#coding chatter

[ID: A screenshot of a work-in-progress visual novel. The textbox is blue and Bumblebee is saying “Great! I’d appreciate the company.” behind the textbox in the centre of the screen is a shitty trackpad drawing of the transformer Rung on a grey background. To his right is a cleaner drawing of Bumblebee who is smiling. End ID]

Thanks! They've been added!

Aside note/nitpick as we see a lot of people saying 'plural coded' with characters they submit-

This isn't a list of plural coded characters, this is a list of just straight up plural characters- as being plural means being 'more than one', and its a list of characters who are 'more than one' in a body. Characters that are more than one in a body, or otherwise have 'more than one' in a body experiences are added- as they simply ARE plural, factually. Those that don't are not, and those that are edge cases or are otherwise hard to judge on this for whatever reason are put in the bottom section until we can parse if they count or not with a more in-depth look.

'Coded' characters are not added to the list, as 'coded' is a sort of nonsensical category for this thing in particular.

'Coded' was originally used for 'queercoded' iirc, which is when a character (usually a villain) was given traits associated with queer folks(means of speech and fashion usually)- implying the character is queer without saying it or confirming it with what are actually queer traits that would then make them by definition queer. This was done because directly queer people, even villainous ones were often seen as too obscene to be shown.

A villain who is a very masculine looking man wearing a leather choker and then a skirt and fishnet stockings and makeup who otherwise refers to themself as a man and never talks about who he is attracted to is queer coded.

For a non-villain example Neo from The matrix is canonically queercoded. Neo is just straight up a trans metaphor getting past censors, canonically.

A character who is mentioned as not having a human conception of gender and deciding to just let humans refer to them as one for convenience is textually queer, NOT queercoded- being literally nonbinary even if they don't say the word nonbinary and it was not author intention.

The angels in Good Omens are canonically lacking human gender. They are NOT coded, they canonically are nonbinary. Full Stop.

In this context of defining coding then, what would 'coded' even look like?

Headcanons because one could read the character as being more than one but there is no confirmation that they have multiple self states or multiple people in there? Thats not coding, thats headcanons and meta.

Any character can be headcanoned or interpreted plural if you squint hard enough and go for it -metaphorically or literally- especially because there isnt anything saying they *arent* plural usually.

If this was allowed it would swiftly become a headcanon blog- and this is not that. The clarity of purpose for this blog is canon, not headcanon.

It would have to be something that intentionally alludes to a more than one experience without being the thing and doing so because of fear of censure or backlash. Plural culture doesnt really have like. Adjacent communities and fashion trends like queer folks have that literally anyone would recognize and intentionally evoke. Its not considered too explicit to star a plural character like it is to star a queer one. If someone wants a plural character they just. Make one. If people want to equate DID and being plural in general to the negative stereotypes they just say it with their whole chest and do it. There is no need for propaganda in that case because plural folks are not seen as obscene.

Thus 'plural coding' isnt really something that would apply to all that many characters if it can apply to anything at all.

So to instead widen what coding is(which is a bad idea for reasons that are a can of worms not fit for this blog but will be done for the sake of example), we can define it as anything that alludes to or is a metaphor for an experience without being the experience literally, regardless of intention.

Characters that have experiences sort of like being plural in a metaphorical sort of way but arent would then become 'plural-coded'

These would be things like separate body time travelers or clones pretending to be one person, or people who are in a telepathy network but have their own bodies. Superheroes with secret identities as well and shapeshifters would count here.

They have experiences that evoke plurality, however they are also distinctly NOT canonically plural for that alone and almost every single one is going to not intentionally be evoking us, and thus is outside the parameters of this blog.