mmm somethings been rattling around inside my brain about queerness in xenofiction (warrior cats centric cause thatâs obviously mostly what people are talking about in my internet circles) and I know around here I am preaching to the choir but w/e. I feel like i may have made this post before but iâll do it again until i feel like iâve crafted all of my thoughts correctly
everyone knows thereâs always like. some shmuck on twitter or youtube comment sections, complaining about how gay cats just donât make sense ~realistically~
and the common argument back is always something along the lines of âthese cats have complex society and religion and talk to ghosts and sometimes have magic powers, and being gay is where you draw the line? it doesnât have to be realisticâ
and something just rubs me the wrong way about that argument, not that itâs WRONG, itâs not wrong, xenofiction by definition is all super super unrealistic. I think itâs more like, it oversimplifies it. because honestly when I make critiques about the warriors world building not making sense, I donât tend to like the argument beginning and ending at âwell it doesnât have to be realisticâ because no it doesnât but itâs still supposed to feel believable.
i think i donât like that the argument seems to imply that gay animal characters are at all on par with other fantasy things like talking to ghosts and having powers or complex religion. I also donât like it when people who are being fake-supportive can condescendingly say âwell the gay couple may be completely absurd and unrealistic but I guess itâs ok because its just a silly fantasy :) â cause like. Like its not unrealistic tho. i donât like the implication that itâs uniquely unrealistic, if this was a grounded story with no magic or religion and the cat social groups were more inspired by real feral cats, it would still be illogical for some queer cats not to exist.
 I feel like it is a more effective argument to point out that straight cats are just as unrealistic, in fact more unrealistic and silly
âcats lovingly and monogamously married-for-life and raising kids togetherâ is the absurdity it should be compared to, rather then the magic elements. Because then the complainers have to contend with the fact that they arenât bothered by unrealistic relationships between cat characters, they are just uniquely bothered by gay ones.Â
I meanâŚnot to get tmi but it seems obvious to me this knee jerk reaction people have to rolling their eyes and scoffing when âgayâ and âanimal characterâ are placed in the same sentence is based on their insistence on equating the breeding behavior of animals to the romantic relationships of humans. Y'know, theyâre assuming that when people talk about romantic couples between anthro characters, that that is the sort of thing they are drawing from. When, certainly when it comes to cats, that is a very very poor equivalent. Cat mating behaviors are not affectionate or long lastingâthey actually seem quite stressful, and then the father runs off to find more girls and probably never calls his one-night-stand again. Â
this is why I am really not fond of âmateâ being used at the go-to replacement for husband/wife in xenofiction. Consider just coming up with a brand new word for your animal characterâs version of romance! maybe they have types of relationships and words for them that humans donât even have! but âmateâ feels like. an action, nothing more. It doesnât inherently imply love. frankly I think more people should be anthropomorphizing mates as simply Business Partnerships where the business is in desiring offspring, as opposed to husband/wife.
Just likeâŚ.ok if youâre going to use the real behavior of animals as at least the loose inspiration for your anthropomorphic characterâs behavior, surely pair bonding would be a smoother translation to what we view as a romantic couple?? not mating?? because pair bonded animals are the ones having consistent pleasant interactions, and being physically affectionate, and working together in life, sometimes even raising each others kids together. Â
And keeping that in mind, frankly you could argue that gay-coded cats should be the norm. (not that I think pair bonded creatures should always be interpreted as a romantic coded relationship, you could interpret some as platonic or familial or simply allies needing to survive. The point is no matter what route you go, you are projecting some human experience onto animals whoâs minds and feelings we cannot ever actually understand. So to make it coded as a gay romance is just as reasonable as making it an adopted found-family sort of affection. You can go any route and be the same amount of unrealistic.)
If these losers actually want reasonable cat fiction, no one should have romantic affection for anyone! and if two cats have kittens together, it should be treated more like a short-lived antagonistic business partnership where you part ways immediately after. If you only criticize one type of romance for being âunbelievable and silly because these are CATS for crying out loud đâ but you donât feel âdistractedâ or âtaken out of the storyâ about the other type of romance, then this aint about realism my guy, sounds like you just have some baggage to unpack.
I am beating people over the head with a very big sign that reads âWhether youâre writing about cats or birds or aliens or fantasy people or whatever, you cannot grant any creature the ability to love without all the variety and complexity that **naturally** goes hand in hand with those messy emotions. If the creatures can fall in love at all, then there must exist the possibility for some of them to be queer about it. And if you view queerness as unnatural, then we donât have a writing disagreement, we have a fundamental moral disagreement about life. And I canât help you there, thatâs your problem! But I refuse to let people benignly hide behind a âsimple desire for more realistic-feeling fiction uwuâ as a defense!! (gay people are real. Itâs true! I checked!!)â
