because 'putting on hold an engagement' isn't the same thing as 'breaking it'

why yuri on ice is not queerbaiting

disclaimer: spoilers for episode 10 ahead

disclaimer: this is in no way subtweeting anyone, its just something that I think needs to be said.

if you’d like to add something (either to add to my point, or to say why you think its queerbaiting) then please go ahead!

for anyone still confused, queerbaiting basically means that a tv show or anime or whatever shows a character as 100% heterosexual but has gay undertones with that apparently heterosexual character with another same-sex character and then pulls a “no homo” and makes them 10/10 straight again

-We’re so used to seeing queerbaiting in our favorite shows that it seems almost unfathomable that there could be a show in which there actually are two gay characters that ISNT yaoi or solely based around sex. I hate queerbaiting and think its absolutely disgusting, and I also think its nasty that we are so accustomed to thinking a show that displays somewhat gay ideas can exist.

-The writers (and one of them being the director!!):

One of the two writers, who happens to also be the director for the show, named Sayo Yamamoto had also worked on another show called Michiko & Hatchin. I haven’t watched the show myself but have heard much about it and am planning to watch it, but its about a girl who’s in an abusive family whos waiting to be taken away by her prince charming. Sayo Yamamoto has worked on hard subjects like this show before, so she would be educated on how much a gay couple in a show would mean to people. She knows how to make it not queerbaiting.

The writers were aiming for a foreign, more western, audience. Even doing the opening song in english!! So they must be well educated in how much queerbaiting takes over so many amazing shows and how they wouldn’t do that.

I absolutley cannot find the source for my life, but I know I’ve seen that Sayo Yamamoto has said that she would like to see a wedding (HINTING TO SOMETHINGGGG MAYBE) and that it is canon !!

-Comparing it to a revolutionary anime, No.6, its almost the same. Although the plot is in no way the same at all ha, the buildup to a gay explosion is there. Already in episode 10 they’re engaged! In No.6, as I recall but please correct me because I havent watched it in a while, theres a long break where the two MCs dont share any of their gay tendencies with each other but just hold it in for angst, but Yuri on Ice follows the gay plot for every episode. 

-In the past we’ve seen such images as Viktor naked in the hot springs, Yuri being impregnated by Viktor’s eros, a censored kiss scene, and so much more. But in episode 10, we’ve finally seen pure love. The bond of marriage between these two, although labeled as a lucky charm, is pure and good. Yuri has said in the past how much love Viktor has brought into his life during the conference, but this is where we truly see love between the two. Phichit (he’s such a fucking homie oh my god he’s the true MVP) yells that Viktor and Yuri are getting married and everyones so happy ??? but like, Viktor is totally calm and collected during it. Yuri, being the absolute virgin, hasn’t had to deal head-on with love. But Viktor, being a someone who has dated before, probably has and he knows that if he really wants to do this thing with Yuri then he’s gotta be engaged to him. Kinda more like an analysis, but this shows how pure and true it is and would be wasteful if it was queerbaiting.

-The bond between these two makes me cry happy tears. I mean just in episode 9 they were confessing that Viktor wants to stay Yuri’s coach forever. The writers would never put this much hard work into this if they knew they were just gonna pull a “no homo.”

my-name-is-long  asked:

Just curious, if Bernie Sanders isn't radical at all (I support him, btw), what would someone who is as far left as you can be be like?

he’s not a bad dude in my research. He’s just only radical in the context of American politics.

Okay if you wanna envision this stuff, think of a pendulum where on the far right there’s uber-ayn-randist-objectivist-individualist-capitalism, and on the left is Full Communism, Sanders probably falls somewhere in the middle-right. Which is like, fine, I guess, and when most of the country’s politics are pretty firmly far off to the right (that includes democrats) he’s radical. Contextually, he’s radical.

But when you start looking at the full spectrum of politics, the dude isn’t that radical. He’s still a capitalist, he’s had… contestable voting history on warfare as well as gun control that I disagree with, his stance on israel is objectionable, etc etc. He holds certain views that aren’t that usual in American politics, but like, by simple fact of BEING IN American politics, he has to be amicable to the views of those in power. Get me?

So my ideal candidate, who isn’t real to my knowledge, but is an amalgamation of many ideas, would be like

  1. Preferably not a man, preferably not white (preferably darker skinned), preferably younger, preferably not christian, preferably not straight, preferably neither Democrat nor Republican. I say ‘preferably’ because it’s totally possible someone could be a connection of those things and still be cool, but there is a thing called epistemic privilege of the oppressed (that link is very, very in depth, be warned) that basically says “if you are oppressed, you know more about that specific oppression than one who is not”. More knowledge is good- I’d prefer them to know of problems like that.
  2. To go along with that last point, they must be educated on systematic oppressions within the United States and have a vested interest in dismantling the machinery that holds them in place. This goes for any number of things- racism, sexism, queerphobia, etc etc. To his credit, Sanders has repeatedly spoken on a number of issues that would fall under this description- and I recognize that. However, he has a shitty track record of not holding his own followers accountable when they do shitty things that uphold those same oppressions.
  3. They must be able to take criticism from those with less societal privilege than them. This also goes along with that last point, honestly.
  4. They must be explicitly and openly cognizant of the harm that capitalism does to societies and be willing to begin the work of dismantling it. This includes not just ‘big corporations being bad’ but also the ways that capitalism as an individualist profit-driven system fuckin suuuuuucks and there are many ways to work to break it apart. Sanders fails here, though I appreciate his interest in creating more socialist systems within our government. Healthcare etc- that’s cool. It’s a bandaid though, not a fix.
  5. They must be anti-gun and/or pro heavy gun control. Sanders is not.
  6. They must be explicitly anti-imperialism and at least generally anti-war- most importantly they should be engaged in dismantling our military power both in the USA and abroad. War is complicated and I don’t like it, but I mean, I guess there are times armed conflict is necessary, abhorrent as it is. The problem with the USA is mostly in our military culture and our traditions of imperialism/neocolonialism. Those bases gotta go- now. Sanders is okay on this front, I can understand his reasoning mostly.
  7. To go along with that last point, they must be cognizant of the brutal military history of our country on our own land- especially against Native nations on this soil. The only reason I’m separating this from the previous point is because guess what I’m talking about? Not just military, but actual honoring of treatises and cooperation as far as humanly possible with the peoples of America pre-USA, including possible land reorganization.
  8. They must be explicitly pro-internet freedoms. This is probably the most ‘me’ point on here, but that means being very defensive of internet freedom of accessibility. If we’re really dreaming, that means this candidate would be in favor of a federally-provided ISP that is free and as widely available as humanly possible. The internet is, at this point, as vital to a functioning community as water or power- it should be provided at absolute minimum cost and as high-speed as possible. Internet isn’t actually that expensive, it’s just privatized and marked up.
  9. They must be in favor of shifting power from private organizations to public organizations- transportation, housing, human needs. The government should regulate or provide all the necessities to live within the United States at a minimum cost. This only sounds ridiculous when it’s put in the context of private companies who need profit on things- if they’re understood as a public, accessible right, there are ways to find the maintenance. It’s not that weird.

God, is that everything? I think that’s everything. Most of what I ‘missed’ would be under point 2 but just expanded.

So there you go- the qualities of my Ideal Candidate. I don’t know who they are, they may not exist, and they are most definitely Too Radical for the USA, but that’s their profile.