fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #5349 ]

[ SECRET POST #5349 ]

⌈ Secret Post #5349 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 41 secrets from Secret Submission Post #766.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

01. https://i.imgur.com/v8NVYpN.png

I don't understand. Isn't the whole point of headcanons is that people can imagine whatever they want, regardless of what the canon is?

This. I'd side-eye someone headcanoning a character who was canonically gay or bisexual as straight. But people can headcanon what they want. Others don't have to like those headcanons.

There are different types of headcanons, too. There is headcanoning where you develop your idea of the character based on canon and then expand on it. But there is also completely original headcanoning where you imagine something about a character that has no basis in canon.

i believe op means that headcanon is reserved for filling in missing detail in canon, not replacing canon with what you prefer. that's more like, alternate universe

that's what i thought the concept was about at least tbh but i don't particularly care

DA - you're mostly right, with the caveat that most characters in media are "default straight," not "we had an in-universe discussion about how incredibly straight I am" straight, so there's often a lot of wiggle-room when it comes to sexuality. But if you're turning a character that has gleefully enjoyed many sexual relationships into a sex-repulsed asexual, that's an AU, not headcanon.

Exactly. Headcanon is about filling in the blanks for things that aren't shown in canon.

For instance, there's a character in one of my canons who is shown to be very flirtatious with women but who also has a very deep, emotionally intimate relationship with another male character. You can headcanon that this character is bi and has more-than-platonic feelings for the male character, but you can't headcanon him as being gay because canon makes it very clear that he is also attracted to women.

i believe op means that headcanon is reserved for filling in missing detail in canon, not replacing canon with what you prefer. that's more like, alternate universe

If that is what OP meant, they are operating on a very outdated definition of headcanon.

Generally speaking, a headcanon is something that people make up or imagine that fills in spaces not already established by canon.

For example for a trans headcanon:

Canon = character is shown to be or explicitly refers to self as trans in the story
Headcanon = character is not shown to be and does not explicitly refer to self as trans but fan likes to imagine they are and there is nothing in the canon that directly refutes this so it could have been true all along
Not canon = character explicitly is shown to be cis, any trans fic would then be "AU" not headcanon

I imagine OP meant you can't headcanon something that has direct canon evidence against it, like turning an established gay character bi. "Straight" characters usually have more leeway with this because tons of them are only "straight by default" without it being explicitly mentioned anywhere in canon that they are exclusively straight, and just because the only onscreen romances are opposite-sex doesn't mean they can't be bi, etc.

Well, okay then! 😆

Eh, it's just fantasy though, right? I don't think there's any harm in imagining someone is attracted to you, no matter the gender. On the point of "headcanoning" that everyone is bi, it's not like you're going around screaming it's the indisputable truth, even in the face of evidence to the contrary. Seriously, you're fine.

Do what you gotta do OP, I'm rooting for you!

You don't have any problems. You can think what you want about your favorite characters. Shit, I do the same if I like the actors. Congratulations on being ALIVE.

"Deal with your meager table scraps, silly gays" is all I'm hearing with that asterisk

Lack of confirmation is not canon. A character who has shown explicit attraction to the opposite gender in canon cannot be headcanoned as gay, but a character who has not shown explicit attraction to the opposite gender, can. There's no shortage of characters like that, whose sexual orientation is completely up for grabs.

A character who has shown explicit attraction to the opposite gender in canon cannot be headcanoned as gay

Watch me!

(Joking aside, comp het IS a thing and as someone that is 100% gay and was affected by it, I will absolutely headcanon characters that have shown attraction to the opposite gender as gay.)

Okay, boomer

Get off of my fandom!

Oh, I miss this older definition of headcanon: your own canon for something that was not specifically mentioned in the show. It was a great way to fill in gaps and then you got Jossed (your headcanon is wrong) or Kripked (your headcanon is right) later on!

Me too.

Hilarious. I love it.

I mean, she had canon attraction to men, but was also a canon lesbian. At different points in canon, the audience, observing the canon evidence, could draw the conclusion that she was straight, bisexual, or gay. And that's not even taking headcanons into account.

The thing is, sexual attraction and romantic attachment are not always distinct or set, and that, combined with expectations (both from others and ourselves), can make for a lot of confusion. Sexual orientations in real-life are sometimes not that straightforward, so why should they be in fiction?

So, I think if you have a reasonable explanation for why something that seems to be canon isn't actually true, that would count as headcanon to me, especially since canon can and does contradict itself (family members that heretofore didn't exist showing up, family members disappearing, dead people who aren't or don't stay that way, it was all a dream, etc.).

You're right, Willow is a case where canon is malleable and so is real life. I mostly put that asterisk there so people wouldn't have the bad faith to jump at me by assuming I headcanon characters who have clearly said and consistently demonstrated that they're gay (like Alec from Shadowhunters or Holt from Brooklyn 99) as bi, but this is fandom, so I should've known someone would look for a way to do that no matter what (not you; I'm referring to the comments up there).

ayrt

Ah, I see. I was thinking mostly about the other way around.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #5349 ]

no subject

"You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

Re: "You can't headcanon a detail that already has canon"?

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

no subject

no subject

no subject

Willow on BtVS

OP

Re: OP