whether that's intentional or not

im glad that the jughead comic is staying true to his ace/aroness in the new comics but i’d also like to highlight that it’s showing precisely what it’s LIKE to be ace.

all of his friends are “supporting” him in his “burger girl” adventures. and by “supporting” him they’re actually forcing him. even mildly teasing him. though it’s being played off lightly: this is actually a really harsh reality of being asexual and/or aromantic.

it’s not actually support. it’s your friends hoping that you’re “normal.” if you show any sign of having interest in another person, they will get overbearingly excited, prying and downright forceful about the ordeal. that isn’t what support is. it’s cruel, uncomfortable and discouraging and leads to nothing more than that.


Current state of my Valentine’s wall. I put a few more up today. Look how well it’s coming out! : ) I even put up my paperman airplane because I got that on Valentine’s Day. I think I have three more to send out on Monday ,and then I’m done replying to all the ones that I’ve gotten. You guys gotta let me if you are or aren’t getting yours!

anonymous asked:

(1/2) Can anyone help me understand what reaction Mofftiss et al. were hoping for? AFAIK Mofftiss, Ben, and Martin aren't opposed to portraying gay relationships, but all 4 have said at various points that the S/J relationship isn't sexual. If that's so, why did they load up the show with so much gay subtext? Were fans not supposed to notice?

(2/2) If subtext became text, why do they think that would be a bad thing? Maybe they view S/J as straight, or favor a TPLoSH-style one-sided attraction. I think Moffat said it’s not about who you want to have sex with, but who you want to spend the rest of your life with. Why not both? Do they think sex would cheapen the relationship? If so, why include so much gay subtext? Help?

I wish I could, nonny. I really, really wish I could. I certainly don’t have answers for you, and neither it seems do Mark or Steven. If I had endless piles of money, I’d pay for legions of us to show up at every Q&A for the foreseeable future and politely ask them these exact questions until they give us some sort of real answer. Actually, I’d probably have to pay male reporters to do it because they seem to dismiss any of these kinds of criticisms and questions when they’re aimed their way by female fans. 

But this is exactly what we all so desperately want to know at this point. Why is there so much queer subtext (and queer TEXT for that matter) in the show if you were never going to follow through with it? Why the tarmac scene? Why does Sherlock leave the wedding early? Why does he never say he isn’t interested in men, never deny that John is his date/boyfriend when people imply it? Why does he bring himself back to life simply because John is in supposed danger? Why does Mary repeatedly equate herself and Sherlock–neither of us were the first, the man we both love? Why Battersea? Why is John still mourning Sherlock so heavily two years later? Why I don’t mind? Why is John dreaming of Sherlock while lying in bed next to his new wife? Why is he insanely jealous of both Irene and Janine? Why why why why why? 

And most importantly, why, when someone asks you if you’re writing a romance between John and Sherlock, do you deny it by saying that maybe you’ve made too many “jokes” about them being gay at this point and then continue to write romantic moments between your male leads? If for some weird reason you didn’t realize you were writing the show in a way that makes a significant portion of your audience believe that it’s a love story, if that was all an accident somehow, then why, once you’ve discovered that people think that, wouldn’t you stop doing that and work harder to indicate within the show itself that their relationship isn’t intended to be read as romantic? Why would you continue to put in moments that add to that “misconception”? Why if not intentional queerbaiting? Why?

He’s unexpectedly sensible and good at taking care of others. If only he could hit better… ❞

anonymous asked:

I just read Vattu, and I wanted to express my appreciation for the richness of the world you've created, including the different races and their backstories, as well as portraying the more major characters in a nuanced way. I also especially appreciate how gender isn't an issue in the comic (though whether that's intentional, I leave to you); whether they're they're male or female, they're just awesome characters on an adventure that doesn't rely on gender-based cliche. I can't wait to read more

Thank you so much this is nice to hear!

I would actually say gender is definitely an issue in the comic! How the cultures in Vattu treat gender and other aspects of identity is a big part of what the story is about, but I guess what you mean is that I’ve not let it be conspicuously a part of how the story is told? Like it definitely matters that the characters who are women are women, I’ve just made every effort to not have the narrative treat them in stereotyped ways (even if the world & characters of the narrative do so… it is maybe a nitpicky distinction)

I didn’t really plan for it to be as big an aspect of the story as it’s become in book 2 of Vattu… I think a lot of it is because I am a little more aware & overtly a feminist than I was during previous projects, where I sometimes grabbed indiscriminately from fantasy-story archetypes that have some politically gross shit embedded in them.

A relevant excerpt from a Junot Díaz interview that has stuck with me for a year: http://rare-basement.tumblr.com/post/45545924305/junot-diaz-on-men-who-write-about-women