#there are a whole lot more examples | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

marley-manson · 3 months

Text

Hawkeye and Frank are the two most diametrically opposed characters on Mash. They clash politically, ideologically, emotionally, intellectually, and even physically on more than one occasion. There is virtually nothing they agree on. But they do have one significant similarity: both Hawkeye and Frank are notably, pointedly effeminate.

Hawkeye is the central protagonist, so he's written to be likeable, even admirable, especially in the first five seasons of the show when satire dominated rather than character drama. He's the character who makes the correct political points and voices the show's ideology, and male audience members are encouraged to identify with him and aspire to be like him. He's witty, he's smart, he's charismatic, he dodges consequences a lot, he's highly skilled in his work, and he has a strong personality and natural leadership qualities.

Frank is the main antagonist up until the end of season five. He's written for audiences to hate him, mock him, and occasionally be horrified by him. He's dull-witted, incompetent, awkward, easily led and manipulated, and always gets his comeuppance. Few audience members are likely to aspire to be more like Frank Burns.

And yet, while most likeable protagonist/detestable antagonist duos in American popular media would also be differentiated in terms of gender performance as a matter of course - the effeminate villain being a standard stock character, always set against a ruggedly masculine hero - Mash takes a different approach.

From his core personality as a sniveling, weak-willed follower, to the way other characters, including Hawkeye, routinely make fun of him by comparing him to a woman or insinuating that he's gay, Frank Burns certainly fits the part of weak, emasculated villain. What's more interesting, and much less commonly seen in Hollywood media, is that Hawkeye is portrayed as just as unmanly, and just as, if not more prone to having it pointed out in the show.

Often Hawkeye's jokes at Frank's expense include the implication that Hawkeye is attracted to him himself, and not necessarily as "the man." He jokes, "Guess it's a marriage, Frank. I know I can do better, but at my age, can I wait?" in Hawkeye, Get Your Gun; he switches from calling Frank one of his vampire brides to taking the feminine part in post-coital pillow talk after siphoning his blood in Germ Warfare; he kisses or tells Frank to kiss him in Major Fred C. Dobbs, For the Good of the Outfit, and Bulletin Board, etc.

Other times, the jokes Hawkeye makes about himself are virtually identical to the jokes made at Frank's expense - their respective attractions to Margaret as a potentially dominant sexual partner, eg, with both Frank and Hawkeye portrayed as eagerly submissive. For instance, in 5 O'Clock Charlie Hawkeye jokes about tying Frank to Margaret's tent, then dismisses the thought with, "He'd probably love it. I know I would." And Hawkeye/Trapper and Frank/Margaret are sometimes paralleled as dual couples, Hawkeye and Frank usually being framed as the more feminine partner in each.

And of course, unconnected to Frank, there are many, many more examples of Hawkeye's effeminacy, both in jokes and in personality traits.

Hawkeye is a self-professed coward who is loud and proud about how terrified he is to be stuck in a war zone. He's emotionally open and highly empathetic, always willing to listen to others' problems and discuss (or scream about) his own. He abhors institutional violence and faces every enemy combatant with his hands firmly in the air. When authority is thrust upon him he strives to relinquish it, and uses it as little as possible.

More shallowly, he has little interest in sports and exercise, derides masculine hobby magazines like Field and Stream and Popular Mechanics, is incapable of performing mechanical tasks to the exasperation of others at least four times (Comrades in Arms which explicitly frames this emasculating, In Love and War, Patent 4077, and Hey, Look Me Over), mocks traditional masculinity in many ways, and enjoys musical theatre and Hollywood gossip. And he makes and takes literally hundreds of jokes about being unmanly and having sex with men himself, many more than he makes at Frank's expense.

But while the jokes are at Frank's expense and meant to belittle him, they're rarely made at Hawkeye's expense, especially in the first five seasons. Hawkeye doesn't make the jokes out of self-deprecation, he makes them out of pride and a desire to differentiate himself from the army men he's surrounded by. He's almost always in on the jokes others make about him, rather than offended - Potter telling him to file a paternity suit against his rival in Hepatitis makes him laugh delightedly, and Trapper's remarks on his effeminacy, such as Miz Hawkeye in Hot Lips and Empty Arms, are sometimes lightly teasing but always a regular aspect of their dynamic that Hawkeye enjoys playing up. Frank doesn't make any jokes directly mocking Hawkeye's masculinity that I can recall, beyond vague "pervert" and "degenerate" remarks, which, while often historically homophobic, in the show's context tend to be treated as a reference to his heterosexual endeavours.

Frank's effeminacy is a point of mockery and derision, but Hawkeye's is a point of pride, and not intended to make him any less likeable to an audience. Antagonists don't get to score points off of Hawkeye by mocking his feminine traits, but Hawkeye makes fun of Frank regularly by mocking his feminine traits.

This difference in framing can partially be explained by the nature of their respective gender performances.

While Hawkeye and Frank are both effeminate, they're effeminate in many opposite ways. Frank is weak-willed while Hawkeye is strong-willed. Frank is unappealing to most women, while Hawkeye is something of a lady's man. Frank cannot face his fears to rise to a challenge, but Hawkeye can. But on the flipside, Frank refuses to admit to fear while Hawkeye openly proclaims it. Frank strives to attain authority while Hawkeye refuses it or takes it on only begrudgingly. Frank is obsessed with guns to a freudian extent while one of Hawkeye's most famous monologues of the show is a speech about refusing to carry one. Frank worships the concept of traditional masculinity even while he can't perform it himself, while Hawkeye mocks the concept and would refuse to perform it even if he could.

The Sniper is an excellent case study of these contrasts. In this episode, Hawkeye is effeminate and at ease with it, while Frank is desperate to prove himself masculine. Frank and Margaret flirt with strong Freudian overtones while Frank shoots a gun while nearby Hawkeye flirts with with a nurse with a line about "tasting" her. Hawkeye connects with the nurse he's wooing by relating to how scared she is and huddling in fear with her, while Margaret demands that Frank prove his masculinity by going out and taking down the sniper himself. Frank carries a gun while trying to approach the sniper, while Hawkeye carries a white flag. Frank tries to make fun of Hawkeye for wanting to surrender, but he can't bring himself to approach the sniper while Hawkeye does.

This contrast of gender performance is a consistent aspect of Hawkeye and Frank's dynamic throughout the show, but The Sniper makes it a central theme so it's a useful example to show how their relationships to masculinity are a deliberate aspect of their dynamic.

And while Hawkeye makes fun of Frank's femininity, it's significant that he also regularly makes fun of Frank's masculinity - his love of guns (eg The Sniper), his sexual affairs (eg the exchange about Frank as a "fantastic performer" in Yankee Doodle Doctor), his numerous attempts to exert authority (eg Welcome to Korea), his desire for socially approved success (eg Hot Lips and Empty Arms), etc.

Both masculine and feminine sides of Frank are comprised of negative character traits, while Hawkeye embodies the best of both - emotional expression and healthy ways of coping by talking about his feelings; bravery but not machismo; intelligence and skill as a doctor rather than an officer; empathy and a willingness to listen; sexual prowess but largely through his love of foreplay rather than his dick game (which, in the context of the early 70s, is a somewhat feminine attribute that distinguishes him from a typical traditionally masculine man); etc.

Hawkeye demonstrates some of the most appealing and healthy qualities of both masculinity and femininity while Frank demonstrates, or strives to demonstrate, the more toxic qualities of both. Through including a few positive masculine traits in the mix, the narrative is able to depict Hawkeye as likeable, admirable, and desirable in his effeminacy while Frank is depicted as loathesome in his. Hawkeye gets one of many, many women in The Sniper by showing vulnerability, while Frank only appeals to Margaret, and Margaret is portrayed as borderline pathological in her sexual attraction to violent masculinity (the scene where Frank excites her with his gun, for example, also includes an electra complex joke, and there's a running rape kink gag in this episode as well).

Another aspect to consider when it comes to differentiating Hawkeye and Frank's respective femininities is hypocrisy. Similar to how Frank and Margaret's affair is mocked because they can't admit to it while Hawkeye and Trapper's affairs are glorified, part of what makes Frank's effeminacy so mock-worthy, while Hawkeye's feminine qualities are a source of pride and rebellion, is that Frank refuses to admit to them.

Frank desperately wants to be the ideal heroic army man and often play-acts the part, poorly. When Hawkeye mocks him by calling him a woman, for example, he's drawing attention to Frank's failure to live up to his own ideals. And when Hawkeye calls himself a woman, he's mocking those same ideals. The message is that Frank is pathetic not so much for failing to be traditionally masculine, but for wanting to be traditionally masculine at all.

Ultimately the ways Hawkeye and Frank perform masculinity and femininity are pointedly in opposition, from which masc and fem traits they embody, to how proudly they embody them. The show itself draws attention to these gendered similarities and differences between Frank and Hawkeye through a constant barrage of jokes, and even whole scenes and episodes. In this way the show portrays Frank as a hypocritical loser who wants to be masculine but fails to embody all but the worst traits, and Hawkeye as a cool, admirable guy who disdains the traditional pillars of masculinity and embraces his own effeminacy.

#mash #marley on mash #mash gen #mash gs #frank mash #hawkeye mash #since you guys liked that trapper gender meta a lot more than i thought you would here have another one #though this is written a little less formally lol #i have more examples of whole scenes that make these comparisons than just the sniper but i'm trying to keep this from being #even longer than it already is #but eg white gold is another good example wrt how they relate to flagg; yankee doodle doctor; army navy game; george; the gun; etc etc #(also it's interesting that when frank leaves hawkeye gets the pathetic loser portrayal more often... though i think that's a coincidence #the shift from early to late mash could be yet another essay on mash and gender lol)#long post

241 notes · View notes

communistkenobi · 4 months

Text

I don’t like when people ask how many books you plan to read/have read this year one because I think that’s a weird relationship to have to books and two because I think even reading a chapter or a portion of something is valuable. this is especially true with non-fiction but even with fiction I think any amount you read, even if you don’t read the entire thing, is not a failure or ‘incomplete’

#I read basically exclusively non fiction and every page I read is beneficial like I’m always learning something #like my relationship to reading is often extractive and utilitarian because of school and research #but that extractive process doesn’t require reading the whole text like 99.9% of the time #I’ve only read a third of Orientalism for example but like I have a good grasp of Said’s core arguments and concepts #and like part of how I finished authoritarian personality (a 1000 page book) was by skipping & skimming sections #like the whole is not always more valuable than its components #and also like ‘I read this book to complete it’ is not an insincere way to engage with a text but I feel like it’s limiting #if that’s your primary approach to reading. Like you read a book just to say you read it #& also more petty but I think that if your argument or thesis only works if people read 100% of your book then you’re doing a poor job #of getting your point across #again obviously it’s valuable to read and process whole complete texts not dismissing that but like #I don’t find a lot of inherent value in reading a book just to complete it u know

176 notes · View notes

johannestevans · 10 months

Text

idk i told my partner i didnt want to discuss a particular tv show if they watched it and it made me realise how much the fandom's treatment of it and the attitude around it has completely soured my ability to engage in discussion about if even tho it does a lot of things well that i honestly enjoyed on top of what i think it did terribly and really alienated me as a viewer

and that just. makes me sad

its bc so much fandom is so concentrated and online but its so miserable when you enjoy or appreciate a piece of media but have a different take on it / enjoy it despite its flaws etc and like

you're in a position of just not being able to discuss it w its nuances or flaws taken into account bc of nitpicky language and unnecessarily aggressive response

#musings #idk for me this is good omens but like #talking to lesbians about ofmd for example and how it feels so thin on the ground for them #i feel like ppl criticise and feel comfortable criticising wwdits a whole lot more #maybe bc its less popular than gotv and ofmd? maybe bc its got like. a coarser and goofier humour and is less earnest?#but yeah idk #i think of all the kill yourself messages ive gotten this year aparr from the ones ive received for generally being trans and gay #theyve either been bc i like izzy hands or bc i don't like gotv #and its like. why is it that important to u that u want someone to die over it ya knoq

315 notes · View notes

heartbeatbookclub · 4 months

Text

I think, in a lot of ways, Monika and Sayori are reflections of each other.

Really, I think all of the girls are similar in a lot of their issues (self-esteem, anxiety, etc) and that's something emphasized in a lot of the stories, and a big part of why they all gravitate towards each other and work to create the club as a safe space for all of them, but I think Monika and Sayori in particular are just very much alike.

I think Trust really emphasized this similarity in the reveal of Sayori's poem, Become the Flower.

Prior to shifting focus onto the poem, Monika talks to herself about her real vision for the Literature Club. I think here, Monika points out what Sayori actually meant when she said that Monika was "trying to make the club [she] needs the most, out of anyone", even if she doesn't actually realize that yet. It's pretty clear that when she says that literature is a window to the real self underneath the person who's "forced to always smile and blend in", and is "forced to be perfect", she's really talking about herself.

I think that a lot of Monika's character throughout Trust is expressed more subtly, often in a roundabout way like this. A huge part of the story is centered around Monika's own personal struggles expressing herself, and that trait is pretty well exemplified in this indirect way of talking about her own struggles. I think that the reason why Monika's characterization here is so subtle overall is reflective of this.

And I think it's pretty blatant that this is statement is also meant to be reflective of Sayori, given that we immediately move from this statement onto the poem which reveals to Monika that she's been hiding her own problems. In this way, I think Team Salvato wanted to explicitly point out how similar they really are, and draw your attention to it.

I think that the way that Trust as a story is put together is meant to really emphasize just how similar they are even in their differences; spending a great deal of time focusing on Monika's own problems, to then showcase Sayori as the mirror to them.

I think the two of them make a very interesting pair in that respect, because a big similarity they have is that they very much place others above themselves, so they both end up individually building each other up while they put themselves down. It creates this strange back and forth where they each insist they suck and the other is great, when the reality is that they're both pretty fantastic.

In the statement Monika made to herself about her vision of the club, while it's clear she's talking about herself, she frames it in the context of somebody else getting those benefits out of the Literature Club, rather than herself. Throughout the entirety of Trust, she speaks dismissively of her efforts and her problems alike, while pointing out that Sayori is providing a lot of help. Sayori by contrast spends most of her time hyping her up and points out, explicitly, that Monika doesn't give herself enough credit. She also dismisses her own efforts, pointing out in most things she does, up into the climax, that Monika is a lot better than her at whatever she's doing. And when Sayori's problems are actually revealed, she explicitly says that she doesn't want Monika to worry about her, and that she doesn't want to have this conversation.

I think this all really shows that both of them are averse to tackling their own problems head-on, and I think this comes out of a fear of being vulnerable, since that's directly mentioned several times in Monika's issues openly expressing herself.

I think what makes Monika's particular brand of self-negging quite so disheartening is that she dismisses it out of hand as her being silly and dramatic, and in that way, she doesn't actually address the fundamental problem underlying it, nor does she actually address the statements themselves as incorrect. The amount of time she spends talking down her own problems as something trivial and silly, particularly in comparison to Sayori's problems, are a manifestation of her own desire to avoid the vulnerability of even having these problems, and it's just...heartbreaking. Sayori's denial is its own can of worms, but Monika's ability to so consistently minimize her issues when they are clearly still impacting her is so uniquely troublesome.

I think a big difference between the two of them in that respect is that Monika wears significantly more of her heart on her sleeve, so Sayori finds it a lot easier to directly target Monika's problems than Monika does in the reverse, but their individual habits of avoidance are coming from the same place.

I'm traveling a bit aimlessly in this essay, trying to tie things together nicely as I see them, but there are just a lot of similarities I notice between their actions and the way they think that showcase that they have a lot of the same problems, and a huge theme in Trust is expressing oneself, which both Monika and Sayori struggle to do, in much the same way.

I think a key similarity between the two of them is their tendency to catastrophize over a situation when left alone, mostly revolving around seeing the worst possible scenario for how they could've personally messed up the situation. I'm just rewatching Trust for this little essay, so there are two major moments I see Monika doing this, but I remember Sayori doing this...a few times, actually, throughout the side stories.

I think the spiral Monika goes into after reading Become the Flower is particularly important, as it exemplifies the habit of dismissing her own problems fantastically; in this case, she has an excuse. It's true that Monika's issues with her perfectionism seem silly and trivial in comparison to Sayori's, but that's exactly the thing: She shouldn't be comparing them in the first place! Her problems are real, and they clearly cause her distress, but because Sayori's own issues appear so much more serious than hers, she dismisses them wholesale as her being dramatic and silly. Because Monika's problems seem so small, she doesn't see them for the problems they really are. In the same way, because her own accomplishments and work seem so small, she doesn't see them for the accomplishments they are.

This spiral showcases Monika's biggest problem, the reason why she has such trouble expressing herself, and conversely, the exact same problem Sayori has. She doesn't want to be the center of attention.

Put another way, she doesn't think she deserves to be the center of attention. Her problems are so trivial; her accomplishments menial. Her fear of vulnerability isn't a fear that others will hurt her; it's a fear of being selfish.

Sayori is very similar, in that the reason she actively works to avoid showing any possible sign that anything is wrong is because she doesn't want anyone to worry about her. She doesn't want other people to dedicate time and energy to her.

I think that for both of them, this comes from low self-esteem. Sayori is self-explanatory I think, but I'd say Monika's perfectionism makes it exceptionally difficult for her to really feel accomplished in anything she does, which, coupled with her constant preoccupation with how she appears to other people (I think Monika places very high expectations on herself. I mean, Trust literally starts with her frantically apologizing and saying "I normally don't ever do this!" when Sayori finds her napping) makes it very difficult for her to feel confident in herself.

The fear both Sayori and Monika have in being vulnerable isn't that people will use that vulnerability to hurt them.

It's that people will try to help them.

And I think that's a really big part of why Sayori feels like she can trust Monika with her darkest thoughts, because she understands that they're the same in a lot of ways.

Monika created the club which she needed the most...and it was also the club Sayori needed the most, for the exact same reason.

I think it's kinda easy to overlook a lot of this because of the sheer amount of focus placed onto Sayori and the more explicit issue Monika has (insofar as the plot is concerned), but I think Sayori is exactly what Monika needs just as much as Monika is what Sayori needs.

#i'll probably be making a lot more of these sorts of essays on different characters + side stories #i just noticed this and thoughts it was really interesting to look at #i think there's not a whole lot of focus given to monika as a character through the side stories in general outside of this #probably because the base game gives so much #i think this is a really interesting showcase of the pressure of this expectation which monika has of herself to be perfect #one thing i didn't mention here is that monika seems to outright reject the authority/seriousness of the club president position #i think another similarity between the two of them is that monika seems to use humor to soften things which make her uncomfortable #which based on the flippant way she talks about setting an example as club president specifically #it seems like she's not exactly confident in acting as an authority in her position #idk i really have a lot to say about them. both individually and together.#musings #ddlc monika #ddlc sayori #ddlc #doki doki literature club

82 notes · View notes

paellegere · 3 months

Text

"their relationship is romantic" "their relationship is familial" "their relationship is platonic" you're thinking too narrow. their relationship goes beyond labels. the family is inherently queer. their platonic love is romantic. the erotic is familial. each one is the other and the other is them

#.txt #i've gotten to the point of relationship anarchy where i no longer understand the obsession with labeling relationships #there's a post floating around like 'it doesn't matter if you view them as romantic or platonic the point is that they love each other'#and i get the message. however may i propose that distinctions such as that don't even have to matter. consider #bold claim probably. but whatever i didn't have the choice to think about love in a normative way and as a consequence i have thoughts #of course i am thinking about wincest but it applies everywhere. jopzier even #jopson views crozier as a surrogate parent but in an inherently queer way. does that mean he want to fuck his mom? probably not #but the fixation and need for redemption turns the traditionally familial relationship into something far more #do you understand #once you leave the normative behind labels become useless #do sam and dean love each other romantically or platonically or familially? consider: it doesn't matter. there are no words to describe it #their love is queer in the sense that it extends beyond normativity. society holds no sway over them. they are ungovernable #i find it ultimately unhelpful to discuss fiction in normative terms when the characters themselves exist outside of normative society #shows like supernatural and the terror are perfect examples. sam and dean were never normal and franklin crew left normal behind #the arctic doesn't care if you fuck your mom. the impala doesn't care if you kiss your brother #this isn't really about anything i just saw that post the other day and i was like. why doesn't this Hit for me. well this is why #however it IS helpful to discuss fiction set within normative society in relation to normativity. it's relevant!#most stories are not however set within the bounds of normativity. that's kinda the whole point of a lot of fiction #baby i explore relationship anarchy in ways that you couldn't even imagine #<-tldr #i have a tendency to write essays in the notes every time i post something. sorry about that. it feels safer here and i am skittish

57 notes · View notes

uninter3sting · 27 days

Text

every obstacle is a test from God and He Is Always Watching.

hey uh does anyone else experience this

#religious paranoia #religious trauma #ocd #christianity #scrupulosity #religious ocd #i can think of a lot more examples. but there is only so much room on the canvas and i didn't want to draw #not all of these are strictly like ocd either some of it is just paranoia #i've gotten a lot better but i don't trust god anymore #bc the god in my brain is not a kind one #also after going to church for nearly ur whole life you start to hear drastically differing accounts for what god is supposedly like #the killa #uninter3sting art #exvangelical

44 notes · View notes

macadam · 2 years

Text

I think why I’m so elated by every piece of weird ass transformers lore I learn about is that I enjoy seeing what writers can get away with in such a big-name franchise. It’s gotten exhausting watching every franchise slowly lose its charm over the ages in pursuit of being palatable to the masses.

There’s definitely something to be said about how writers don’t get to put their all into these mainstream stories because they have to be so palatable. It’s hard to enjoy what you make when it has to walk the tightrope between being a compelling story, and pleasing shareholders. Stories lose their heart, when writers can’t make it theirs, y’know?

Seeing the stuff that slides in transformers media, the weird shit that is still slipping through the cracks, jro in his entirety, feels like a deviation from that. The first thought that always goes through my head is “haha how is this official canon media. Who okayed this?” And the answer is probably no one, really. The writers get to have fun. We still get to see a glimpse of the insane well why not quirky 80s toy ad that transformers started off as. It brings me a lot of joy to see that the goofiness and absurdity is still there, somewhere.

The fact that so much of the weird lore sits right on the surface is so wonderful, too. These aren’t some obscure side comics, or a failed tv show. So much of it is at the very front of the franchise.

It’s nice to see transformers writers still winning, I guess.

#weird shit feels real #and well loved #and it’s funny #I dunno #mac thinks too much #transformers #thinking about how when I first read tf fanfics #well there was a lot of canon stuff I thought there was no way was canon #but like #holoforms? that’s in tfa. front and centre #but I thought there’s no way that’s canon cause it felt so quirky #and there’s an endless selection of other examples I could give #where I was like there’s no way this was allowed to exist. it’s too odd #but it does #transformers is allowed to push the envelope in so many ways #explore the whole nature of how sentient robots would work #it’s very refreshing after existing in like.. starwars and dc spaces where all the fantastical stuff #was annexed in favour of a more mainstream palatable story #won’t even start on marvel #transformers is a little oasis. all the official writers are insane (for better or worse)#it’s amazing

406 notes · View notes

always-amity · 4 months

Text

My designs for all the (named, rip to that little guy that Merciless ate in httyd1) Seadragonus Giagantus Maximus in the httyd books.

38 notes · View notes

klance-daydreams · 54 minutes

Text

guys we need to actually stop involving pidge in romantic klance situations

#WHAT I MEAN IS. like #i see wayyy too often pidge being the witness of random klance antics or being depicted as interested in klance's relationship a lot??#idk how to describe it i never see any of the other teammates being the punchline for klance jokes more than pidge #and im not saying that klance jokes with pidge involvement is inherently bad but i have so many examples of this being taken weirdly #like i remember this one comic i saw by this pretty popular artist (at least back in peak vld fandom) where keith and lance are having #a slow dancing moment in one of their rooms and at the very end it's revealed that pidge was watching through the vents and recording the #whole thing.#and there's this other art i see frequently on pinterest where it's implied that klance are doing the dirty and pidge is in their room #having to listen to it #and just today i received a message asking me to draw keith carrying lance bridal style as pidge watches in the background #...DOES ANYONE UNDERSTAND WHAT IM SAYING #do i sound insane #I'm just saying that pidge is not this interested in klance. at least to the degree the fandom makes them out to be #and sometimes it's just plain weird okay??? okay #haha if u read this far hello 😭#klancedaytalks

20 notes · View notes

maxlovespigeons · 25 days

Note

Hey, you like COTL, right? Could you help me figure something out?

Why do people ship Narinder and the Lamb?

YOU ARE ONE OF TWO PEOPLE IVE MET ON THIS SITE THAT HAS ANY FORM OF RELATION TO THE GAME THAT SEEMS TO NOT SHIP NARILAMB!

And I'm not even sure about the other one

Oh I do ship them! I suppose from what I've seen it started out as like a very common joke? How most of the players that spared Narinder after defeating him ended up marrying him

Plus there's the whole mini quest series you get from him in post game where it seems he warms up to the Lamb and even ends up thanking them, I think that's pretty cute :] even if you don't ship them you could probably see them as unlikely friends at the end of it.

Then there's the domino effect of the ship being popular: people enter the fandom, see the ship is popular, then start shipping it as well because why not? Shipping is one of the biggest fandom fuels, so it's rather not surprising that the fandom latched onto something like that!

And, in the end, the creators seem to encourage the ship on Twitter a whole lot! They retweet art and interact with the community a lot in that regard, even having made some jokey official art with the two in a position where they'd be seen as a couple (as Mary and Joseph in a parody artwork for Christmas).

Nothing wrong if you don't enjoy the ship in the end, as long as you're respectful to the people that do! (Which goes both ways, of course.) The game has a lot to offer and the relationship between the Lamb and the One Who Waits is the one we get most of, so I don't think it's overall very surprising people choose to focus on them a whole lot!

#maybe one day we will get to see some more relationships between characters to chat about or overall more lore #it doesn't seem like the devs have implemented everything they wanted to add to the game just yet #the relationships between the bishops for example are also super interesting to think about!#overall who cares if it makes sense #fanon exists as it is for now and everyone is having fun so!#cotl #ask #cult of the lamb #also i suppose you got the impression I don't ship them from the fact I don't draw them a whole lot?#i tend to focus on a lot of other relationships as well but i do greatly enjoy seeing these two in fanart and such

20 notes · View notes

fictionadventurer · 8 months

Text

Fun genres of old tv shows:

TV is such a new format that we're just using radio play scripts, so our dialogue helpfully describes what you can see on the screen

Youtube doesn't exist yet, so we're going to pause this sitcom to let these musicians play whole entire songs

#random thought of the day #sitcoms #major example for number 1: the lone ranger and really old gunsmoke episodes #number 2: basically every show before 1970 or so but the andy griffith show does this a lot #dick van dyke show too but that's usually in the context of the variety show so it feels both more natural to the show and more artificial #it's not quite the same thing as the characters going #'oh this local guy happens to sing really well'#or 'wow these hillbillies got a whole bluegrass band'#or 'main characters are just gonna pick up a guitar for fun'#where it rises from the lives of the characters #instead of being presented as something done by professionals

69 notes · View notes

anaalnathrakhs · 3 months

Text

i feel it's so fucking stupid and ungrateful but it still hurts a little when someone gifts me something i just don't like. i don't know. i know it's dumb and inaccurate to astrain that much meaning to a simple gift, but it feels kinda like they don't know me. i guess it feels like people don't see me, like a reminder that the person i reflect and the person i feel like are incredibly different.

#two fairly recent examples jump to mind #last year my class did a secret santa #the guy who got my name barely knew me so instead he asked our litterature teacher for tips #i was doing an effort to participate a lot in her classes and discuss stuff and i felt like she was an adult i could really trust #and adult who Gets It #and she picked just. the wrong gift. a classical philosophy essay.#stuff i hate reading. stuff i hate thinking about.#i said thank you to both of them and tried to read it during christmas break still. but i was right. i hated it.#and this year's christmas #recently i tried patching things up with my parents and we are a lot more communicative now #so they've opened up that my demand not to receive any gifts was painful to them #so we had an agreement: we write open-hearted letters to each other on christmas.#and they can gift me something if they'd like but no pressure if they don't find anything they feel would be a good gift #bc i myself opened up about the whole ''inaccurate gift'' thing being one of the reasons i dislike receiving stuff #and guess what. christmas comes. they got me a printed card from an artist whose work we saw at a local art thing earlier that year.#that artist does mainly either plants or nice architecture. stuff i love.#they picked the ONE work of hers that doesn't look like that. some reinterpretation of the great wave of kanagawa #a piece which i dislike with a passion for aesthetic reasons #i had promised i'd be honest if their gift missed the mark but tbh i couldn't. it's just an aesthetic thing it's completely begnin.#it's not like they spent lots or tried to pick something that was USEFUL #so i smiled and the picture is hanging with other stuff in my room #and i thanked them and i can't express how genuinely glad i am we have a better relationship #but man i felt my heart break a little under the tree in that moment #idk #i know it's silly but it makes me feel weird. and cold.#broadcasting my misery #vent

28 notes · View notes

istherewifiinhell · 2 months

Text

IS FLYING GENDERED?

On the masculine default, typifying gender in genre, and women as the other in the transformers cartoons.

question for the ages

once again i said back in the halcyon days of watching g1 (aka 5 months ago) i was like. Nooooo, decepticon is NOT a gender that's Silly. It's funny, but as a Read Of The Text, I thought it largely unneeded. (The concept came about, as a joke, involving dismissing the bad guys using the same language you would abt women (sexistly) that they're emotional [heh, flighty], vain, and shrill) after all. If in the 80s era there are 5 whole named/speaking woman tfs, its only ever gonna get better from here right? (<- booboo the fool)

anyway

Let's consider the axiom that the assumed default gender is male, that maleness is often seen as LACK of gender, and femaleness and gender variance are the PRESENCE of gender. In certain reasoning and worldviews, of course (See Androcentrism). Then add that, for transformers, the assumed default thing a transformer turns into, is car. (Autocentrism, if you will)

(The most general term for what a tf turns into is "Alt mode" as some of them are not vehicles at all. The other mode is "Robot Mode", whether its humanoid or not)

So I will be laying out why I believe the cartoon iterations support: non standard alt modes = non standard genders. This is in spite of the fact that FIRST lady tfs were all cars. Sleek cyber cars, but still. For whatever reason, (possibly, the reason for everything in tf, toys) they might as well not exist for how woman tf characters presence in the cartoons progressed over time.

And, to be clear, this is a reading of how these works of fiction are created, not a new unified bioessentialism but for robots aliens I'm proposing for like. In universe lore reasons. I hate that idea.

That said, alt modes in order of most to least gender: Spider, motorcycle, flying (in general, with rotors, jets), tank, and then FINALLY, car. (water and space crafts are already too marginal to rank, but they too can be assumed in relation to default maleness, AND that in making one a woman, would still qualify as othering her).

The NUMBER one reason for this is the bizarre need to have an ESTABLISHED woman tf character before making new ones. AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE. With a g1 gender ratio something like.... (counting even the most marginal cases for the ladies) 9:120? (That's a rough count from a quick scanning of the tf wiki g1 char list) Shits dire out here.

The second is, ofc, character design based. cis people [stand in phrase for the hegemonic world view] are not okay, and their opinions about how tf gender must need be depicted visually is. uh? Im not a fan. Size and shape dimorphism in general is a given, and specifically having women tfs as far more humanoid and curvy in specific. Also general cartoon lady face syndrome but, whatever. I think there's exactly one character here who doesn't have "lips" or "lipstick" as a distinguishing factor. I'm so tired.

Third is generally, the idea of The Girl Of the Team. When there's The Girl, she often isn't JUST a normal character, who happens to be a girl. See, of course, the Smurtfette Principle. But in my view there's also a trend to give The Girl "special traits" on top of "Girl", maybe even to directly combat the idea that the Girl Character has no other traits? To stop this from being a General Primer on Woman in Media, my explanatory focus is things specific to the tf franchise.

(A phrase I use for thinking about normative modes [in general, not just the Alt ones] in within the tf universe is "unique transformerdom" or, even more clunkily, "A transformer of unique transformerdom". The excessive verbosity is amusing to me personally. All I mean by it is to have an umbrella term for any of the ways tfs can be made unique from their peers in the non allegorical realities of the fiction).

I could, and do, and greatly want to, speak about this AT LENGTH. But it keeps spiraling away from me. So I'll say for now were looking at ways a character is being depicted different from her peers, not because she is the only woman (which she likely is), but cause she's a different kind of transformer, AND if she's othered for it.

(IN SOME forms of the lore. Being a transformer woman, IS A UNIQUE KIND of transformer unto itself. Let's just say I hate it and move on)

Fourth, is the gender of villainy. There is much to be said about gender presentation of villains, the ways they are allowed to be aberrant. We will get to it. There is also all the tropes specific TO evil women, and the modes of villainy open TO female characters. But a general thing I think impacting the gender ratios of the factions is the how "Good" and "Evil" female characters are written. I'll generalize and call this the "Damsel vs Temptress" dichotomy. (See concepts like the Madonna-whore complex). Transformers, is by and large, an action franchise. Unless special reasons are made, characters who can impact the action– have more screen time, and likely more memorable, and iconic presences. A villainous woman can be unchaste, violent, aggressive. While a heroic woman, even if not a literal damsel are more likely to be in a support role. The secretaries of the action genre: medics and techs.

(Another factor is that tfs are giant robots, and the good guys are often friends with tiny squishy little humans. These make very good damsel fodder, and can be taking up the spots on the roster that might, in a different franchise, go to women. Additionally, while woman characters in transformers overall is an interesting topic. When I say tf women, I'm referring to ones that are in fictionally, transformers.)

SO, now understanding our points of attack/obstacles for getting woman into transformers. (Getting established, gendering the designed, uniqueness of existence, and general villainy). Lets go over those alt modes, and the characters that have em, in more detail.

Spiders

The "Beast Era" (1996) intro-ed the spider ofc. And what don't we have with this one. She's a villain, but shes also misunderstood, the era and design style let to these more organic shapes. And they used them to make sure she was very sexy. She's genre aware, she's quippy, she's an absolute icon. So naturally. She gets ported to other later shows. Which means we just have sexy spider ladies running around when everyone else is a fucking truck and shit.

Her own origin is, well think of her as a "Bride of Frankenstein" to the resident evil scientist, also a spider. She was designed for, and manipulated by him in multiple ways. Her protoform (A blank robot base), was supposed to be one of the good guys (a Maximal), but was reprogrammed into a bad guy (Predacon). Even then, she eventually joins them, for her own reasons. She's not even the first predacon to do so, the difference? Well the characters are a lot more NORMAL about his autonomy. Both of these characters stress that being a predacon is an identity they still see as important. But only the woman is told that really, she is was was always MEANT to be a maximal. And while that's true in a sense. There's also a plot were she's forced (by plot contrivance, not the other maximals) to get corrective robot surgery for it. And when they think she died from, everyone's more sad for her boyfriend than for her. Ouch.

The second spider, in the 2007 show, is now one in a world where she is the only "techno-organic" transformer, hence, she is spider, everyone else is a vehicle. Similar to the first, her narrative is very gendered, but less in the way were, like, I do literally think the first was was experiencing in universe sexism from other characters. Here, they really focus on the "techno vs organic" narrative, and the tragic circumstances on how that happened. In this case its just real world sexist writing.

THIRD SPIDER, (2010), instead of misunderstood and tragic evil, this ones just super mega likes to cause pain evil. She also occupies a strange place between the typic vehicular tfs, and the insecticons. This is because she has a helicopter alt mode, and her robot mode is just, a lady with spider characteristics. And, more than just a passing bug like similarity, she has the power to control the insecticons (you know, cause evil woman mind control). However, she doesn't fit in with them either, as the insecticons are at the most insect like they've ever been, in look, living in hives and that most don't even speak.

They may vary in exact character, relationship to the story's moral conflict, and design. But they stay comfortably established, dimorphised, flirty and flirting with villainy. And bonus points, always, for black widow spider trope.

SO. SPIDERS. Established: ✅️ Gendered designs: ✅️ (Extremely!) Unique: ✅️ Othered: ✅️ Villainy: ✅️

Motorcycles

Tooooo my knowledge the first bike lady was in 2004, and fairly minor, in the actual plot, but rest assured, they did go the previously established woman route, by being pink, though, which one shes named after varies by language. But neither were previously motorcycles. (And yes, there is also this problem of mixing together or swapping out one woman tf for another. As if we have the ladies to spare). Even though motorcycle men also exist, this one just stuck for a bit. Maybe something to do with Those Movies. I think the Gendered Existence of a motorcycle is pretty evident though, general sex appeal, being smaller, the mode of riding a motorcycle is different, more physical and intimate. Mainly this ranks so high for the level of grossness they can pack in. Just how objectifying it can be, particularly with two instances where the human rider is an annoying teen boy. Naturally, I've also never seen a male and female motorcycle in the same room, but the approach to design tends to be different. And yeah most of em are Arcee, who's first alt mode was cyber car, but it's not just her.

Established: ✅️ Gendered designs: ✅️ Unique: ✅️ Othered: Depends on iteration, I do NOT like the way one gets called "tough, for a two wheeler". Villainy: ❌(they wouldn't need to be motorcycles if they weren't making them the Special Girl Autobot, after all)

Flying

General: It just tends to stick out when your one girl is only flyer in the group, even she's otherwise tactfully done. Only flyer of the Maximals, a falcon, only flyer of the dinobots, a Pteranodon.

Rotors

I can barely even figure this one. Maybe it's just a general, aesthetics and use case of the actually vehicles, the associations? None of these ladies (and special case) are very connected otherwise. As previously mentioned, the spider helicopter. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

A big one for this is the preschool demo shows, which are rescue team focused. In the first one the only woman on the human response worker team pairs with the helicopter, they mention she does medical at times. The helicopter is male, like the other tfs. But also he's afraid of flying, and while not the first case of a flyer with a fear of heights, their personalities are, pretty different. As he's both fearful AND effeminate, fine as character traits go but, with the tone of humour used, marks him as Other.

In the second, Whirl (pointing to icon) becomes a girl for the first time, now with standard humanized face. I assume as move to keep with the previous show of having a girl one, as there's no human team mates. She's also the only one who really likes rescue school. Aaaand that's all know of her. What more do you want from me.

Helicopters: Unique: ✅️ Othered: ✅️ (milder than some)

But why'd I call this section rotors instead of helicopters? That would be because one of the latest Sole Female TF we just put in everything™ is a VTOL jet with rotors. She'll tend to be the only jet of her type, which is also smaller than the type of jet used for the villains.

And, of course, aside from alt mode, the thing that makes her stand out most in the cartoons? That she's very clearly a comics character. (I find the emphasize that she's "fan created" over done, as it only controlled minor aspects, and irrelevant cause tfs get completely overhauled in new versions all the time). From her design, which is a bit busier than most characters she stars with. And also uses Japanese aesthetic signifiers in ways that I think are a bit misappropriated and untactful. (VERY USamerican comics). Also, when she stars next to a guy, also from comics employing Japanese aesthetic, you can tell its not deployed in the same manner. (E.I she has hair and makeup, he has armor). Either way, her depictions have her either as badass sword lady on mission from god who's constantly getting hit on by an annoying guy. Or have her be from a different planet and has special telepathy.

Do we see how both her gender AND the cultural signifiers are having affects here? That the main woman tf in a series can be a literal alien even among our alien robots, with cultural signifiers they don't have?

Ratings Established: ✅️ (made the comics to cartoon jump) Gendered designs: ✅️ Unique: ✅️ Othered: ✅️ (SO SO EXTREMELY, using methods in fiction and real life)

Jets

I think my association of jets with tf gender is stronger, than some of the above examples, even if there's less reason to it. And why is that? Well, lets get socratic. Here's another question.

Is This All Starscream's Fault?

No. He's not real, he can't do things. But. His legacy as THE main stay transformers character that gets to subvert gender? Yeah. (Sure, the G1 autobots have their own effete, but he's not in every single cartoon they ever made now is he? Plus now that I think about it, he is a FLYING car...)

From the get, he's not a Man's man. He's shrill, he's manipulative and duplicitous, petty and emotional, cowardly and wheedling. He is, of course, the Perfect character. Now naturally, the 80s cartoon was not concerned with your paltry logics. Starscream and his ilk are the jets, but every decepticon can fly. The gun, the cassette player, the camera, the cassettes.

And each to a last, more masculine than he is. Vocally or behaviorally, physically. Every one of them fit the gender expectations more than he does. Even being a small time grunt, is a masculine trait, after all, more so than unchecked ambition. So its not femininity from flying, from jets. But direct relationship, reference, and descendancy from Starscream that makes it. I've yet to see female versions of Jet fire and or the aerialbots, for example.

So what to do when an effeminate male villain was less maltese falcon and more that man has effeminate hips? Well. We had to start getting his ass for being effeminate, explicitly. They made the female clone of him, which yeah, is an offensive joke stemming from the various The Gender Anxieties. (Transmisogyny, homophobia and sexism. General relation toxic masculinity. A heady mix of all and more).

But I mean. It's free girl tf... Once given a name in extra canon materials, she start's showing up in other things. Once you're in books, video games, comics, and most importantly, toys, you're real. And then eventually, her first non clone appearance in a cartoon, and how her presence shaped it.

That being, Cyberverse. Which is a cgi show, you need to know this for reasons of production. Making new models is expensive. This has always been the reason you just make recolours of Starscream and name them different things. Chicken or egg on this one, I don't know, But because CV has Slipstream, and the only difference between her and the generic "male" decepticon jet, is a more feminine face; Suddenly, any random decepticon goon can be a woman.

An absolutely revolutionary take for striving to populate a fictional world with gender parity. By at large it also means they're way more lady villains, and specifically flying model of villain. The show has other woman, but none who get the same androgynous body mold treatment.

Established: ✅️ Gendered designs: Mildly to NO. Unique: By design, no. Othered: Yes for the clone, and Screamer himself, I suppose. No, otherwise. Villainy: ✅️(That's, the whole idea)

Tanks

It needs to be said. Sometimes, when doing things that transgress a norm, anteing up is less subversive. This is another reason why gender variance, female agency and overt sexuality are more common traits of villains. When already defying strictures of society. What's one more.

That's Right. TANKS ARE THE BUTCH WOMAN OF TRANSFORMERS.

Alright. Let me back up. Strika is the stone cold knock out undefeated champ of lady tf designs that, actually has a reoccurring cartoon presence. She is, admittedly, only a reoccurring to minor character.

Her introduction is in another show with techno-organics, this one involved in the struggle between well, the techno and the organic. Strika as we see her, and as the design that will go on to be iterated, is not in her normal transformer body. She has been transferred into a 'vehicon' body. Without a preexisting essence contained in one, vehicons are not considered alive, in the way a transformer is. Visually, they lack the more human body plan, a standard face, feet and hand like appendages.

To further contrast Strika against the two techno-organic woman. Both of them are tall, and slender. Their softer organic shapes designed towards elegance or beauty, whatever your subjective opinion of that result might be. They both have romance subplots too. By the way. Or honestly one subplot and one main plot. Strika. In contrast. Is built like a brick shit house. Her face is. Minimal. And her goal: protecting her planet... by terminating the heroes.

Now, existing as a character that can be referenced for other media, and given the detail that she was a "Famous general", it's off to the races. She makes a wonderful big tank menace that can fill out a background shot, too.

Without her I hardly think we could have Clobber, also from CV. Who is. The true goat. The finest thing, the achievements of all we could ever hope for. A big fuck off woman, gender swapped from a previous male design with minimal faff, with now even more personality and show presence. Friends, wants, desires. Emotions. Thank God for Clobber, Thank Clobber for Clobber. Thank Randolph Heard and Mae Catt for Clobber.

Established: Depends if you want to count that Strika had so much swag they kept drawing/modeling her Gendered designs: FUCK NO Unique: ✅️ Othered: only originally Villainy: ✅️

Cars

So now you have the final piece of the puzzle. In transformers, Autobots are Cars. Yes, there are plenty of autobots that are NOT cars, and there are cars that are not Autobots. But they're exceptions, they're aberrances. They're unique. And Autobots are the norm. They oppose the Decepticons. Decepticons are Villains. And Decepticons can fly. Modal simplified binaries and false dichotomy abound!

And the thing about those original Autobot woman, the one's who largely did not influence all of this? They were cars, it's true, but not like how the men where cars. They've not been designed from transforming car toys, with a shellac of humanoid gender over top. Their designed in the way of human gender. With the car on top.

When the preexisting clause leads to the original designs to be revisited, which, has largely only happened in more recent years. They aren't car woman robots. The cars are literally not part of their bodies, they are additional. Instead of a unifying identity of a robot who is a car, its Arcee and her backpack. Parts of cars get grafted onto their petite lady bodies, and placed anywhere out of the way.

In order to make a transformer a woman, they have to give her a gender, not understanding that that's always been the case. And to give her a woman's gender, she's got to LOOK like a woman, not a transformer. And to look like a woman, she's got to act like a woman. She must be heroic but reactive instead of active, or else, villainous, conniving and or self centered. To be a woman, we must have some other previous woman to explain her presence, or else explain it anew with her unique, strange, or exotic origin. How could she ever be a woman if she simply, existed, looked average, talked average. How could she be a woman if her body is hunks of ungendered car. How can she be a woman if she's everything we expect a transformer to be.

A woman is transgressive, a woman is not normal. Autobots are normal. Autobots are heros. Autobots are men. And Autobots do not fly.

#some shit #its not called cisformers #<- IT SURE ISNT FOLKS #a note on how im using citations here u can read BEFORE getting into the post proper #I'm writing this in mind that someone might have NO idea about tf. or. god forbid.#the general perspective of media trope analysis im working from.#So the links can be considered additional or further reading with intent of 1. if a more thorough understanding of a concept might help #2. something im eliding the name of for search reasons 3. a referential example of what im saying #4. a specifc reference/bit of info that might be unclear. in which case im usually linking to a SECTION of the page #5. JOKE #ALright now normal tag talking space.#THIS IS. serious media analysis done casually for fun! in that. I mean it. genuinely. But also im here for silly fun and im not trying #to be SOOOO academically rigorous that its still not. Posting. u know?#MUCH inspired. or i suppose u might say. encouraged to completion and whole hearted commitment by (fandom) silly serious analysis and #math theroying thematics #i have NO idea if this thing will be searchable with all the links and the words i used. but i prepared for it it case it is #AND I PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO IT!!!!!!!! SO its okay if anyone reads it!#but im also braced for bad faithing inwhich case. I will not be held responsible for my actions. thank you.#i have been told to tag this #maccadam #transformers #if someone tryies to kill me for it im not taking responsibility

23 notes · View notes