fe awakening would be so good if it was good

Quick introduction:

This text is adapted from a subheading I cut from a larger writeup I’m still working on (as of time of posting this), regarding Inigo’s queer coding across his multiple appearances in the Fire Emblem series.

This is noted because, within this piece, I make reference to concepts such as “the philanderer archetype”, which are expounded upon in the actual writeup but not here; additionally, I note this for the tone which this piece takes, being somewhat more argumentative than analytical/explanatory in places.

The following isn’t an exhaustive breakdown of Inigo’s design, and is somewhat limited by my own knowledge (I’m a student illustrator/designer, not yet a professional); still, I hope it is at least somewhat interesting in my breakdown/research of at least one aspect of Inigo’s visual design (and how it functions as visual queer-coding).

[Also I spelling and grammar checked this pretty late at night, so if you see errors or weirdly-worded sentences in here: no you didn’t :D]

Design description:

In Inigo's official render artwork, he is depicted as a slim, fairly short-to-average height looking young adult, with a fairly skinny rectangular body type and a flat chest. He has a layered hairstyle made up of long strands cut to chin-length, and his hair is a warm dark grey colour; in game, his hair changes to the colour of his second parent as chosen by the player (eg, silver-white for Henry, blue for Chrom, etc).

In his left ear, Inigo wears an earring style called a “hook taper gauge”–gauges being characterised by requiring a larger hole to fit through. This earring curves from around from the back of Inigo’s earlobe to the front into a half-moon (or incomplete ring) shape. Said earring is coloured silver in Inigo’s official render, but gold in every other appearance.

Inigo is wearing the game's standard mercenary uniform for male characters. This consists of underclothes– a popped-collar shirt with voluminous sleeves, trousers, a pair of black leather boots; and over-clothes– a skirted tunic, a belt across his waist and chest, fingerless gauntlet gloves, as well as armour around his knees, shins and feet. There is also a shield on his left arm and a sword sheathed across his back. Inigo's pose and expression in this render are laid-back and casual; his feet are in a relaxed stance, he has one hand slung over his belt, and the other is twirling a lock of hair as he tilts his head at the viewer and smiles.

Inigo’s appearance, outfit and posing all described here are also more or less the same or similar for Inigo's in-game portrait, as well other assets such as map sprite, default 3D model, etc.

The analysis bit:

While visual shorthand/stereotypes can be and are useful tools for designers in communicating text and subtext, the depth of information they can convey is both less specific and more limited than written text. In some respects, this is a strength; certainly, it is a feature of visual storytelling well understood and utilised by most professional visual artists.

This is to say that the design choice to given Inigo an earring (and a singular earring, no less) is quite significant. For such a minor departure from the standard mercenary uniform he otherwise wears, it conveys a surprising amount of information about his character visually; inclusive of, but not necessarily limited to, implications of queerness (though understanding the queer angle shall be my focus).

Ear piercings have been worn by peoples across various cultures worldwide since early history. In 1500s Europe, they were considered a fashion statement for both men and women of the upper class; and amongst the lower class, sailors (presumed men) would also pierce their ears as a status symbol– purportedly to show that one had sailed the globe or crossed the equator. However, by the 19th and 20th centuries in Europe, the act of piercing one’s ears fell out of fashion, becoming considered “barbaric” (IE; became associated with non-white cultures, thus fell out of fashion due to racism). At this time, piercings were thus largely replaced with clip-on ear jewellery for women. As for men, a slow roll of changes to European men’s fashion which had already occurred over the 1800s had seen “practicality” become a focus of men’s clothing; adornments and/or other decorative elements in general became undesirable to wear, ridiculed for displaying excess and, later, ridiculed for being associated with women (as women’s fashion slowly became associated with excess and decoration via men’s fashion’s lack of it). The practise of European men wearing earrings would have died out among this larger trend.

Clip-on earrings, or really the concept of earrings, thus were now “for women”, or solely considered “women’s fashion”; as was most jewellery itself now, with scant few exceptions. Though the concept of piercing one’s ears to wear earrings did not seem to make a comeback at all until the 1950s; though when it did, it was a hit with women in western cultures (Europe, America, presumably also AU/NZ). By the 1960s, the practise of ear-piercing had been adopted by the Punk subculture and with teenage girls. As a result, in the 1970s, the modern ear piercing gun was invented in California by Studex as a direct response to the practise of ear-piercing now being mainstream and popular with women.

Of course, ‘women’ is specified since, as with most things associated with women under misogynistic society, the practise of piercing one’s ears was now not socially acceptable for men because of it’s now-association with women. To pierce one’s ears as a man in the 60s and 70s was an act of counter-culture; and, it was so in the specific sense of rejecting masculine hegemonic gender norms of the time by donning ‘feminine’ visual signifiers. Thus, the (western) cultural association of men wearing earrings as a queer signifier had begun to form– as gay men did, and continue to, use gender-nonconformity and ‘femininity’ as signals for one’s queer sexuality (and as both are reinforced upon men as being “gay” behaviours in the first place; their usage as intentional signifiers often reclaiming their ‘derogatory’ usage).

As for the practise of wearing a single earring to signify “gayness”, a 1990s New York Times article at least confirms what one likely has had as a burning question until now: if gay men are known for wearing one singular earring, “which ear is ‘the gay ear?’” According to said NYT source, it is the right ear:

It was not until the 1960's, when all kinds of customs began changing, that more American women began piercing their ears. (…) Gay men followed, often wearing a single piece of jewelry in the right ear to indicate sexual preference. "In a world where you can't dress flamboyantly, that's a very discreet signal," said David Menkes, who lives in New York and has had himself pierced in several places. (Piercing Fad Is Turning Convention on Its Ear, New York Times, May 19th1991)

However– regarding “the gay ear”, this same source then goes on to explain that the specific symbology of having one pierced ear, and which ear is pierced especially, seems to have very quickly been muddied by the spread of earrings as fashion to a wider cis-heterosexual culture: “..so many heterosexual men have begun wearing earrings -- often in both ears -- that the placement no longer suggests anything about sexual preference”(New York Times, May 19th1991).

Thus, as a “discreet” marker for the gay community, a single earring worn in one’s right ear had actually stopped being a functional signifier by at least the 1990s.

Be that as it may: the idea of a “gay earring” or “the gay ear” has endured culturally since, regardless of it’s diminishing within the actual gay community. The dating app Grindr– the funniest source– published a blog post titled Which ear is the gay ear? as recently as 2024; other various internet sources turn up articles from 2025 and 2026 on this question as well. For the purposes of queer-coding, then, I would argue it barely matters which ear is or was “the gay one”; it also barely matters that there used to be some truth to the practise either. Instead, as the concept of a man with a singular earring remains a signifier of queerness culturally, it necessarily embeds itself in and can be interpreted from it’s inclusion in a character’s design.

This is not to suggest, of course, that Inigo is inherently gay because he wears an earring. It is carefully placed in the left ear, after all (for clarity reasons, this is a joke. Humour.)

Rather, there are multiple layers to what Inigo’s earring might be conveying of him. From understanding the cultural connotations and history of earrings as fashion, a singular earring– and especially in the gauge style Inigo wears– they mark him as someone who is both fashionable and perhaps little bit rebellious just as much as they do “gay”.

Indeed, Inigo's early concepts in the The Making of Fire Emblem 25th Anniversary Development Secrets, Awakening and Fates Art book depict him, in both written and visual materials, as someone who is casual and youthful (words like “sporty” and “active” used as descriptors); implying of someone who is extroverted and up-to-date with trends. This is then reflected in Inigo’s writing later; his support with Severa has him state he’s actually “has an eye for these things (fashion)” when he gifts Severa a ring; specifically, Inigo has “an eye” for women’s fashion. Which is an incredibly cis-het thing for Inigo to be skilled at and/or interested in, of course.

That is to say, even this “alternate explanation” is still rather queer-coded.

...Cultural notions of “the gay earring” aside, there is another aspect associated with earrings, and jewellery more broadly, which definitely cannot be reasoned away: I speak of the fact that, from the 19th century onwards, most jewellery has been considered as “women’s fashion or ‘feminine’, thus, those who wear jewellery are considered as being ‘feminine’ also.

The implications of visually coding Inigo as subtly feminine are then perhaps more obvious, and certainly less arguable, than those of attempting to argue he is coded as “gay” specifically. Femininity is a cross-cultural signifier of queerness in men, as well as those perceived as such by (western, and for our cases at least, Japanese) hegemonic gendered society. Certainly, it is an implication used in other characters’ designs within Awakening itself to code said characters as queer– though not usually in a flattering way, it must be said; thinking of Excellus and the bandit brothers here. It still stands to reason that Inigo’s design is not exempt from this standard; IE, if there are other characters in the same text with ‘feminine’ visual elements meant to communicate subtextual queerness, why would this not also be true of Inigo?

This idea of Inigo’s earring as a more-broadly feminine signifier, leading to a reading of queerness, is also backed up by other subtle elements of his design present: such as the consistent choice to depict him in all his iterations throughout development as having “long strands of hair”, as one example. The only ‘male’ second-gen with longer hair to compare to is Yarne, whose mullet is un-styled and more reminiscent of fur; nowhere near as ‘neat’ or ‘groomed’ as Inigo’s locks. Which, this neatness in of itself can be read as “queer”/’feminine’; the length obviously also a subtle communication of such. [AN: I made an argument about Ferdinand(FE3H)’s long hair being a visual codifier of queerness in the full write up. This is NOT because I personally believe “men can’t have long hair”, but because the full writeup expounds on the FE series and thus Awakening adhering to a very strict ‘conservative’/’traditional’ standards of gender expression for it’s characters. Thus, something as basic as ‘having long hair’ counts as contravening gender norms for men/those perceived as such].

This visual feminine-coding is also particularly clear in what necessarily had to have been a very specific choice in Inigo’s official artwork: his pose, and the mannerism depicted where he’s twirling a strand of hand in a flirtatious manner. In movies, books, and general culture, a character twirling her hair is more often than not used as cue to say she has a crush on a man; of course, “her” and “man” specified, as the hair-twirling trope to indicate flirtation in media is rarely used for men, unless the intent is also to signal that he is “girly”. I even went out of my way to pirate an episode of The Simpsons to find an example of this: Episode 6 of season 5 (“Marge on the Lam”) has a very brief cut-in joke involving the character Mr Burns kicking his feet and wearing a fluffy pink robe while twirling a phone cord in this “girlish” lock-of-hair manner. The ‘joke’ of this cutaway of course being that a decrepit, old (and bald) man like Mr Burns would be behaving in a youthful, ‘girly’ manner such as this, unexpected of his usual personality, age and gender. So, Inigo’s hair-twirling is him being in a flirty pose, yes: a flirty pose “for girls”.

However present the overall feminine-coding is in Inigo’s design, it is still, admittedly, quite subtle. Plausibly deniable, one might even say. Far from this subtlety discounting it as evidence towards Inigo’s queerness, though, I would actually argue for how it’s execution lines up rather seamlessly with Inigo’s written characterisation, regarding his femininity and latent queer-coding; one might argue it even serves as an effective visual representation of such.

“Inigo isn’t queer, he’s just fashionable” both sounds like something the character himself would claim and a euphemism for queerness in of itself, despite it’s intended purpose to deny it. It’s the same as how the philanderer/noble gentleman archetype(s) Inigo embodies are both inherently queer and a shield against queer allegations. As such, ignoring the coded history and enduring legacy of “the gay earring” as a queer signifier, as well the more broadly-feminine signifiers attached to Inigo’s design, is not only a laughable thing to attempt, but also rather pointless; no matter how one slices it, this character is designed visually to give the impression he is not entirely straight [AN: or cis, but I need the full writeup to prove this]; that he is queer.

In other words: Inigo’s earring may not literally be a “gay earring”– IE, potentially not intended to call back to the history of the American gay-culture signifier as such specifically– but in all other ways, Inigo’s earring is still, in function, a “gay earring”.

SOURCES:

Collins, A. (2025). History of Studex. BUZZUFY. Available at: https://www.buzzufy.com/blog/2025/06/19/history-of-studex/ [Accessed 18 July 2026].

(Inigo’s official artwork) https://fireemblemwiki.org/wiki/File:FEA_Inigo.png

Piercing Fad Is Turning Convention on Its Ear. (1991). The New York Times, 19 May, p.38. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/19/news/piercing-fad-is-turning-convention-on-its-ear.html [Accessed 18 July 2026].

Rudolph, N. (2022). Why is Mens Fashion Boring? Not Beau Brummell : Next Historically Accurate Cosplay! . Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKKiMNnD3iM&t=1s [Accessed 19 July 2026].

serenesforest.net (n.d.). awakening-trio.jpg. Available at: https://serenesforest.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/awakening-trio.jpg [Accessed 18 July 2026].