I'm gonna preface this by saying I have no problem with representation. I love queer stories, especially when they're organic and natural. I'm bi, and I've had fulfilling relationships with women as well as men. Honestly, I would love a spin-off on Brimsley and Reynolds. It didn't feel.....forced. the characters were new and their story grew organically. Michaela? No. I'm trying to articulate how I feel without sounding like I hate the queer community because I genuinely don't. I appreciated Benedict's story line even if it was a little jarring. He's exploring, experimenting and that's fine. It still doesn't take away from his story. But the introduction of Michaela felt like a guy punch. It felt wrong. I've never particularly like gender swapping in stories based on an original IP, because it changes a lot of dynamics. It changes a lot of story lines. And yes, it's fiction, but I'm sorry I cannot get over it, especially when it's such a blatant case of pandering. It makes me feel as if I'm wrong to question this change and I've somehow internalised homophobia. If so, then why wouldn't I hate other queer characters or be similarly uncomfortable?
Okay I think I can make my argument clear with an example. If anyone has seen the movie Love Lies Bleeding, I think they'll get it. The sexual orientation of the characters didn't matter. It felt right. And it was not important to the story. It was just an established dynamic and we could enjoy the plot easily. It wouldn't have mattered if it was a heterosexual couple or a homosexual couple, the story is largely unchanged. If Michael becomes Michaela, here's the issues I see. Who inherits Kilmartin. We've already established an estate will go to the next male heir if the current owner dies. A major part of Michael's story was his guilt over his inheritance and his imposter syndrome. His story arc taking his place in parliament. It's all gone. I mean, I know the show isn't interested in the plots other than the main character pairing but this felt so wrong. If they wanted a lesbian lead, the just make another show with original characters why force this? I'm not looking forward to Francescas season at all. I'm sure a lot of people will like it and that's their prerogative but for me, personally, the only thing keeping the story moving forward is Benedict. Maybe Eloise. But I feel like the story of the show has lost its charm and has dug itself into a hole like Disney or marvel
Iâm going to try to be respectful as possible. As a lesbian, itâs deeply concerning and infuriating to me how so many people including ppl from the community have internalized misogyny and homophobia to queer women. Just because you support and donât have an issue with queer male stories doesnât mean you canât be homophobic to queer female stories. Just because youâre bi doesnât mean you canât be homophobic. Why do you think majority of mlm stories are consumed by women? Why are the stories written and targeted towards women instead of the coupleâs own community?
Thereâs an issue going on right now where many fans are okay and THRILLED with Benedict being bi and sleeping with a man, yet complaining about Francesca and Michaelaâ both have revealed that they have a potential to turn into queer stories. But no oneâs batting an eye to Sophie being erased for Benedictâs potential gay partner. People are more okay with a lesbian Eloise than Francesca, and maybe because Eloise fits the stereotype more than Francesca. Why????
Maybe you need to reflect on why youâre feeling this way since youâre clearly favoring queer male stories over queer female stories. Why is a straight male characterâs arc more important than a sapphic character who can go through the same arc and even MORE? Why are you okay with Benedict but not with Francesca? Why does Brimsley and Reynolds feel natural but Francesca and Michael is forced and pandering? Why is making sapphic representation pandering unless itâs based on stereotypes, but not gay representation?
This is Bridgerton. They made POCs part of the elites, itâs not historically accurate, the medicine and technology isnât historically accurate. I see no reason why they wonât change the law at some point for it to be possible for a woman to inherit titles and estates. Even if they donât go into that direction, Iâm pretty sure thereâs a lot more story to explore for a sapphic character.
Thereâs so many variants of Michael in other stories and media, heâs not special. But Michaela?? How many stories are there even in the mainstream media where we get a happy WLW couple that doesnât end in tragedy? Literally 0. Thereâs no happy ending anywhere in popular media because Bury Your Gays is the default fate of every queer female story that gets even slightly popular. You say make a new show with sapphic characters yet 90% of the time they get cancelled after the first season and this is something weâve been dealing with for decades and trying to call out.
So again, why is a straight coupleâs story more important to you than a WLW couple who can offer a more unique, nuanced portrayal of yearning, desire, betrayal to oneâs self, crisis of faith, even loss of identity and room to show politics in the Bridgerton world like how they did with Queen Charlotteâ and make a bigger impact on how the public perceives queer women?
Youâre uncomfortable with a queer female character changing what you know and are familiar with in the booksâ that she canât possibly compare to what a male character can offer. Itâs ironic how awfully similar that sounds to homophobes who canât accept the existence of queer women in society because god forbid a woman can do what a man can for a woman, or even do better.
Donât watch it if you donât want to. The rest of us will feel valued and seen and enjoy it together when the season comes out while you distance yourself further from the sapphic community.
TLDR; Queerness makes the story richer than any straightness will.
discoholicmusic
baratheonpilled
ellievsbear
