In many cases, 'headcannoning' a character that has transfeminine subtext as transmasc leads to a weaker or in some cases, hateful, transgender narrative overall. For example, Miquella from elden ring. In the case of transfeminine miquella, you have a narrative in which miquella seeked to give up her heart, burying and hiding her heart, her love, everything that was feminine so far down that nothing could ever reach it, hoping it would either and die, and this ultimately leading to her downfall because she could not ever hope to succeed without her heart, her love. She throws it away, and it destroys her. The story is obvious in a transfeminine reading of the story: By not embracing herself as a woman, miquella threw away her heart and her love and all joy she could have felt. It's a beautiful, tragic, heartwrenching tale about how the choice to never transition will slowly eat away at you, leaving you a loveless, joyless shell of a person. On the flipside, we have the case of a transmasculine reading of the character, and the exact *opposite* narrative: By transitioning, miquella loses any chance of joy and happiness, becomes an incomplete being, and is doomed to fail because he could never hope to be a god since he threw away saint Trina. By choosing to interpret the story this way, you make an implicit reactionary statement that being transgender is a curse, something that holds you back. It's a cruel and hateful reading, so that begs the question, why would anyone interpret the text that way? Or did they perhaps not engage with the text to see the implicit meaning, choosing a shallow desire for 'representation' over proper literary analysis?
areudirty
theartofmadeline
