Different Anon. But were you going off the fact that bl's give inherently heterosexual moments? Because the whole push and pull thing of Rome deciding to reject Raffy's "confession" then basically test him does give heterosexual honestly. The public confession with what looks like a face of disbelief/irritation that follows a yes that seems like a chore to say? That definitely gives heterosexual. But I wonder if we put too much thought into roles when something that seems inherently heterosexual can simply be environmental, media trained, and not what it seems.
Why give credence to heterosexual when everyone, no matter your sexual identity, are products of where they grew up? Something that seems heterosexual could just simply be a norm that's been labelled as heterosexual because what else could it be? Does that give it more purpose, more importance of a label?
I don't know. But I do know that many BLs lean more into the norms we see for Heterosexual couples, which helps nothing in the LGBTQ+ community by forcing boxes. The problem is that I don't think labelling things as heterosexual helps either because it denies the idea that something just is despite who you're with, romantically or sexually.
that's a lot of questions anon, idk if i can cover them all in one go.
as far as labels go, to keep things short, i view them as important but not as prisons of perspective. it's helpful to have a word that describes a norm or a behaviour, however, as individuals we are always going to be far too nuanced and complex to fit perfectly neatly into any category. they are meant to serve as guidelines that help us understand ourselves better, not there to place immovable limitations we should fit into.
in that sense, labelling something this or that doesn't necessarily take away from any other layers, it simply highlights an important/notable aspect.
now, do i think bls cater a little too much to the straight gaze? sure, a lot of them do but there's also a plethora of lovely, deeply queer stories out there for me to enjoy so i don't tend to focus on that too much.
when it comes to rome and raffy specifically, their story irks me a little because it has a very queer framing of their initial conflict yet offers a heteronormative solution to those tensions.
the reason why raffy is cold and distant at first, is because he is ashamed of rome. he is ashamed of his attraction to him because, in his elitist mind, a random dj fucking in bathrooms is unbecoming of someone like him. random hookups are unbecoming of him. giving in so easily is unbecoming of him.
a rome doesn't fit in his projection of who he is (should be), nor would he realistically fit in his actual life/the vision his mother very publicly has (and that very obviously weighs heavily on him).
and not only is he keeping him a secret, he's also being rude and hurtful while he does it. because on one hand, he resents himself for going to him continuously, on the other, he knows rome genuinely likes him and will let him get away with a lot.
this kind of dynamic is irrefutably queer; coming to terms with the reality that you can't be who you're expected to be, feeling shame about your desires, being forced to make the choice of who you are going to be even though you'd much rather avoid it, then living with that choice and so on and so on.
from rome's perspective also: being someone's secret, feeling constantly rejected and undervalued, swallowing your pride and dignity, knowing you can't really voice any of these grievances because they'd fall on deaf ears and then staying anyway because you fell in love and can't think in your own best interest.
but the story doesn't really address any of that. they set the scene and then shifted the focus entirely on raffy getting over jack. he never gave a fuck about jack in the first place. he was at war with dean, because he wanted the spotlight and everything that comes with it. that included an up and coming director boyfriend. it's why he rolled his eyes instead of looking hurt when he saw them together; he wasn't hurt about unrequited love, he was hurt about not getting what he thinks he deserves.
his big realisation doesn't revolve around an identity crisis, like it was supposed to. turning away from jack and running to rome can not happen unless he unpacks a fuck ton of issues first. but instead, the story of their reconciliation is a silly power struggle.
'i let you mop the floor with me and humiliated myself for you, now you do the same for me and we're even'
that is a very heterosexual game, because straight people are always on the power struggle bus. relationships at all times have a winner and a loser, the roles just rotate depending on who can get the leverage at any given moment.
so that's basically what i meant. i was promised a queer story and given a 2000ish romcom plot where the popular guy realises the underdog girl is not so bad after all then does a public song and dance to appease her and apologize for whatever bs he pulled and then they lived happily ever after.