I just want mirage all to myself. I love prettyboys
*cough cough * blizzard *cough cough *
1 Like
Mirage gives off disaster bi energys.
1 Like
I kind of agree tbh. In my mind Mirage is hella bi.
1 Like
I’m approaching Apex Legend’s the same way I approach Street Fighter; Cool character designs, zero interest in actually playing lol.
Not a fan of the devious bisexual trope either, but being realistic, some LGBT people are evil (just like straight people can be). I’m not really against the idea of LGBT villains.
4 Likes
ofc, but like 75% of bisexual male representation in media are villains/bad guys, and sometimes their bisexuality is made to be part of their villainy. See Vamp, Volgin, Chris Keller, Buffalo Bill, Trevor Phillips, the Carver, Frank Underwood and Loki. Doesn’t help that some of these are also the most popular open bisexual characters. Outside of homophobic films from the 50s and 60s, gays and lesbians do not have that same amount of villainous depiction. Closest I can think of is the gay ex-army prison guard and Alex, both from Orange is the New Black.
Being realistic, 75% of bisexual men are likely not sociopaths or overt psychopaths. Having villainous lbgt characters is cool, but having them as a majority is hardly healthy.
There are no exclusive 100% villains, sociopaths or psychopaths in Overwatch though. Like, every single character has background and context that makes them ambiguous, with the exception of maybe Doomfist, who would fit as a villain.
To me, that’s important, because “Did one bad deed once” does not a villain make. Due to this nuance in characters, none of them would fit the “devious evil bisexual” trope because none of them are exclusively devious and evil, but even for those that are (Doomfist), they don’t have any of the other typical bisexual tropes attached so they would not be defined by it.
Hey, everyone already headcanons Mccree as bi, and he’s by far not a villain.
I’d say the most prominent stereotype for bisexual men is that they’re annoying flirts, lol. I have never heard of “bisexual villain” trope.
1 Like
Honestly, I have never heard of the bisexual villain trope either. I HAVE heard and experienced the flamboyant, feminine male villain trope though.
1 Like
Yeah, there’s a bunch of videos on Youtube analyzing this in Disney movies, of all things. Disney did have a lot of flamboyant villains, even though a good chunk of them were not even gay…
I’ve only ever heard of making villains more sexually open, and that includes often showing them flirting with anyone, to indicate that they’re depraved villains (since our culture puts value on purity and being straight). I’ve seen plenty of “Let’s show this villain making the hero uncomfortable by flirting despite both of them being men/women.” It’s connecting same sex attraction with something bad and depraved, as well as implying that it’s not even real attraction and is only used for a nefarious goal (this happens a lot specifically with women who are always more sexually explicit than their female heroine counterparts and further damages bisexuals because that villain is often portrayed as bi-curious as long as he’s evil).
HourlyB mentions some examples, but as I’m only familiar with Frank Underwood I can only comment on that. And I would not call him a one dimensional villain who was made bisexual to indicate his evilness or that his bisexuality was used negatively in his story (which is what a trope should do if we’re calling it a trope). As a matter of fact, showing that he once loved a man genuinely was one of the things that brought more nuance to him as a character (not specifically because he loved a man, but because he loved someone) and it showed him in a vastly different light. I distinctly remember thinking “Oh wow, Underwood being shown as gentle and vulnerable over a love interest? I guess there’s more to him than I initially thought.”
Frank being canonically bisexual made his whole lifestyle and position all the more interesting to me, especially in today’s climate where someone like him wouldn’t have ever achieved the position he did if such a thing was revealed to the public. It showed one aspect of how much public image is important and how easily you could influence people against (or for!) someone based on one simple fact about their life that they cannot change. It actually made me feel sad because obviously Frank was ambitious politician with big goals; had he decided to pursue his love with that one man, his political career would’ve been impossible.
He’s actually similar to Soldier in that regard. They’ve both given up personal life and love for pursuing other goals. We know Soldier regrets it to an extent, and I’d dare say I could see Frank regretting it at least a little bit as well. To me, this isn’t falling into a bad trope, it’s good storytelling.
1 Like
There’s definitely a difference between ‘’ evil men who are bisexual ‘’ and ‘’ evil men whose evilness and corruptness is further emphasized by having them be attracted to the same sex, because that’s a bad thing, and that’s corrupt and evil ‘’ There’s a difference.
If anyone is familiar with Dragon Age 2 and Inquisition, one of the writers specifically mentioned that Solas didn’t end up being bisexual because they wanted to avoid the ‘’ depraved bisexual ‘’ trope, because in the previous game, another bisexual man Anders can already be seen as a depraved bisexual. And that’s all freaking garbage to me, we missed out on representation and LGBT content because of something ridiculous like this, especially when their bisexuality is never showcased in a negative manner. It’s all just extreme reaching.
2 Likes
This absolutely.
I think a lot of people jump to conclusions far too quickly. Analysing tropes isn’t easy and it isn’t straightforward as just identifying a trope and calling it a day. it has to go further than that.
I’d even say that sometimes giving a villain someone to care for can help us understand them and connect with them and show us that they’re a realistic person with different goals, goals we might consider evil, but goals nonetheless. You know, the whole “the best villains are the ones who see themselves as the heroes.” I’m totally not interested in villains being emotionless robots.
With that said, people also need to not call characters villains so easily. As I said for Overwatch, who even is a villain? Doomfist is the only hero that fits the bill.
1 Like
I mean, Junkrat, Roadhog, Reaper and Doomfist aren’t really ambiguous to me, but fair point.
Vamp (Metal Gear Solid 2 & 4), Volgin (Metal Gear Solid 3) and especially Trevor Phillips. (GTA V, and while he is one of the protagonists, he is still a terrible person by most metrics) They are probably the biggest and most prominent examples of bad guys where bisexuality plays a role in their being evil.
Also, McCree being bi wouldn’t help with that stereotype you mentioned. People headcanon him as bi because he fits the stereotype of some smooth talking, finger guns-ing bisexual. He might not be villainous, but that doesn’t mean progress necessarily.
True. But I can only think of 3 bi men who are not either evil or a stereotype, and all of which I had to actively search for. That’s kinda depressing.
I suppose I am more arguing in reference to culture in general, not the OW cast specifically. Off topic, I suppose. I’m mostly doing this for a essay, debating on forums helps me crystallize my points.
1 Like
You’re not wrong. The reason why (even homophobes) hc him as bi is because he’s sexy and he knows it. He’s a huge respector of women + him being all suave means he cannot be straight. Because straight men are never so shamelessly “sexy”.
It’s the chad smolder vs. suggestive eyebrow wiggle
1 Like
I’d still argue that that depiction is not a good thing, outside of the “respectful” aspect.
Why are bi men often depicted as flirts/suave? It’s like the only avenue people know how to write for us. “Hit on everyone, that’s a good idea.”
1 Like
I didn’t say it was right.
Isn’t there a discussion about this very thing in one of the other threads? Someone is proposing to show off that a hero is bi by having him flirt with everyone?
Fair enough, misinterpreted your point.
But that sounds gross. Like, the complete opposite of good representation.
1 Like
While that is a very good point, he’s still a Machiavellian sociopath who does terrible things to get power.
The presence of a round character is not the presence of a positive one, which would be more my point. No one realizing their sexuality is going to look to characters like Frank or Vamp. Trust me, that was my situation from 15-18.
Junkrat and Roadhog are absolutely ambiguous. Junkrat was born to a nuclear wasteland, it’s not like he had much of a choice in what he’ll do with his life, on top of probably being physically and mentally influenced by his surroundings. Sure, he’s doing crime, but not all crime was created equal, especially when someone had no choice in what they’ll be born into.
I wish we knew more about Roadhog, but he appears to be a very deep character with a very sad backstory. It’s implied that he wanted to fight for freedom, but that fight went too far, something that couldn’t have been in just his hands alone. What he does now is a consequence of mistakes and failures, something that (again, implied) he regrets deeply. I know both of them are a sort of a comic relief, but they still have backstories that explain their situation and direction in life. It’s not as simple as “Well, they’re on a crime spree = villains.”
Reaper is Reaper. Him being Gabe and us knowing what he went through as Gabe will forever paint Reaper as someone who can’t be considered 100% unredeemable villain who’s doing bad things for the sake of being evil. I’m not excusing him (or Junkers), but to me, it’s a shame to reduce such complex characters simply to “villains, bad” and call it a day. They’re clearly not the good guys, but they also clearly not exclusive bad guys.
I mean, yeah, it’s true, but none of it is ever connected with bisexuality. I didn’t get the vibe that showing us his bisexuality was supposed to reinforce his sociopathy, I got the feeling it was shown to tell us that there used to be a different person deep down.
I agree with this tho. My solution is to add to more “introductory” bisexual characters to the media, so keeping all of those ambiguous and complex ones won’t feel like we’re only getting weird a-holes as representation.
Like, I’m glad younger girls that I used to be had someone like Korra and Asami these days, for all the show’s flaws, those are positive characters that are complex and different, but still ultimately for kids. I don’t think there’s anything remotely similar for boys.
2 Likes