Do you think OUAT supports the idea that every woman needs a man to be happy and they're incomplete without them? There are no lesbians/bi women (Mulan doesn't count, it was only implied that she's anything other than straight and then she disappeared), Belle is only Rumple's LI, Snow is just part of Snowing-she can't live without David, 90% of Emma's scenes are with Hook and about CS, Regina will revert to EQ without a bf and she needed him to have light magic... No man, no happy ending.
Why doesn’t Mulan count? I don’t understand why Mulan doesn’t count, because it definitely wasn’t that ambiguous, and has been confirmed by the writers.
In the end, Mulan chose herself. She could’ve chosen Aurora’s happiness over her own and stayed with her and suffered quietly, but she decided to join the Merry Men and find another way to happiness.
And she disappeared because the actress got busy; you have to factor that in, okay?
Okay, now regarding your question—there are two things I want to address. First of all, do you actually have a problem with a character needing another person in order to have a happy ending, or do you have a problem with it being strictly heterosexual couplings?
You should want more gay couples on television. We all should.
We should want TV writers to know that and we should want really beautiful, well-written storylines that show gay relationships just as nuanced as straight relationships. I encourage everyone to fight for this, okay? I would’ve loved Aurora and Mulan to end up together, and I really hope that we have more gay/bi characters on the show before it’s end.
That said. OUAT is not a show that defines it’s women by it’s men, and I don’t know what in the hell gave you that idea. The men are defined by the women—almost every male character, with the main exception of Rumplestiltskin, exist solely to further the character development of the female characters.
Charming is a part of Snow, Hook is a part of Emma, Robin is a part of Regina. Even Henry is a part of Emma and Regina.
This is a show about love and hope, so you cannot be surprised that romantic relationships are a main plot point. You are the one looking at it like the men are more important than the women, which just isn’t the case.
You have to understand that it’s the notion that LOVE makes these characters stronger, not necessarily ~a man~. There have been just as many beautiful and strong moments for Regina and Emma and Snow that have been about loving themselves and loving their family, not necessarily their partners, but you insult that when you only point out the romance.
Kind of like I was talking about with Mulan, you’re picking and choosing the moments that suit your argument, and ignoring everything else.
I’d also like to point out to you that the show is bringing on a character who never gets a boyfriend—Elsa. Elsa is someone who doesn’t have a man but she still has a happy ending, and the writers have said they don’t intend on changing that. So there you go.
Wait…there are people who didn’t know that they intentionally paralleled CS and Snowing and that that’s why they’re comparing them?? Like, I’m seeing people who are genuinely angered by this and I’m just sitting here like HOW DID YOU NOT REALIZE THIS EARLIER!?!?
Maybe the Enchanted Forest has a realm like Far Far Away in Shrek 2 that has its own version of Rodeo Drive, and that's where Snow got her prom dress? At the Olde Knavery, Versarchery, or Barney's Old York, perhaps?
Do you think we ll ever find out more of Pan and Hooks backstory because we only found out a little we dont know why he lived there for hundreds of years. Obviously we ll find out eventually but do you think its soon because theyre already leaving neverland
Yeah, we will. In a Rose McIver interview (i’ll try to find it again) she mentioned recently filming an episode that sheds more light on her time in Neverland, and that includes Hook. So hopefully that’ll be the episode that reveals more. I really want to know how exactly Hook was in Pan’s “employ”.