When subtext =/= buttsex.

[mothwing]

Lots of sensible things about LGBTQ representation are being said over at sparkindarkness' journal on how problematic subtextual and Word of Gay type of "representation" in canon are.

«Ok a rant about LGBTQ representation – and why hints don’t cut it»

[...]

No, it’s not enough. Your hot men who have what may be a lingering look or touched each other a little longer than you thought was strictly necessary or y’know are just “so gay together” do NOT count as GBLTQ representation. I don’t care if you’re sat there with your slash goggles and you’re going to run on home and dash off a ream of steamy steamy mansexing (but hey, if you’re going to, maybe you can avoid tropes like making one of the men shorter than he is on screen so he can ‘bottom properly’ and other such badness? Ugh, yes really) your slash fantasy is not a GBLTQ representation.

[...]

sparkindarkness .

There are also smart things in the comments on how problematic platonic and asexual relationships are being made if every platonic on-screen relationship is automatically seen as sexual by kazaera  here.

Comments

[lordhellebore]

I did? *g* It's been so long, I don't even remember. But that sounds like me, to shove it into someone's face like that. I like confrontation with these kind of things in the first longer conversation I have with a potential new friend/partner, because that helps immensely with deciding right at the start whether or not they're worth knowing ;)