind of identified with eve at the same time as trying to get her to fall: he was basically luring her down the same path he took that led to his own fall. his temptation worked because he and the first woman had a lot in common. while his intentions were bad, the emotions behind them put him and eve in parallel to each other. regardless of whether this was a good or bad thing, it does position satan as someone who gasses up and identifies with Thee woman in PL.
the supernatural lore on temptation and the garden interesting in this context as well. i can only speak to season 5, but within kripke era, lucifer is described as having tempted lilith, not eve — but that is a relevant tie-in as well. lilith is a figure who refused to be subservient to man also, of her own accord, so to connect that to lucifer and temptation aligns lucifer once again with an anti-patriarchal stance. i will also stress that throughout s4-5 the description of the interactions between lucifer and lilith are of temptation, not torture, which parallels the eve story.
(certainly these temptations can be looked at as being anti-feminist as well. personally i'm more into inspecting the parallels between satan and eve or lucifer and lilith (and doing that is the most on-topic direction for the argument i'm trying to make here), but there are a lot of other good frames for analysis of these dynamics as well. just acknowledging that this, like everything else about this character, is slippery.)
lots of disliked and norm-breaking women — and gnc people, and genderqueer people, and trans people — have been described as devilish or of the devil or as worshipping the devil subsequently to demonize them. you can probably think of at least a handful of examples. in a very simplified way, to people who are on board with biblical patriarchy, anyone who isn't is bad news. who else is bad news? the devil. match made in hell.
obviously all of this is super misogynistic and part of a long tradition of religious vilification of women. “women are inferior because eve succumbed to the devil; women are the reason humanity exists in a fallen state,’ etc. my let's-complicate-satan agenda does not extend to trying to minimize the harm that has been done by associating some groups with the devil. the devil is, almost all the time, just a different way of calling someone or something fundamentally evil, and it is not good to go around aligning marginalized people with that figure who do not want to be associated with it. that is something that has happened a lot, to a lot of people’s detriment, and it has been used for a lot of human rights violations — which is relevant here, for better or for worse. 
"for better" because sometimes, people decide that if they're going to be called evil anyway, they might as well embrace the devil, and turn him into a symbol to rally behind. and the devil is a pretty badass symbol, all things considered. people are scared of him — of her — and having people fear you and your allies can be a lot better than being subjugated. 
again, you can probably think of examples of this. a lot of people lean into witch stuff even without being practitioners of witchcraft specifically for feminist or gender-subversion reasons. same sometimes goes for succubi and other demonic entities. lil nas x’s ��montero” made ample use of edenic and demonic imagery (including that fucking fabulous fall from grace via pole) to represent queerness. lots of people in the supernatural fandom have Feelings for meg and ruby and other demons who are ostensibly female characters with significant roles on a show mostly about men, etc. there are also examples of satan being good for women in gothic literature, some uses of satan as a subversive rhetorical device for lesbian causes, etc (i’m referencing in passing various things from per faxneld’s book “Satanic Feminism: Lucifer as the Liberator of Woman in Nineteenth-Century Culture” for these last). satanism and luciferianism aren’t necessarily concerned with worshiping satan/lucifer, but they do use the names of that figure for their ideologies, which also aren’t necessarily explicitly feminist but do place a pretty heavy emphasis on free thought, self-empowerment, subversion of tradition, and liberation.
tl;dr: the devil has a history of being used to vilify and empower subversive individuals and cultural movements, including feminist and queer ones. as in the previous section, imo this makes interpreting lucifer supernatural’s gendered portrayal as feminine and/or genderweird part of a well-established, morally complicated cultural tradition.
an opinion: in stories where the devil is a (failed) rebel, i think it’s really compelling to give the devil figure characteristics that put them in opposition with the reigning power. there’s something about the devil being a mirror for god as well, of course, but it speaks to at least some versions of The Disenfranchised Experience to have lucifer be Different in a pivotal way. someone who wanted equality/freedom/whatever, but was denied it, and was therefore unendingly punished, but never lost their pride…it isn’t necessarily empowering; lucifer's revolutionary story can be a cautionary one (e.g. “this is what happens if you lean into the bad things people assume about you and let yourself become overcome by hate”), but it’s…idk it’s something. it’s interesting, at the very least. the villain era phenomenon speaks to it; the buttress’s song “brutus” that was circulating on everyone’s spotify discover weekly a few years ago speaks to it…it’s gripping. it’s a relatable antihero or villain story to many, i think. 
(a few people in the tags of this post about satan in paradise lost, which makes no mention of gender or sexism, assumed that the post was about reacting to sexism and/or cissexism, which i thought was interesting and relevant also lol)
SOME OF LUCIFER SUPERNATURAL’S VARIOUS OTHER POLITICAL PARALLELS
[cw for mentions of fascism and other violent ideologies] 
i want to be super clear that My Agenda here is not to use gender to try to make lucifer seem like a better or worse character, morally or in quality. imo whether lucifer reads as more feminine or more masculine or both or neither is morally neutral. beyond that, i fully recognize that supernatural’s lucifer is represented in ways that align him with a range of political metaphors, both reprehensible and sympathetic, that are difficult to disentangle from each other. if i’m going to talk about the character’s implied alignment with subversive movements and marginalized groups, i would feel remiss not to acknowledge that kripke’s lucifer is also explicitly an ecoterrorist — an ecofascist, even. in many ways, this character is written to mirror the way Some People feel that they are entitled to shape the world to their own liking, disregarding human life at their own whim. it’s not for nothing that the actor who plays the most recognizable version of lucifer on spn is a blonde white man; there’s symbolism there that must have been more important to the show’s creators than alternative directions they could have gone with casting purely on the basis of demographics/appearance, and that makes sense. i understand why people would compare supernatural’s lucifer to the boys’ homelander, for example; i’ve written meta about the parallels between them myself. i think the comparison is apt in many ways. 
however, while homelander is a specific villain tied to specific current political and cultural issues, lucifer is more abstract than that, and as such is harder to fit into specific contemporary human ideologies. any version of lucifer/satan/the devil/whatever fits into a HUGE mythology, and when you write a sympathetic devil character — especially one deliberately and explicitly inspired by sympathetic devils of the past — you are inevitably ringing the same bells other sympathetic devil characters have rung before. and supernatural did not shy away from connecting its version of lucifer to that mythology! kripke’s lucifer is, paradoxically, a lot harder to pigeonhole as Bad through a contemporary lens than homelander is because lucifer is part of a myth that touches a huge number of times and cultures, rather than a direct commentary on and product of a particular modern american context. 
the “taking the lives of others i deem unworthy” perspective is bad, but it’s also what hunters do, at a different scale. supernatural from the start has been a show that features situations designed to question the ethics of its protagonists as well as its villains, and lucifer is one of THE examples of that. pretty impossible to build a lucifer based on milton’s satan and not have him come across at least partially as a rebel against injustice (even if he has gone rotten in the process) and everything else that milton’s devil was. hard to do the devil-as-a-woman trope and not make her part of that tradition along with all it entails, misogynist and feminist alike. lucifer spn doesn’t fit tidily into political or identity boxes because he’s written to be harder to categorize than that — that’s part of the horror, and it’s part of what makes the heavy-handed connections to sam (and dean) all the more unsettling. 
so 
with all of that said
let’s get into lucifer’s genderweirdness on supernatural ~ 
part 2: gender in supernatural masterpost
35 notes · View notes
theunluckyone13 · 2 months
Text
✨🌙 Are we in the clear yet, good🌙✨
Tumblr media
🌙Hi! I’m noot, and I absolutely 🦇suck at introductions🦇 Anyways: 18+, work a full time gig so I can be slow at times (though you wouldn’t believe the stories I could share) I love to talk, share music tiktoks, memes- so my feelings won’t be hurt if you tell me to shut up 😂 open to any and all pairings! Lover of doubling, third person past tense- oh and I do tend to type a lot… 👀😂 Also try my best to vibe and go with the flow 💕😂
Tumblr media
Now onto the good stuff:
💕- really interested in
Fandoms:
💕- Fourth Wing: current obsession.
Spn- Can do pretty much any character.
Mcu- not completely caught up, but can do almost anyone
💕Twilight- soft spot for me, can do anyone, but I suck at the volturi
💕Throne of glass- need to re read, but my memories are still fresh! Have yet to do this.
Crescent city - working on book two! Also have yet to do this fandom- but excited to try!
💕A court of thorns and roses- I’m going to get this out of the way- have been told I do the bat boys the best! But I am willing to try anyone! Currently listening to the graphic audios
✨the amount of ideas I have? Absolutely disgusting✨
💕Tvd/ to - A comfort show of mine. At one time I have done 98% of the cast. I’m familiar with everyone!
The selection- more so in love with the idea.
Bridgerton- rusty, but social events, scandals, drama? Gimme.
Grey’s Anatomy - have yet to do a rp, rewatching once again.
Night World- A super old book series I remember loving, about supernatural creatures. Honestly I’d love to take the idea of supernaturals in a normal setting and run with it.
Crave: I remember the first book and it’s chaos 😂
Tumblr media
Vibes I’m going for
✨Enemies to lovers
✨angst
✨I’d combust for anything supernatural related- especially fae or vampires
✨Twilight or tvd vibes, small town spooks
✨Anything inspired by a Taylor Swift song
✨chaos- lot’s of chaos
✨Courts or kingdoms- think acotar style
✨I’d also combust for anything acotar inspired!
If interested add me on discord or interact!
supernootural67
Tumblr media
13 notes · View notes
findroleplay · 3 months
Note
✨🌙 Are we in the clear yet, good🌙✨
🌙Hi! I’m noot, and I absolutely 🦇suck at introductions🦇 Anyways: 18+, work a full time gig so I can be slow at times (though you wouldn’t believe the stories I could share) I love to talk, share music tiktoks, memes- so my feelings won’t be hurt if you tell me to shut up 😂 open to any and all pairings! Lover of doubling, third person past tense- oh and I do tend to type a lot… 👀😂 Also try my best to vibe and go with the flow 💕😂
Now onto the good stuff:
💕- really interested in
Fandoms:
Spn- Can do pretty much any character.
Mcu- not completely caught up, but can do almost anyone
💕Twilight- soft spot for me, can do anyone, but I suck at the volturi
💕Throne of glass- need to re read, but my memories are still fresh! Have yet to do this.
Crescent city - working on book two! Also have yet to do this fandom- but excited to try!
💕A court of thorns and roses- I’m going to get this out of the way- have been told I do the bat boys the best! But I am willing to try anyone! Currently listening to the graphic audios
✨the amount of ideas I have? Absolutely disgusting✨
💕Tvd/ to - A comfort show of mine. At one time I have done 98% of the cast. I’m familiar with everyone!
The selection- more so in love with the idea.
Bridgerton- rusty, but social events, scandals, drama? Gimme.
Grey’s Anatomy - have yet to do a rp, rewatching once again.
Night World- A super old book series I remember loving, about supernatural creatures. Honestly I’d love to take the idea of supernaturals in a normal setting and run with it.
Crave: I remember the first book and it’s chaos 😂
Harry Potter: Never done a rp before, but feeling heavily inspired after playing Hogwarts Legacy
Vibes I’m going for
✨Enemies to lovers
✨angst
✨I’d combust for anything supernatural related- especially fae or vampires
✨Twilight or tvd vibes, small town spooks
✨Anything inspired by a Taylor Swift song
✨chaos- lot’s of chaos
✨Courts or kingdoms- think acotar style
✨I’d also combust for anything acotar inspired!
If interested add me on discord or interact!
supernootural67
-
9 notes · View notes
sunglassesmish · 1 year
Note
As a pretty much casual fan of spn who only got into it like 3-4 months ago, I like Jensen, Misha (and Danneel) but am not a super fan of any of them. And that is why I think I'm able to view all their interactions with each other and other spn actors (incl Jared) from an unbiased pov.
With that said, I definitely think Cockles is real and has been for a decade, even though I can't wrap my head around any polyamorous relationship being successful for so long (like how do you love more than one person equally, how does jealously not come into play, how do you divide time, what do you tell your kids about the arrangement, how come everyone around you is so accepting of your poly relations, etc).
Anyway, though I can't figure out the how, I'm just glad that these three ppl have found one another and I'd love to see more in-person interactions between Dee and Misha just to see their own unique, individual dynamic without Jensen being around.
Happy for JDM but majorly jealous too.. Like how lucky you've gotta be to find not one but two HOT and loving individuals and be able to live so harmoniously despite physical distances, hectic schedules and so on.
Hopefully 2023 will give us lots of JenMisheel, or better still, lots of MishDee!
this is very interesting considering you can see them from an unbiased perspective and you think they are together. i love it. i would say that because not everyone is polyamorous, it may be hard to understand how the dynamic works and all the ins and outs. i’m not either so i can’t comment much on polyamory, but if these three are i fully support them and anyone else who is.
and i too am hoping we get to see more of them together this year, and considering they’re about to work on a project together soon, we obviously will (!!!!!)
36 notes · View notes
shallowseeker · 7 months
Text
Related to Sam's high-pressure therapy in The Big Empty, I got to thinking about The Winchesters.
In The Winchesters, the therapy that is hoisted on John in 1x04 Masters of War feels very public, coerced, and wordy. John is kind of bullied(?) into sharing his thoughts and scoffed at(?) when he's prickly and defensive about his traumatic experiences. For starters, he shouldn't have to share his very real personal experiences just for a case...
Then, Carlos swoops in and performs the therapy Perfectly (TM), with pretty words so poetic and practiced you'd think they'd been plucked from a professional memoir. It felt cartoonish to me then, and it feels cartoonish to me now.
No wonder John has a breakdown.
That was a horrific therapy experience for him. He almost seemed shamed for his negative feelings and inability to speak in group therapy. (Compare this to the Dr. Sexy guy's no-pressure, "you don't have to speak," group approach in SPN prime's Gimme Shelter.)
This scenario in SPNwin, though? It maybe made John worse, or at the very least inflamed the problem. Then he "overkills" the war god, speaking not to an inner evil but to a disorganized state brought on by a near-repeat of what happened to Murphy happening to Carlos.
John is driven by fear here, not innate violence. At least, not a violence any less innate than that which resides in all of us... (Recall when Claire couldn't calm down when she was kicking her would-be rapist in SPN Prime, season 10. Put in a knife in her hand? She'd have rage-fear-stabbed the guy, mark my words.)
Anyway, the whole thing feels...so much like Sam's pressured therapy in The Big Empty to me? Clearly, that was not the right format or the right therapist for John, but at the end, he is maybe-shamed(?) for not doing therapy Right (TM) in or the Right Way (TM), despite saving Carlos's life.
It's okay that this therapy was a good fit for Carlos's bubbly social butterfly self, but it's also okay that it was a bad fit for John's more private personality.
Then, maybe it feels like John's breakdown in the bathtub is framed as a personal failing. I'm not sure. On the one hand, it does feel sympathetic. On the other, it feels so, so disingenuous at times. I can't put my finger on it, but I do know that many instances in SPNwin re:therapy and pacifism rub me the wrong way for similar reasons as they do in The Big Empty.
This is a work in progress. I haven't quite wrapped my brain around how I feel about it all yet, but it definitely feels as complicated to me now as it felt to me then.
Note to add: I do view overkill as a psychological warning sign, by the way. It's as legitimate for Carlos to recognize in John as it was for Mary to recognize in Jack re:overkilling Nick in SPN prime. It was also an important thing for Sam to recognize in MoC!Dean. It's less about morals and more about it being a red flag. Overkilling is a psychological signature.
Nevertheless! The therapy was a bit eh for me.
7 notes · View notes
scoobydoodean · 2 months
Note
Hey there, I have SPN Thought Worms i thought you might appreciate: You know how there’s debate wether (in the biblical story) Abraham “failed” God’s test, if it was a blind loyalty test or to see if he’d put his moral and love over unquestioned orders? In the same vein, do you think Dean truly ‘failed’ Death’s test with the ring and carrying out his duties for the day? Like maybe Death actually wanted Dean to be unable to do it bc it proved he had limits or smth? Or did he just get Sam’s soul back despite the apparent failure because he has a massive soft spot for Dean? (relatable tbh). Hope I made myself clear lol, the concept is jumbled-up in my mind, and have a great day!
This is a really interesting question! I also have a feeling I'll have a lot better of an answer when I get to 6.11 on this rewatch and have the entire season fresh on my mind. That said, Death actually says in the end that the goal was for Dean to learn something.
DEATH Today, you got a hard look behind the curtain. Wrecking the natural order's not quite such fun when you have to mop up the mess, is it? This is hard for you, Dean. You throw away your life because you've come to assume that it'll bounce right back into your lap. But the human soul is not a rubber ball. It's vulnerable, impermanent, but stronger than you know. And more valuable than you can imagine. So... I think you've learned something today. (x)
I'd really like to watch through season 6 again to solidify this one for myself, but I have a feeling that this isn't about teaching Dean a personal moral lesson at all. I don't think Death is at all concerned with the fact that the nurse died because the little girl didn't from a moral perspective—he wouldn't have ever given Dean his ring if he was. That isn't why he said "good" when Dean said he would have acted differently if he could go back. We can guess it also isn't just a simple lesson about "bringing each other back" being bad and "letting go", because that'd be pretty hypocritical given Death is going to help Dean anyway with no one forcing his hand (and he tells us Dean has use). It isn't a moral issue Death's addressing. It's a lesson he's giving on the structure of the universe. It's about balance. As Death says cryptically later in the scene:
Tumblr media
I think what Death wanted to get across to Dean is that souls must pass on, and their energy must be allotted to the appropriate areas in time and space. If one person doesn't die, passing their soul on as energy, another person must die so that a certain balance and energy level is maintained in the universe. Death plans to help Dean from the beginning, because "Right now, you're digging at something. The intrepid Detective. I want you to keep digging, Dean."
Death, as a person who can't ultimately involve himself without also disrupting balance, is ultimately hinting at Dean as best he knows how that he wants him to stop Crowley and Cas from sucking a bunch of souls out of Purgatory, creating absolute chaos. But he can't say that, so instead, he gives Dean a lesson. He tells Dean that human souls are extremely valuable, and that they need to go to the places the universe wants them to go and stay there. If they don't—if they are moved on a large scale—something terrible will happen. Death has to expect Dean to extrapolate all of this information, which is not an easy expectation to fulfill.
So I guess to summarize: I don't think Dean failed Death's test, because actually using the ring and experiencing what happened when Dean tried to change things was more of a lesson than a test. The test was how Dean reflected on the lesson after and evaluated his behavior. He passed when he said he'd behave differently if he could go back. Death wanted Dean to understand the idea of balance in the universe depending on where souls go, and how important it is not to disrupt their flow or move them around. Changing things makes bad things happen. When there's just one soul, the impact is small (something Death is willing to let Dean toy with by offering his ring for the day). But what if someone disrupted the flow of many many souls at once?
36 notes · View notes
planandexecution · 10 months
Note
i saw the good omens screen shot (im pretty sure anyway, its just one right?) but why is there such a big deal about it outside of 1. oh no leak 2. omg 3. maybe its a fake? and why is destiel involved?? idk i just dont think its a bad spoiler enough to warrant all this
big spoiler warning for under the cut because i've been very vague about the leak when posting in the proper tags and all so far
honestly i think it's just because a lot of people wanted to see all of season 2 completely as intended with everything as a surprise and they're pissed they didn't get the reveal organically - like it's not surprising they're gay but a random pride month post is kind of an underwhelming way to find out (also yeah if you don't know already there's a very very low chance it's fake because it was literally in some official amazon prime twitter compilation of gay people kissing ?)
destiel is involved because supernatural fans (me) heard that an angel got to kiss homosexually on tv and commenced what i like to call comedic jealousyposting (half joking on this one i feel like jealousy was secondary to just finding the whole thing funny and relating to it as spn girlies are another bible fanfiction TV show fandom who have also dealt with leaks/ambiguous rumoured footage/confusing corporate pride etc.)
apologies if this is incoherent i'm falling asleep as i type (long day in the good omens trenches) but yeah personally i'm not hugely affected by the spoiler but i know a lot of people were (which still doesn't justify being assholes about it and harassing people for posting about it i don't think? but i haven't seen too much of that anyway so idk what all the ruckus is about really) 👍
11 notes · View notes