we Talk

𝄚𝅦𝄚𝄞 hi guys,, this blog was made to put our thoughts into the world... this account is ran by two people, @samnericpilled and @divinism443 !!! negative anon asks WILL be put on a hit-list ❤️

── . ✦ pre-island simon headcanons

(trying my absolute hardest to imagine book simon and not my au...)

DISCLAIMER: i would like to preface this by saying im only talking about people who believe ralph or the boys being feminine in a regular way is bad. if you are talking about it being portrayed in a fetishistic manner, then i agree. that IS weird.

* also talking about despcon and tiktok comments ty

⊹₊˚‧︵‿₊⊱·✶·⊰₊‿︵‧˚₊⊹

sidenote: literally haven't seen any fetishistic artwork depicting feminine ralph since looking at the hellhole known as the 2010's lotf fandom. pls keep that there ty

there isn't inherently anything wrong with making ralph feminine. yes, i know that sounds crazy. but what makes you think that boys can't wear dresses, makeup, or do anything that gender norms say only girls do? saying ralph can't be feminine plays into the patriarchy and has misogynistic undertones. are girly things bad? why can't boys be girly?

also, bringing up his age while talking about feminization isn't the take some people think it is. it conflates sexuality with femininity which is misogynistic and has been used to stereotype women to this day.

in conclusion: feminine ralph is fine y'all everybody go home

Is your ask button referencing the Jack Merridew vs napoleon rap battle 😭💔

yeah LMAOO

(disclaimer: it's fine if you have your own personal reasons for not shipping them, or are just uncomfortable with shipping them. nobody is forcing you to ship them. this is specifically a criticism of the statement/stance above. i'm not calling you homophobic. thank you.

the argument that shipping the boys is rooted in homophobia. it's implying queerness is inherently sexual while that couldn't be any more far from the truth (after all, whatever happened to asexual and ace-spec people?). that reasoning is the same stereotype oppressors used to beat down the LGBTQ+ community, deeming gay men as hypersexual and unable to hold stable relationships.

also, most people who use that argument against shipping the boys wouldn't be saying the same thing if it was a straight couple. puppy love is a term for both queer kids and straight kids, and it'll always encompass them. in fact, it's a normal development in toddlers and children; the boys are very much old enough to have little crushes and relationships.

« ☆ —⋆——꒰ঌ·☆·໒꒱ ——⋆— ☆ »

if we're going off what golding wrote in, ralmon is implied (heavily in the manuscript!) and jalph has a few lines showing slight implications (wouldn't say that it's stone-cold proof though.) 12-year-olds can be queer. they can be in love. it's not that big of a deal.

not only that, simon is a queer-coded character even disregarding the bbc show. batty and queer are double entendres for his character! it's not that "queer meant something different back then", where do you think the slur originated from? clearly from the public believing people in the LGBTQ+ community were strange regarding their sexual orientation. batty is referencing the term "b!tty boy", a derogatory anti-gay slur stemming from jamaica, a country that was a british colony until 1962—after the book was written and published.

why be so against people shipping when one character is queer-coded?

છ˖ꔫ ꒰ ✧˚ෆ •｡ꪆৎ ˚- tl;dr (if you have a short attention span): the argument in the title is rooted in a homophobic stereotype conflating queerness with sexuality, dismissing the concept of queer puppy love.