STEPHANIE WHAT ARE YOU DOING DO NOT SLEEP WITH BILLO
I can't help it! It's canon for Stephen, therefore it needs to have some kind of Stephanie equivalent!
I think this is partially a larger symptom of Media Lacking Girls, but then, from what I hear, you still get that emo pining stuff in fandoms with a decent amount of female characters, so I don't really know.
It's a thing that people have noticed across fandoms. I haven't seen a lot of it in Doctor Who, which is where I read the most femslsah and which of course has awesome women coming out its ears. But, just as one example, in thelittlebang, a multifandom femslash challenge, there were two stories in fandoms I recognized (fairy tales and Firefly) and both of them were Quietly Tragic. Which was depressing.
I really don't want happy!Stephen to be asexual because I feel like he would be too much of a, I dunno, whatever you want to call that stereotype of the "tee hee! I'm faaaaaaaaaaaaabulous!" flamboyant gay man who doesn't actually do any icky threatening mansex stuff, that's just gross.
Hmmmm. To be honest, I hadn't even thought of that stereotype, because I'm so used to the fannish mindset where all the men (and more than a few of the ladies) have been written into mansex at some point or another. If he were the only gay character in the fandom, it would be pretty bad, but there are so many other gay/bi/queer/mansexin' guys - including half a dozen alternate versions of the same person! - that I think, in this context, having him represented as a fully sexual being is not the priority it would be in mainstream media.
Plus, the context would not be "Sam hangs out with her nonthreatening pink-clad guy and they pick out clothing" so much as "after fifteen minutes of enjoyable but vanilla foreplay on the couch, Jon starts to wonder if he's lost his edge."
The problem I was worrying about -- see, I just reread half of AVEN's FAQ, and while it points out that some asexuals perticipate in sex with their non-asexual partners, the stereotype/misconception it keeps coming back to is the idea that a person needs to be sexual in order to be happy/healthy/fulfilled. And that's definitely an idea that often comes hand-in-hand with fandom's (otherwise generally awesome) sex-positive vibe. So I was worried that writing asexual!happy!Stephen into a relationship with sex involved would fall into that misconception.
...Maybe every once in a while c!Stephen and l!Stephen (with or without their respective Jons) will have to catch the interdimensional train into town and give happyverse!Jon a weekend of utter carnality. And h!Stephen can be the one who drives to the store when they run low on lube.
Re: lol MOST teal deer sorry :|
I can't help it! It's canon for Stephen, therefore it needs to have some kind of Stephanie equivalent!
I think this is partially a larger symptom of Media Lacking Girls, but then, from what I hear, you still get that emo pining stuff in fandoms with a decent amount of female characters, so I don't really know.
It's a thing that people have noticed across fandoms. I haven't seen a lot of it in Doctor Who, which is where I read the most femslsah and which of course has awesome women coming out its ears. But, just as one example, in
I really don't want happy!Stephen to be asexual because I feel like he would be too much of a, I dunno, whatever you want to call that stereotype of the "tee hee! I'm faaaaaaaaaaaaabulous!" flamboyant gay man who doesn't actually do any icky threatening mansex stuff, that's just gross.
Hmmmm. To be honest, I hadn't even thought of that stereotype, because I'm so used to the fannish mindset where all the men (and more than a few of the ladies) have been written into mansex at some point or another. If he were the only gay character in the fandom, it would be pretty bad, but there are so many other gay/bi/queer/mansexin' guys - including half a dozen alternate versions of the same person! - that I think, in this context, having him represented as a fully sexual being is not the priority it would be in mainstream media.
Plus, the context would not be "Sam hangs out with her nonthreatening pink-clad guy and they pick out clothing" so much as "after fifteen minutes of enjoyable but vanilla foreplay on the couch, Jon starts to wonder if he's lost his edge."
The problem I was worrying about -- see, I just reread half of AVEN's FAQ, and while it points out that some asexuals perticipate in sex with their non-asexual partners, the stereotype/misconception it keeps coming back to is the idea that a person needs to be sexual in order to be happy/healthy/fulfilled. And that's definitely an idea that often comes hand-in-hand with fandom's (otherwise generally awesome) sex-positive vibe. So I was worried that writing asexual!happy!Stephen into a relationship with sex involved would fall into that misconception.
...Maybe every once in a while c!Stephen and l!Stephen (with or without their respective Jons) will have to catch the interdimensional train into town and give happyverse!Jon a weekend of utter carnality. And h!Stephen can be the one who drives to the store when they run low on lube.