J* (@jayjayramble) header
J* (@jayjayramble) profile picture

fixating on gls (and other queer media). gay witches fighting fantasy fascists.

they/them
Joined January 2024
Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)Photo by J* (@jayjayramble)
It also pressures us into having narratives where men cannot be soft, gentle and loving with each other without it being interpreted as a "bait". It turns the act of shipping, which is an exercize of imagination that extrapolates canon, into an act of investigation.
1
2
16
304
it’s piploy’s birthday, today is a day of peace and love. no rage-filled tweets from me.
1
4
272
while i can discourse about masculinity forever, i think that’s enough about MEN for the day or year.
8
329
part of what makes bromance interesting to me is specifically that it does this subversion of male intimacy while also making us question the normative aspects of romance itself. is it friendship? are they soulmates? who knows! how very fun and very queer.
when we relegate deep emotional intimacy between men exclusively to homosexuality we align ourselves with the patriarchal demand that a man’s capacity for care is determined by sexual attraction.
1
9
2
64
1,721
deep affection, even homoeroticism, is often more “accepted” as part of female relationships outside of romance, bc emotional intimacy is already expected of women. so let’s question why there’s such resistance and demand that it *must* be romance when it is male bodies doing it
1
3
2
17
835
question all your assumptionsssss, fellow queers.
2
9
275
when we relegate deep emotional intimacy between men exclusively to homosexuality we align ourselves with the patriarchal demand that a man’s capacity for care is determined by sexual attraction.
I wont say too much 'cause i dont go here & have smart moots who got much more insight, but the inherent *dismissal* of bromance as sum anti or un-queer, in a deeply imperial patriarchal society& world that treats male non-sexual intimacy as derogatorily queer, is so ironic to me
4
39
10
162
11,064
taking away the derogatory framing (ie calling men “gay” for expressing feelings) does not remove the misogyny at the heart. men’s care is still a transactional reward for “sex”, while the feminine qualities of *mutual* care and reciprocity are still subjugated.
1
12
998
thus, romantic or sexual intimacy is not a prerequisite for good queer narratives (as in, ones that directly target that hierarchy of hegemonic masculinity), but a portrayal of true mutual care, founded on emotionality, vulnerability and equality, is.
1
9
1,172
Another food for thought : Are so many people offended by bromance shows because they have internalised the idea that male friendships are only allowed to manifest within certain boundaries? That there is an acceptable degree of affection, intimacy and emotional vulnerability between two men, and anything that goes beyond it must automatically be labelled as either “gay” or “queerbaiting”? Isn’t this, in itself, a reflection of the toxic masculinity perpetuated by a patriarchal society? One that has conditioned people to associate emotional intimacy, physical affection and genuine tenderness between men with homosexuality, as though these qualities somehow undermine their masculinity? I’m not a man, so I can’t speak from a male perspective. However, as a woman who has a platonic soulmate, I can tell you that the affection, closeness and behaviours portrayed in these bromance shows are very much part of my own platonic friendships. Why are we so quick to question the nature of a friendship simply because it doesn’t conform to the narrow boundaries society has imposed on it? And, more importantly, why are we so uncomfortable with the idea that two men can love, cherish and be deeply affectionate towards each other without that affection having to be romantic or sexual?
28
300
46
931
27,858
soooooo close to getting it.
call it what it is. queerbaiting. real male friendships don't have all these underlying feelings and tension. it's not NOT a bl just because they don't kiss
1
2
1
40
4,447
actually this is so fucked up that you would say this? you need to take a step back and reflect on your actions.
Replying to @jayjayramble
what if i said i’m intrigued by whatever tf that viewmim show is
2
6
1,546
muted bc actually i do not care, ppl can get over themselves, expand their horizons, learn from others, and stop demanding that queerness fit one singular understanding.
2
17
105
1,990
unmuted bc holy shit i needed to argue. ppl really don’t take the time to imagine any queer experience that doesn’t fit neatly into their western label box. identity politics has y’all by the throat.
2
13
589
there is nothing “inherently” wrong with a work being queer coded. and if it has actual anti-patriarchal messaging that none of these hyper-sexual so-called queer love stories ever touch? then yes actually it’s “inherently” a more meaningful show that does more for queer ppl.
4
1
16
783
piploy steals scenes where ever she goes i hope she knows that she has *it*
6
12
535
okay back to sleep emibonnie will act on my screen again it’s too bad they took a year off and didn’t have any gl at all this year
2
2
1
35
2,659
what if i said i’m intrigued by whatever tf that viewmim show is
3
1
2,190
ignore me i was half asleep
1
1
311
don’t really feel like weighing into the bromance discourse but since i’m here… too many of y’all’s conceptualization of queerness is limited to “lgbtq+ identity” and explicit sex.
10
73
9
452
15,366
june 💔💔🕊️🕊️
3
4
25
1,700
i am the opposite of intrigued by the jjj show, even with the piploy of it all. also jan my friend, your hair.
1
2
492
also disneyfication of loves echoes i saw you too 😠
4
415