• Phish [he/him, any]
    ·
    4 years ago

    I don't know if you can really count David Bowie either. I'm not saying the character doesn't have some queer qualities but I think that's because David Bowie himself did and people love him for it. It wasn't like, 'hey look the evil goblin king is kind of gay.' so much as 'hey look it's David Bowie!'

    • Septbear [love/loves]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Doesn't matter why he was cast he he still part of a broader pattern of villians being queer coded.

      • Phish [he/him, any]
        ·
        4 years ago

        I just don't think that was the intent with his character.

          • Phish [he/him, any]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Saying his character is queer coded implies intent. I think people analyzing the goblin king and coming away believing there's some villainization of queerness are simply wrong.

              • Phish [he/him, any]
                ·
                4 years ago

                Within any field. The fact that it's called coding implies an attempt to communicate something indirectly. Of course within the context of this post it literally says conservatives queer coded these characters for the purpose of making kids think gays are going to hell, which is what I was responding to.

                • GalaxyBrain [they/them]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  It's never ever used that way when analyzing media. No one gives a fuck about authorial intent because that's a really boring way to discuss things.

                  • Phish [he/him, any]
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    Ok but that's literally what it means. Also authorial intent is interesting and obsessed over in academia.