[ SECRET POST #3552 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3552 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 52 secrets from Secret Submission Post #508.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

It's completely different for a fictional character. She wasn't written to identify as lesbian instead of bisexual because that's something that really happens. She was written that way because the straight man who wrote her didn't understand enough about lesbianism and bisexuality. Did she even consider the possibility that she was bi? I don't remember exactly but I greatly doubt it.

[(Anonymous)]

She was also written some ~20 years ago, where representation of the entire queer spectrum was limited at best and almost wholly nonexistent in mainstream media. Very very few in the industry 'understood enough about lesbian and bisexuality' back then to adequately represent its nuances. Which may not excuse it, but if you're talking about the context of a character's development/creation/etc, you have to look at it as a whole, and that includes the framework of its period, which was much much more limited and simplified than ours.

[(Anonymous)]

I know, I lived through that period. And that's why I think it's fine to call her bisexual in current discussions even though the show didn't.

[(Anonymous)]

But redefining a 90s character through present eyes completely changes what that character was and meant. The character herself identifies as gay, and a large number of gay women identified with and connected with that character at that time for precisely that reason. Does it suck that bisexual women couldn't do the same? Sure. But you just can't reverse-engineer an existent canonical identity through a modern lens without fundamentally changing it.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Characters can be read in multiple ways by the audience. One person's bisexual interpretation doesn't erase another's lesbian interpretation.

[(Anonymous)]

The point I'm trying to make here is that I don't think the character identifying as a lesbian is necessarily wrong for the character, whatever the actual reasons behind why she was written that way.