livebloggingmydescentintomadness:
I’m gonna need people to learn the difference between queer subtext, queer coding and queer baiting before Good Omens season 2 comes out. I can’t sit through another year of discourse about how Good Omens was “queer bait” because Azirphale and Crowley didn’t make out. They are canonically non-binary beings and while there’s a discussion to be had about whether or not non-human trans/nb representation deserves the same praise as actual human trans/nb representation - it’s still not fucking queer bait just because your ship didn’t get into an explicitly romantic relationship. There is more to being queer than PDA and there are more queer identities than homosexuality. Aziraphale and Crowley are canonically non-binary. In the original text, it’s fair to interpret them as asexual since it says that though most people would mistake Aziraphale for a gay man, angels are “sexless” unless they “really make an effort” which could be in reference to gender or sexual identity. I could see someone arguing that the book is an example of queer subtext and the show, at worst (“worst”) could be argued as queer coding. Neither is an example of queer baiting, end of discussion.
“There is more to being queer than PDA and there are more queer identities than homosexuality.”
There it is.
This is the closest I’ve seen a post come to addressing the heart of the matter, which is:
If you require romance before you’re willing to classify a relationship as queer then you have cut the Aro community out of the queer umbrella. If the characters must explicitly profess their love for one another or you’re going to call it queer baiting (not what that term means, btw, I’m glad to see that conversation happening), then you are admitting that you don’t consider Aromantic people queer.
And that’s a you problem. Either you’re doing it intentionally, in which case your opinion fundamentally doesn’t matter, or you’re doing it because you haven’t thought this through, in which case you need to get on that.
I want Aziraphale and Crowley to hold hands and kiss and say they love each other on screen. I do!
But I’m so tired of being told my identity is just Queer Lite and that I should sit down and get out of the way because other identities need representation. This is mine! Shut up or go away.
I do not give a shit about Neil Gaiman or Terry Pratchett. I don’t especially care what their intentions were. But while they didn’t set out to write something gay, they absolutely did intend to be explicitly queer.
And, side note: if you can watch the two minutes of vague hinting at Shadwell/Madam Tracy and come away knowing that there’s more between them than friendship, but you’re confused about Aziraphale and Crowley (who casually presents as different genders on multiple occasions) after six episodes spent illustrating a 6000-year-long relationship between two people who weep for each other and risk themselves protecting each other and stroll around parks feeding ducks together and throw away everything they know so they can start a new life together, then I don’t know how to help you.
i would also like to reiterate a little more firmly and explicitly that if you think ‘gay’ is somehow “better” or “more” or “superior” to ‘nonbinary’, fuck you.
nonbinary is exactly as good as gay, as important as gay, as beautiful as gay, and as necessary as gay in terms of representation. nonbinary is not, as the last person said, “queer lite”. nonbinary is as queer as gay.
nonbinary fucking matters, and y’all really show your asses and how little you respect nonbinary people when you dismiss canon nonbinary characters as “homophobic” and in essence declare it a cop-out for not making them gays who kiss onscreen.
nonbinary is not homophobic, it is not runner up to gay’s first prize. nonbinary does not need to apologize for not being gay.
show some damn respect to nonbinary, aromantic, and asexual people who are actually really happy and excited about seeing some representation onscreen.
































