Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2016-11-27 03:39 pm
[ SECRET POST #3616 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3616 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #517.
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.

OP
(Anonymous) 2016-11-28 12:17 am (UTC)(link)Honestly even if I didn't ship anything in this fandom I'd feel the same way though. Like just delete these two characters from the universe entirely for a second, and my feelings stay the same. I'm really afraid Blizzard is going to pull something stereotypical and/or "straight male-gaze-y" and then act as if the rest of their otherwise quite diverse cast is otherwise completely 100% default straight. I think it would be a novel way to approach things by saying "some of the cast is LGBT" and then not confirming/denying who is or isn't. Not that it's something I'd want for EVERY franchise to do, but truthfully I think it's stopped a whole bunch of typical gamer "ew I'm not playing _____, they're a fag" type bullshit. It's been interesting to see a fandom develop where we know from the beginning that there's definitely 100% canon LGBT representation as confirmed by TPTB, but they weren't interested in spilling the beans (at first) as to which character(s) were said representation.
I'm not the only LGBT person that feels like this in the Overwatch fandom and I've seen a bunch of personal posts on my dash about it, but like I said, I know my reasons for not wanting this are partly selfish, even if I do feel that these two would be quite interesting in terms of representation for multiple reasons. Which is why this is a secret and not something I plan on saying outside the confines of a community specifically made for telling fandom secrets.
Re: OP
No, they just apply it to Zarya.
Re: OP
(Anonymous) 2016-11-28 01:04 am (UTC)(link)Honestly I think that's mostly because Zarya's a masculine-coded woman. I don't think that would magically stop if she were confirmed to be the straightest straight lady to ever come outta Straightsville. I'm thinking it's less about her perceived sexuality and more about her perceived gender presentation. They're uncomfortable with her because she's a muscular lady who looks like she could break them, and that doesn't make their genitals tingle so therefore she's a bad character in their minds.
If anything I'd just picture the jokes getting even cruder if she were "confirmed straight". Instead of the "hurrdurr butch lesbian" stereotype it's going to be "I bet she loves to dominate the shit out of her men, she probably only likes wimpy little cucks who let her peg them while they crossdress" type rhetoric. I've already seen a little of that unfortunately.
People are uncomfortable with characters that don't fit into a certain mold, and Zarya definitely qualifies.
None of it is right, but there is an absolute "boys club" thing going on where male characters being homo/bi-sexual get shit on way harder than female characters being homo/bi-sexual. I saw something like it firsthand in another gaming franchise of mine, where a male character was confirmed as bisexual and the fanbase threw a homophobic hoopla while meanwhile in the same game there were two female on female kisses and it wasn't even mentioned by the same guys flipping out about a "faggot" in their game. It's just another gross reminder of how female homosexuality has been branded as being "for men" and male homosexuality has been branded as "taboo". Neither is a good thing. :(
Re: OP
Re: OP
(Anonymous) 2016-11-28 01:50 am (UTC)(link)Re: OP
(Anonymous) 2016-11-28 02:53 am (UTC)(link)Re: OP