kraz

Because them being perceived as "just friends" completely dismantles their complex relationship. By portraying them as "just friends" it is not longer them. You may disagree them to be romantic, but you can agree that they're not "just best friends". You literally cannot write about them as simply platonic soulmates and bring out their level of devotion towards each other at the same time.

This is why I think in Kurukshetra they felt slightly distant, because other than the "I choose you as my charioteer" scene they didn't really have much going on.

Remember that they are HEAVY on the physical contact, gazes, and Krishna cannot stop talking about Arjun. He has to bring him into conversation EVEN WHEN HE'S NOT THERE WITH HIM. He has openly confessed his love for Arjun to SEVERAL people.

He's practically OBSESSED with Arjun. He's head over heels with him. This isn't platonic soulmate behaviour because we already have THE platonic soulmate relationship in Mahabharata. Krishna and Draupadi. They are THE example of platonic soulmates. They will die for each other but in a sibling kinda way absolutely. And it has been made clear by every writer through and through.

But what Krishna and Arjun have isn't platonic, and almost every writer, deep in their heart, knows it. Not just romantic either. Both terms do not apply to whatever the fuck those two have going on. Secret third thing, LITERALLY. Every time I read any text related to them it always feels like they wanna write them having a union but can't. Krishna and Arjun always seem like they're one hand brush away from going "fuck it." This isn't platonic behavior. But also not romantic. I think it's every single one of these terms packed into a blender and turned into a puree.

Platonic or romantic the society would shun away any possibility also for such a deep connection to imply something more than friendship and no showmaker would want that

So god/devotee becomes the easiest dynamic to show the deep connection without the audience having to have any deep thoughts about them two

It's less about the god/mortal part because Madhurya Bhakti exists and I haven't really seen anyone even imply that tbh.

But it is indeed about:

1. Homophobia/internalized homophobia and that queerness should "stay out of religious texts/not everything has to be queer and woke" etc.

2. "They're just best friends/brothers" mentality/general headcanon but that is simply the cherry-picked version of them. But I have already shown that if Krishna said the things he says to/about Arjun to someone he considers platonic, say Draupadi, or even Sudama, it would sound weird as fuck.

3. Most people expect Krishna to only love his female love interests, like Radha, Rukmini, Satyabhama, etc., because most people either identify with/relate to the female love interest (usually female devotees/stans/madhurya bhakts) or with Krishna having said female love interest (usually male devotees/stans).

4. The only male lover some of them are willing to accept is Gadadhar, but that is again because he's literally the male version of Radha.

5. They are "NarNarayan" and hence brothers so they cannot be together. Ig that's the only strong argument. However, many ppl using this argument usually ship Subhadra and Arjun, who are maternal cousins. So...

At the end, especially in times like this, where queer rights are already at almost their lowest in India, we will probably never see a KrishnArjun adaptation that implies a kind of tension that's just more than platonic, or truly capture their obsession with each other. Or even make Krishna even dare say canon monologues like "I cannot live on this earth without Arjuna" or "My family, my wives, none are as dear to me as Arjuna is".

Until people actually do 💀

Then suddenly love has a Terms & Conditions page.

Like damn 😭 I thought we said the divine was beyond human limitation??? Why does transcendence keep stopping exactly where social discomfort begins?

It’s always: “Krishna belongs to everyone 🥰✨🌸”

right up until someone loves him in a way that disrupts heteronormativity or rigid social boundaries. Then it's blasphemous.

People are fine with Krishna being: a cowherd, a king, a strategist, a charioteer, a thief, a diplomat, a husband to thousands of wives, a cosmic being, the universe itself, both terrifyingly divine AND deeply human at once.

But the SECOND someone explores him through queer intimacy or emotional fluidity, suddenly everyone remembers “boundaries,” “tradition,” and “proper interpretation.”

Like wow. Fascinating. So he can contain the cosmos but apparently not bisexuality. Noted.

We can handle Vishvarupa. We can handle him casually bending reality and delivering cosmic truths beyond human comprehension. But two men having suspiciously intense emotionally codependent dialogue? THAT is where the realism breaks for people 💀

People are comfortable with divine love as an aesthetic. The second it becomes specific, the universality develops walls very quickly.

They also don't have a problem with Mitra-Varuna, but we all know that's because no modern Hindu is as attached to them as they are to Krishna, given that he's one of, if not THE MOST prominent deity in hinduism rn. This is why they feel uncomfortable.

Male madhurya bhakti the lukewarm progressives still accept. But not someone male who is directly attached to Krishna. Who has actually met LIVING Krishna and spent time with him, for years. Who Krishna would give his own life for. Who Krishna can't stop obsessing over, again, CANONICALLY.

Vidur: “No bribe can part Krishna from Arjun. Arjun is not Krishna’s friend, he’s Krishna’s very breath.”

Episode 64: https://youtu.be/5fHhWT26GLQ?si=enWfGJj__Joc8ye2

Time Stamp: 27:49

As a cis person is there any way I can formally oppose this, like is there any petition I can sign or something like that.

And to all the Indian trans folks reading this, don't lose out on hope. The bill is not a law yet. It'll go to rajyasabha and then to courts. Let us hope it gets rejected in rajyasabha. And as far as I am aware one can also file public interest litigation against the bill then.

WE KEEP FIGHTING!!

you can sign a petition & if you're a current resident send an email to your member of parliament. i am linking both sites below

Having a character grow up in solitary confinement and then ripping her away from the only family she's ever known to live a life of solitude once again is not good writing.

Having a character be in love with his best friend and then just compare it to a high school crush is not good writing.

Having Eleven say that Mike has always been the person who truly understood her after showing us in the previous seasons that he only sees her as a superhero IS NOT GOOD WRITING.