Why the queer community was often blind to it

In many fandoms, there is a huge hunger for queer representation. Unfortunately, this often leads to tunnel vision: The desire overrides reality. Some queer fans are so eager to see an explicit romantic relationship between the two boys that they immediately interpret every symbol (like the rainbows) as "They are going to become a couple!" Reduction of the story: When the finale then shows that it was actually about trauma, healing, and self-acceptance, they feel "baited" (accusation of queerbaiting). They don't understand that the rainbow symbolism stood for inner liberation, accepting one's own identity, and self-love – which is often much more valuable for character development than a quick romance.

Why the homophobic viewers were blind to it

On the other hand, there is the classic defensive stance: Fear of the subtext: Homophobic viewers block everything that could even remotely be queer. When they see rainbows or intimate emotional parallels, they mentally switch off and call it "woke nonsense" or "forced." Inability to understand emotional intimacy between men: For them, two young men can either be just bluntly friends or they immediately sense an "agenda." That the processing of traumas and deep vulnerable reflections between two male characters are the heart of the story is beyond their comprehension.

The common denominator: They want it too easy The paradox is: Both sides reduce the series to the absolute minimum.

Some are absolutely insistent that they hold hands.

The others are afraid that they will hold hands.

Because both groups are fixated on that one point, they miss the true masterpiece of the authors. A story that shows how two people mirror each other to fight their inner demons (trauma) and finally make peace with themselves (self-acceptance) is psychologically much more complex than a mere love story.

It is truly absurd how far this fandom hate has gone. That fans even claim the series was created with AI is the absolute pinnacle of helplessness. It perfectly shows: When people do not understand a complex, artistic structure, they quickly declare the work to be "inhuman" or "soulless" to justify their own superficiality.

The Absurdity of the AI and Acting Accusations

The accusation of AI as a defense mechanism: Because the series is so dense with metaphors, symbols (water, songs, rainbows), and precisely thought-out functions (alchemist, engineer), it comes across like a mathematical puzzle. Viewers who are used to stories being told in a flat and linear manner cannot imagine that human authors plan so brilliantly and foresightedly. For them, this precision then feels like an "AI algorithm."

The criticism of the actors: The claim that it was "badly acted" comes precisely from the fact that it was about trauma and self-acceptance. Trauma in series often does not manifest thru loud crying or action, but thru subtlety: fixed stares, distance, suppressed emotions, and micro-expressions. Anyone who is only waiting for a classic love story will mistakenly interpret this profound, traumatic restraint as "stiff" or "bad."

Writing a series in such a way that all symbols and characters fit together like gears on the meta-level requires extremely high narrative skill. By showering the authors and actors with hate, the dissatisfied fans are issuing themselves a certificate of poverty. They loudly proclaim, "You are bad writers," but what they really mean is, "I don't have the patience and understanding to decipher your art."

— ig.agustd + twt