It seems to really not get the idea of female characters who have arcs? Like take Ms. Poots, who is the one I'm most familiar with: Her whole arc is about her starting as the goofy, comic figure that Coulson and the gang arrest in her van, seeing her lose faith in the Rising Tide, watching her grow strong and more…

It's especially glaring as SHIELD is laying on hint after hint about Mary Sue Poots being an Inhuman, and the fact that she's wrenched intel out of Ward by being all callous and spy-ish.

Or maybe he still felt fucked up about it all in a teenage way and hormones and awkwardness intervened? Especially since they weren't supposed to be dating or even really to know each other. There are a billion explanations for his behaviour. He got convicted, to a large extent, because gut feelings trumped jury…

I don't wanna be a dick, but AFAIK the Night Vale people prefer if you link their Soundcloud or some other official source rather than YouTube uploads.

If I were a betting robot, I'd think that it's future-proofing. John Oliver's stint on the Daily Show demonstrates that another host could pull off that format after Stewart inevitably leaves. Moving the name to something more generic, and the format away from identity politics, makes it easier to replace people…

Just for clarity, I'm going to talk about how Bioware does gays versus how other people do gays.

Really? Because the gay men I know hate the way Bioware does same-sex romances. Me included. The fact it passes as representation probably speaks to a lot of people, buuuut it's not.

How is it any different from "lesbian" porn?

No, but I think that the subtext is overemphasized by people who think that strong homosocial relationships necessarily indicate homosexuality. Also there's a difference between noting the existence of subtext and producing new text that queers the characters for, again, the fetishistic interest of straight…

No. I'm gay. Fuck you for assuming I'm not, by the way.

Bullshit. No one is in this to "increase representation". That's like saying straight guys fetishize lesbians to increase queer representation. It's a stupid and insulting concept.

The solution is to create characters who are actually gay rather than grafting homosexuality onto characters who are established as straight for the fetishistic purposes of teenage girls.

Honestly I'd rather queer figures be absent than be handled that badly. Of course, most of all I'd rather that they actually be well written and have plausible inner lives, which the ones in this kind of stuff virtually never, ever do.

Whedon decided that, despite both Xander and Willow having been identifiably heterosexual previously, he was going to make one of them gay. IIRC it came down to a coin toss.

This kind of thing is bad because it objectifies gay men as romantic surrogates for straight cis women. It's basically "lesbian" softporn with a veneer of respectability. It's bad when fans write it, it's bad when people like Jennifer Hepler and Sheryl Chee write it into video games. It's bad when it's porn like in…

He is kind of a creep what with the hitting on Diaz repeatedly even though it's clear she's uninterested? I mean, I kinda give it a pass because it's a system. Certain characters and plots are gonna remain largely static.

To be honest, I've always thought that it was a shame that he picked Willow instead of Xander, Because then at least there'd be something to Xander.

The internet is in public. Fans are allowed to like what they like, and we're allowed to laugh at them as long as it doesn't cross the line into harassment. Furries work the same way.

Read a couple chapters. Dumb as heck twee dialogue. It's bad.

I'm gay as a bag of freshly sucked dicks and personally I find this kind of fan fiction genuinely offensive.