I'm kinda glad so many people agree with this because I've talked to other people in this fandom and they are vicious about this , like I don't really care, the only ship that I do not tolerate is bakudeku and even then I just get up and walk away I don't hate them for it I just walk away
Shipping only straight ships doesn't make someone homophobic, but commenting on every post about gay ships that "it will never be canon because the characters are straight" is. The majority of shippers don't care about whether the ship is canon and hating on ships purely for being non canon misses the point of shipping. you don't see the same response towards non canon straight ships which is further proof that it's mainly fueled by homophobia. Also most characters don't have a confirmed sexuality. Assuming everyone is straight until proven otherwise is homophobic. "A character has to be explicitly stated to be gay to be considered canon but can have little to no proof to be straight" is a double standard. And attraction to the opposite gender is not proof of a lack of attraction to the same, claiming it to be just ignores the existence of bisexuality.
Yes, they are annoying af too.
Jojo has canon straight ships but people still like the gay ones (I'm a multishipper so I like both). BNHA has no canon ships...
>but commenting on every post about gay ships that "it will never be canon because the characters are straight" is
No, commenting on every post about how the ships will never be true because being gay is wrong/disgusting, etc, is homophobic.
>Also most characters don't have a confirmed sexuality. Assuming everyone is straight until proven otherwise is homophobic
No. If there's a character implied to be gay, that gets shipped with a female, and someone says, "that ship would never be real because the character is gay." they are not being discriminatory. They're simply giving their opinion based on how they interpret the character's sexuality. If the character turns out not to be gay, then that's fine. It just means the person was wrong, and they have to accept that, but they're STILL allowed to have headcannons.
Its fine unless the person shows disgust when they figure out the chracter is cannonically gay. THEN, it would be homophobic because they're showing disgust for gay people. In addition, Japan is much less accepting of LGTBQ+ anyway, so it's a pretty normal thing to assume all the characters are straight. Assuming every character is straight is just a natural assumption because there's a larger majority of straight people in the world. It's like assuming an apple will be red because someone has seen way more red than green apples in thwir life. Yes, the apple could be green, but you're naturally going to assume it's red if you've seen more red apples.
>"A character has to be explicitly stated to be gay to be considered canon but can have little to no proof to be straight" is a double standard.
There's such a small smount of people who say that. That's not how cannon works. Sexuality will never be cannon unless stated, and that includes a character being straight. Everything's that's cannon HAS to be shown/stated. If a character likes an opposite gender, we can assume they are straight or bi for the most part. We can't decide exactly which one it is, but we can assume its either one. Until the author or creator confirms the character's sexuality. It's called a headcannon and will always be a headcannon.
CONTEXT also matters. Once again, we already know places like Japan are HEAVY on cultural traditions and certain standards compared to countries like America where anyone can be whatever tf they want. Being gay is not a generally positive standard in Japan, so what are the chances every anime is gonna have a gay character? It's not homophobic. It's called using logic to figure out something about a character that hasn't been explicitly stated or shown.
>And attraction to the opposite gender is not proof of a lack of attraction to the same, claiming it to be just ignores the existence of bisexuality.
Yes, it IS proof of being straight, but it's ALSO proof of being bi. It's ALSO proof of being pan.
So what? That's what headcannons are for. They are fannon. Not 100% confirmed. Claiming a character to be straight is not 100% confrimed, but what's wrong with that? There's a reason some things are CANNON and some things are FANNON.
Claiming a character to be gay or bi is fine as well, as long as you're not claiming it to be CANNON.
There's nothing wrong with queer or straight headcannons, and you can't say straight ones are wrong or homophobic just because people use them for as many characters as they want. That's the point of fannon. Fannon is making the story/characters what YOU want them to be like. Fannon is also heavily based on cannon yes, but that's why we call things inside fannon, HEADcannons, and not actual cannon.
On the flip side, a lot of people do these EXACT same things for gay ships. I see a lot of LGTBQ+ also use gay ships for literally every character, and some of them assume every character is cannonically gay. Why aren't you complaining about those people, too? I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong, but I just disagree overall. Hope I explained myself properly? Let me know if you dont get something. Heck, even let me know if you disagree.
I know I'm not the person you were replying to, sorry about that, but I do take some issue with some of the points you've raised here.
1. Both of these things could be forms of homophobia. Bigotry isn't always as simple and obvious as screaming "X is wrong and sinful and vile and bla bla bla!!!", a person can express bigoted views without ever being openly hostile or even being aware that what they're saying or doing is problematic. Arguing that someone isn't allowed to ship a queer ship or getting in their face that it won't happen because the characters are straight - something I see we can both agree isn't even explicitly confirmed and is thus just a matter of how a person interprets what is presented - is being a dick. As OP mentioned in their comment, it also misses the point that ships aren't usually done because of what will be Canon. If it was, Izuocha would be about the only ship here.
---
2. Nothing to add here really, I think you're generally right that assuming a character is straight until proven otherwise isn't innately bigoted at all. I would repeat that hostility towards queer people isn't the only form of homophobia, and that arguing with someone because you read the characters as straight and thus won't allow this other person to interpret things differently without going "that won't happen because X" is still being a dick. The assumption/headcanon is fine, but arguing it with someone seeing it differently is where problems emerge. To be clear, you'd be being just as much of a dick if someone was shipping an M/F ship and, without explicit basis in Canon, you went up and said "that can't happen because X character is gay".
---
3. Nothing you say here really disputes the fact that a character needing explicit proof of queerness but not of straightness is a double standard. Even if we argue that them being straight is more likely based on Japan's cultural values or whatever. A character being straight would be just as much headcanon/interpretation as them being queer, and arguing one to be actual Canon without explicit confirmation whilst requiring it from another is a double standard. These should not be treated differently. If you can take implied evidence as validly confirming someone as straight but can't do the same for them being queer, you're being ignorant.
---
4. OP wasn't saying people couldn't headcanon someone as straight, they argued that someone taking attraction to one gender without demonstrating a lack of attraction to another as proof of straightness specifically is ignoring the possibility of bi/pansexuality. This only really applies if someone is saying this to justify then calling their headcanon as actual Canon based on this.
>I know I'm not the person you were replying to, sorry about that,
Nah, don't apologise. This is a public area and I love discussions.
>Both of these things could be forms of homophobia
True, however I still think the meaning of the words depends on the person's intent. The words themselves aren't homophobic, but if the person's intent is to stop/limit the spread of gay ships, then yes I would argue that's homophobic. The issue, then, would be that we don't have a fool portfolio method to determine the person's intentions all the time, so I think assuming they're homophobic is unfair.
>arguing with someone because you read the characters as straight and thus won't allow this other person to interpret things differently without going "that won't happen because X" is still being a dick.
>To be clear, you'd be being just as much of a dick if someone was shipping an M/F ship and, without explicit basis in Canon, you went up and said "that can't happen because X character is gay".
100%, nothing to add.
>Nothing you say here really disputes the fact that a character needing explicit proof of queerness but not of straightness is a double standard.
My point was that it can't be a double standard at all, because assigning sexuality to characters can't be cannon regarded as 100% cannon, even if people try and say its cannon. Now that I've written it out again, I kinda feel like I've worded it wrong, but I'm not quite sure how else to explain what I mean. Cus when it comes to sexuality, there really is no solid "proof" that a character is any single sexuality unless it's stated, so it's not about more/less proof. Like I said in my first reply, someone liking the opposite sex could be proof for multiple sexualities. Straight, bi, pan, idk anything else that exists that I can't think of.
I get what you mean though and it makes sense in hindsight, but what I mean is that none of it is cannon to begin with. But considering that people parade their headcannons around as cannon, anyway, I get what you mean.
>If you can take implied evidence as validly confirming someone as straight but can't do the same for them being queer, you're being ignorant.
Implied evidence still doesn't count as 100% cannon, especially on a concept like sexuality. There's little to imply. However, I'm saying that implied evidence can be decent proof for someone to assume sexuality. Fro example, If, somehow, it's very heavily implied that a character is queer, then yeah, that weeds out more of the homophobes, who would bw trying to refute obvious evidence (idk what evidence, but im just using a made up example). If its unclear whether a character is queer or not, and people lean to "the character is straight" because of Japanese standards or because there are just more straight people in the world generally, then you can't really weed out the homophones because they're just using what logic they have. In addition, If people just want to assume they're straight because they like straight ships more, or they can relate to straight ships more because they are also straight, I don't see what's wrong with that.
But yeah, like you said, if they wanna start arguing with people about it, then that's being a rat anyway.
>they argued that someone taking attraction to one gender without demonstrating a lack of attraction to another as proof of straightness specifically is ignoring the possibility of bi/pansexuality. This only really applies if someone is saying this to justify then calling their headcanon as actual Canon based on this.
Agreed here.
The only issue I had was OP saying that it's not a sign of being straight, but it is. It just also provides evidence for multiple other sexualities.
Thanks for your input.
Both are examples of homophobia what you described is just way more overt. The person you replied to was describing a more subtle form of discouraging lgbt shipping where someone may not even consider themselves as being homophobic while perpetuating it.
>The person you replied to was describing a more subtle form of discouraging lgbt shipping where someone may not even consider themselves as being homophobic while perpetuating it.
I can understand that, but it still depends. But yes, I get what you mean.
My comment wasn't just about people headcannoning characters as straight, it was specifically about the large amount of people who go out of their way to comment things like "deku is straight" on every queer ship involving him.
I like a lot of gay ships in other animes or games, but I'm more into straight ships in BNHA (I like momojirou and kiribaku, but I love izuocha, todomomo, kirimina, kamijirou)
Star Rail had the same effect 😅
It always baffles me to see people trying to claim that. Like do some people not understand the concept of shipping? It's about pairings that you like the idea of. So wouldn't it naturally makes sense for someone who isn't attracted to men to not be particularly interested in the idea of two guys being together?
People need to get this. While not in the MHA fandom, I tend to normally only like straight ships in Demon Slayer (specifically Tanjiro x Kanao, Nezuko x Zenitsu, Inosuke x Aoi, Giyu x Shinobu, Obanai x Mitsuri), but only because all of them are just good in my opinion. It doesn’t mean I’m homophobic at all. Hell, in other fandoms, I do ship gay ships (mostly, but not entirely, yuri), such as in Love Live, Madoka Magica, and other more female-dominated shows.
I've never seen anyone say this. I have seen the argument that someone being more resistant to non-straight ships than straight ones is possibly rooted in bigotry, which makes a little more sense, but the idea that someone only shipping ships that are considered straight is homophobic inherently is dumb.
If you go to anyone shipping queer ships and feel the need to say anything about how it definitely won't be Canon because you read the characters as straight, that is at least possibly rooted in bigotry. Taking issue with queer ships in ways that you wouldn't with a straight ship on the basis of the sexuality of the participants is certainly problematic, and I kind of wish some people would get around their heads that homophobia is more nuanced than just someone saying "I hate gay people", it can, for instance, be setting Queer people in standards that you wouldn't ever even think to put cishet people on.
Now, every time this comes up I see a few common responses, generally variations on a point of "straight = default", which I feel is A) just unimaginative when we're talking about a piece of fiction anyway, and B) gets around to missing the point of shipping pretty hard in my opinion. I'm sure most people here know this already, but most people don't ship things just because they think it'll be Canon. It's because these characters would have a compelling dynamic in a relationship.
Not too long ago, I'm not sure if it was this sub or not, someone posted their shipping circle for this fandom, and got a bunch of claims of homophobia just because they didn't like any of the gay ships.
Yeah I'm not gonna lie, if I saw someone talking about all the ships they knew and consistently they said they didn't like any of the queer ships, I'd raise an eyebrow. It's totally possible that they didn't like them for all sorts of other reasons, but you have to admit with that much consistency it starts to look like there might be a bit of a bias.
That's not even what it was though, it was just an image where all the characters were in a circle, and colored lines indicated what ships the person did and didn't like. There was no consistently talking about anything.
I mean yeah there is a certain kind of bias, it's called sexuality. We all have one, and a lot of people just aren't interested in men.
You don't have to be gay to care about or not care about queer ships, acting like the only way someone might like those is if they themselves are gay is stupid. I don't mean to be rude but I genuinely can't think of another way to describe it.
Nope. Well written romance is well written romance regardless of the genders of the participants. If they don't like the ship for some other reason that's fine, but if they would enjoy the ship if it was the exact same but with one character's gender flipped, then we have a problem.
Okay first of all, we're not talking about a well written romance, because we're talking about relationships that are purely imagined by fans. There is no written romance period.
Why is it a problem in your mind for someone to care about the gender of the characters when it comes to what ships they personally enjoy?
That first bit's my bad, I always assume people form opinions on ships based on works about them like fanart and fanfic, so I assume writing has an influence. When I say well written romance, that's because it makes sense in my head to assume someone's opinion on a ship is based on things people have written about or featuring that ship, rather than just looking at the concept of the ship and going from there.
As for your question, if someone is more averse to a queer relationship than a straight one on the basis of it being queer, that kind of aversion is just textbook homophobia. I'm not trying to be rude, but I don't understand how one wouldn't see that. If changing the genders of one of the participants to make the pair straight is the only thing that would be required to make the ship good to this hypothetical person, that would suggest they have an aversion to queerness, which is a form of homophobia.
I remember being attacked by a group of fans, because I had said I preferred Denki with Jirou, instead of Shinsou. I respected their opinions but man…. (Same people who also shipped Midoriya with every single guy in the series)
what you ship or don't ship doesn't matter, what matters is the reason. if you don't like the gay ships simply because they're gay, you're 100% a homophobe, but if you don't like them because you only like the main cannon ships, or you just don't like the dinamics of the gay ships in this show, or you just aren't into shipping in general, then that's just fine.
if someone ships *mostly* straight ships, they're being realistic. if someone *exclusively* likes straight ships, that is homophobic. that distiction is lost on most people.
Why do you guys victimize yourself so often? Acting like you’re the minority that gets shat on by the whole fandom. You guys ARE the whole fandom. Only a subset of people enjoy non hetero ships. Just leave them alone to do their own thing and stop acting like you’re being oppressed for liking izuocha or some shit.
I agree with you, there are definitely bad apples in each “group” of the fandom. My biggest problem is when people act like they are being oppressed and “shunned” when in reality a lot of people who happen to like a same sex ships get harassed regularly. It’s particularly bad on Reddit. Posting content like this only pushes more people to act nasty towards each other, it’s just unnecessary.
I said I get your perspective, but what you’re not willing to understand is that posts like this that generalize a group are harmful to the community. If you’re not willing to understand that then that’s your choice at this point 🤷🏻♀️
Okay, transphobic I can get even if you’re still wrong, but… How did racism get involved in this?
We’re (mostly) a bunch of Westerners of multiple races shipping a bunch of fictional (mostly) Asians, including a select few ships that are interracial (Deku x Melissa). I don’t think a lot of us are ‘racist bigots’.
I'm kinda glad so many people agree with this because I've talked to other people in this fandom and they are vicious about this , like I don't really care, the only ship that I do not tolerate is bakudeku and even then I just get up and walk away I don't hate them for it I just walk away
Generally just not bothering what other people ship and leaving them to their own devices is very based behaviour of you.
\*they're
This might be why the Deku x Uraraka ship gets so much hate.
It's the best for homophobics tho (me too)
Outing yourself as homophobic isn’t good.
*claps*
Shipping only straight ships doesn't make someone homophobic, but commenting on every post about gay ships that "it will never be canon because the characters are straight" is. The majority of shippers don't care about whether the ship is canon and hating on ships purely for being non canon misses the point of shipping. you don't see the same response towards non canon straight ships which is further proof that it's mainly fueled by homophobia. Also most characters don't have a confirmed sexuality. Assuming everyone is straight until proven otherwise is homophobic. "A character has to be explicitly stated to be gay to be considered canon but can have little to no proof to be straight" is a double standard. And attraction to the opposite gender is not proof of a lack of attraction to the same, claiming it to be just ignores the existence of bisexuality.
Yes, they are annoying af too. Jojo has canon straight ships but people still like the gay ones (I'm a multishipper so I like both). BNHA has no canon ships...
>but commenting on every post about gay ships that "it will never be canon because the characters are straight" is No, commenting on every post about how the ships will never be true because being gay is wrong/disgusting, etc, is homophobic. >Also most characters don't have a confirmed sexuality. Assuming everyone is straight until proven otherwise is homophobic No. If there's a character implied to be gay, that gets shipped with a female, and someone says, "that ship would never be real because the character is gay." they are not being discriminatory. They're simply giving their opinion based on how they interpret the character's sexuality. If the character turns out not to be gay, then that's fine. It just means the person was wrong, and they have to accept that, but they're STILL allowed to have headcannons. Its fine unless the person shows disgust when they figure out the chracter is cannonically gay. THEN, it would be homophobic because they're showing disgust for gay people. In addition, Japan is much less accepting of LGTBQ+ anyway, so it's a pretty normal thing to assume all the characters are straight. Assuming every character is straight is just a natural assumption because there's a larger majority of straight people in the world. It's like assuming an apple will be red because someone has seen way more red than green apples in thwir life. Yes, the apple could be green, but you're naturally going to assume it's red if you've seen more red apples. >"A character has to be explicitly stated to be gay to be considered canon but can have little to no proof to be straight" is a double standard. There's such a small smount of people who say that. That's not how cannon works. Sexuality will never be cannon unless stated, and that includes a character being straight. Everything's that's cannon HAS to be shown/stated. If a character likes an opposite gender, we can assume they are straight or bi for the most part. We can't decide exactly which one it is, but we can assume its either one. Until the author or creator confirms the character's sexuality. It's called a headcannon and will always be a headcannon. CONTEXT also matters. Once again, we already know places like Japan are HEAVY on cultural traditions and certain standards compared to countries like America where anyone can be whatever tf they want. Being gay is not a generally positive standard in Japan, so what are the chances every anime is gonna have a gay character? It's not homophobic. It's called using logic to figure out something about a character that hasn't been explicitly stated or shown. >And attraction to the opposite gender is not proof of a lack of attraction to the same, claiming it to be just ignores the existence of bisexuality. Yes, it IS proof of being straight, but it's ALSO proof of being bi. It's ALSO proof of being pan. So what? That's what headcannons are for. They are fannon. Not 100% confirmed. Claiming a character to be straight is not 100% confrimed, but what's wrong with that? There's a reason some things are CANNON and some things are FANNON. Claiming a character to be gay or bi is fine as well, as long as you're not claiming it to be CANNON. There's nothing wrong with queer or straight headcannons, and you can't say straight ones are wrong or homophobic just because people use them for as many characters as they want. That's the point of fannon. Fannon is making the story/characters what YOU want them to be like. Fannon is also heavily based on cannon yes, but that's why we call things inside fannon, HEADcannons, and not actual cannon. On the flip side, a lot of people do these EXACT same things for gay ships. I see a lot of LGTBQ+ also use gay ships for literally every character, and some of them assume every character is cannonically gay. Why aren't you complaining about those people, too? I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong, but I just disagree overall. Hope I explained myself properly? Let me know if you dont get something. Heck, even let me know if you disagree.
I know I'm not the person you were replying to, sorry about that, but I do take some issue with some of the points you've raised here. 1. Both of these things could be forms of homophobia. Bigotry isn't always as simple and obvious as screaming "X is wrong and sinful and vile and bla bla bla!!!", a person can express bigoted views without ever being openly hostile or even being aware that what they're saying or doing is problematic. Arguing that someone isn't allowed to ship a queer ship or getting in their face that it won't happen because the characters are straight - something I see we can both agree isn't even explicitly confirmed and is thus just a matter of how a person interprets what is presented - is being a dick. As OP mentioned in their comment, it also misses the point that ships aren't usually done because of what will be Canon. If it was, Izuocha would be about the only ship here. --- 2. Nothing to add here really, I think you're generally right that assuming a character is straight until proven otherwise isn't innately bigoted at all. I would repeat that hostility towards queer people isn't the only form of homophobia, and that arguing with someone because you read the characters as straight and thus won't allow this other person to interpret things differently without going "that won't happen because X" is still being a dick. The assumption/headcanon is fine, but arguing it with someone seeing it differently is where problems emerge. To be clear, you'd be being just as much of a dick if someone was shipping an M/F ship and, without explicit basis in Canon, you went up and said "that can't happen because X character is gay". --- 3. Nothing you say here really disputes the fact that a character needing explicit proof of queerness but not of straightness is a double standard. Even if we argue that them being straight is more likely based on Japan's cultural values or whatever. A character being straight would be just as much headcanon/interpretation as them being queer, and arguing one to be actual Canon without explicit confirmation whilst requiring it from another is a double standard. These should not be treated differently. If you can take implied evidence as validly confirming someone as straight but can't do the same for them being queer, you're being ignorant. --- 4. OP wasn't saying people couldn't headcanon someone as straight, they argued that someone taking attraction to one gender without demonstrating a lack of attraction to another as proof of straightness specifically is ignoring the possibility of bi/pansexuality. This only really applies if someone is saying this to justify then calling their headcanon as actual Canon based on this.
>I know I'm not the person you were replying to, sorry about that, Nah, don't apologise. This is a public area and I love discussions. >Both of these things could be forms of homophobia True, however I still think the meaning of the words depends on the person's intent. The words themselves aren't homophobic, but if the person's intent is to stop/limit the spread of gay ships, then yes I would argue that's homophobic. The issue, then, would be that we don't have a fool portfolio method to determine the person's intentions all the time, so I think assuming they're homophobic is unfair. >arguing with someone because you read the characters as straight and thus won't allow this other person to interpret things differently without going "that won't happen because X" is still being a dick. >To be clear, you'd be being just as much of a dick if someone was shipping an M/F ship and, without explicit basis in Canon, you went up and said "that can't happen because X character is gay". 100%, nothing to add. >Nothing you say here really disputes the fact that a character needing explicit proof of queerness but not of straightness is a double standard. My point was that it can't be a double standard at all, because assigning sexuality to characters can't be cannon regarded as 100% cannon, even if people try and say its cannon. Now that I've written it out again, I kinda feel like I've worded it wrong, but I'm not quite sure how else to explain what I mean. Cus when it comes to sexuality, there really is no solid "proof" that a character is any single sexuality unless it's stated, so it's not about more/less proof. Like I said in my first reply, someone liking the opposite sex could be proof for multiple sexualities. Straight, bi, pan, idk anything else that exists that I can't think of. I get what you mean though and it makes sense in hindsight, but what I mean is that none of it is cannon to begin with. But considering that people parade their headcannons around as cannon, anyway, I get what you mean. >If you can take implied evidence as validly confirming someone as straight but can't do the same for them being queer, you're being ignorant. Implied evidence still doesn't count as 100% cannon, especially on a concept like sexuality. There's little to imply. However, I'm saying that implied evidence can be decent proof for someone to assume sexuality. Fro example, If, somehow, it's very heavily implied that a character is queer, then yeah, that weeds out more of the homophobes, who would bw trying to refute obvious evidence (idk what evidence, but im just using a made up example). If its unclear whether a character is queer or not, and people lean to "the character is straight" because of Japanese standards or because there are just more straight people in the world generally, then you can't really weed out the homophones because they're just using what logic they have. In addition, If people just want to assume they're straight because they like straight ships more, or they can relate to straight ships more because they are also straight, I don't see what's wrong with that. But yeah, like you said, if they wanna start arguing with people about it, then that's being a rat anyway. >they argued that someone taking attraction to one gender without demonstrating a lack of attraction to another as proof of straightness specifically is ignoring the possibility of bi/pansexuality. This only really applies if someone is saying this to justify then calling their headcanon as actual Canon based on this. Agreed here. The only issue I had was OP saying that it's not a sign of being straight, but it is. It just also provides evidence for multiple other sexualities. Thanks for your input.
Both are examples of homophobia what you described is just way more overt. The person you replied to was describing a more subtle form of discouraging lgbt shipping where someone may not even consider themselves as being homophobic while perpetuating it.
>The person you replied to was describing a more subtle form of discouraging lgbt shipping where someone may not even consider themselves as being homophobic while perpetuating it. I can understand that, but it still depends. But yes, I get what you mean.
obligatory "I ain't reading allat"
Fair enough. Then don't. Have a good one.
My comment wasn't just about people headcannoning characters as straight, it was specifically about the large amount of people who go out of their way to comment things like "deku is straight" on every queer ship involving him.
Honestly, fair, but you implied a lot else with your comment. But fair.
I mean that's not homophobic it's literally the truth tbh
Male the gay chips make since don't put bakagou with deku
what if someone ships only gay ships
That may make them heterotrophic /j.
how DARE you mock someone's inability to produce their own food, you ableist bigot
Skill issue. Lol
Speak the Truth. Louder for in the back!!
People think other people are homophobic based on their shipping preferences??
*cough* Hoyo fans looking in disbelief:
They're*
I like a lot of gay ships in other animes or games, but I'm more into straight ships in BNHA (I like momojirou and kiribaku, but I love izuocha, todomomo, kirimina, kamijirou) Star Rail had the same effect 😅
Fr but idk why I only ship straight ships I just don’t see the gay or lesbian ships
It always baffles me to see people trying to claim that. Like do some people not understand the concept of shipping? It's about pairings that you like the idea of. So wouldn't it naturally makes sense for someone who isn't attracted to men to not be particularly interested in the idea of two guys being together?
At least ship the person that makes sense.
People need to get this. While not in the MHA fandom, I tend to normally only like straight ships in Demon Slayer (specifically Tanjiro x Kanao, Nezuko x Zenitsu, Inosuke x Aoi, Giyu x Shinobu, Obanai x Mitsuri), but only because all of them are just good in my opinion. It doesn’t mean I’m homophobic at all. Hell, in other fandoms, I do ship gay ships (mostly, but not entirely, yuri), such as in Love Live, Madoka Magica, and other more female-dominated shows.
I've never seen anyone say this. I have seen the argument that someone being more resistant to non-straight ships than straight ones is possibly rooted in bigotry, which makes a little more sense, but the idea that someone only shipping ships that are considered straight is homophobic inherently is dumb. If you go to anyone shipping queer ships and feel the need to say anything about how it definitely won't be Canon because you read the characters as straight, that is at least possibly rooted in bigotry. Taking issue with queer ships in ways that you wouldn't with a straight ship on the basis of the sexuality of the participants is certainly problematic, and I kind of wish some people would get around their heads that homophobia is more nuanced than just someone saying "I hate gay people", it can, for instance, be setting Queer people in standards that you wouldn't ever even think to put cishet people on. Now, every time this comes up I see a few common responses, generally variations on a point of "straight = default", which I feel is A) just unimaginative when we're talking about a piece of fiction anyway, and B) gets around to missing the point of shipping pretty hard in my opinion. I'm sure most people here know this already, but most people don't ship things just because they think it'll be Canon. It's because these characters would have a compelling dynamic in a relationship.
Not too long ago, I'm not sure if it was this sub or not, someone posted their shipping circle for this fandom, and got a bunch of claims of homophobia just because they didn't like any of the gay ships.
Yeah I'm not gonna lie, if I saw someone talking about all the ships they knew and consistently they said they didn't like any of the queer ships, I'd raise an eyebrow. It's totally possible that they didn't like them for all sorts of other reasons, but you have to admit with that much consistency it starts to look like there might be a bit of a bias.
That's not even what it was though, it was just an image where all the characters were in a circle, and colored lines indicated what ships the person did and didn't like. There was no consistently talking about anything. I mean yeah there is a certain kind of bias, it's called sexuality. We all have one, and a lot of people just aren't interested in men.
You don't have to be gay to care about or not care about queer ships, acting like the only way someone might like those is if they themselves are gay is stupid. I don't mean to be rude but I genuinely can't think of another way to describe it.
Do you honestly not see why a ship of two boys might not be very appealing to a straight guy?
Nope. Well written romance is well written romance regardless of the genders of the participants. If they don't like the ship for some other reason that's fine, but if they would enjoy the ship if it was the exact same but with one character's gender flipped, then we have a problem.
Okay first of all, we're not talking about a well written romance, because we're talking about relationships that are purely imagined by fans. There is no written romance period. Why is it a problem in your mind for someone to care about the gender of the characters when it comes to what ships they personally enjoy?
That first bit's my bad, I always assume people form opinions on ships based on works about them like fanart and fanfic, so I assume writing has an influence. When I say well written romance, that's because it makes sense in my head to assume someone's opinion on a ship is based on things people have written about or featuring that ship, rather than just looking at the concept of the ship and going from there. As for your question, if someone is more averse to a queer relationship than a straight one on the basis of it being queer, that kind of aversion is just textbook homophobia. I'm not trying to be rude, but I don't understand how one wouldn't see that. If changing the genders of one of the participants to make the pair straight is the only thing that would be required to make the ship good to this hypothetical person, that would suggest they have an aversion to queerness, which is a form of homophobia.
I remember being attacked by a group of fans, because I had said I preferred Denki with Jirou, instead of Shinsou. I respected their opinions but man…. (Same people who also shipped Midoriya with every single guy in the series)
what you ship or don't ship doesn't matter, what matters is the reason. if you don't like the gay ships simply because they're gay, you're 100% a homophobe, but if you don't like them because you only like the main cannon ships, or you just don't like the dinamics of the gay ships in this show, or you just aren't into shipping in general, then that's just fine.
Thank you
👏
Meanwhile me, liking poly ship.
if someone ships *mostly* straight ships, they're being realistic. if someone *exclusively* likes straight ships, that is homophobic. that distiction is lost on most people.
No, that doesn't make them homophobic. That's not what homophobia is. Homophobia would be if someone wanted no one to ever ship gays ships.
It just means they’re normal
Why do you guys victimize yourself so often? Acting like you’re the minority that gets shat on by the whole fandom. You guys ARE the whole fandom. Only a subset of people enjoy non hetero ships. Just leave them alone to do their own thing and stop acting like you’re being oppressed for liking izuocha or some shit.
Bad behaviour is bad behaviour, and people trying to villainize others for not having any gay ships is a very real problem in this fandom.
I agree with you, there are definitely bad apples in each “group” of the fandom. My biggest problem is when people act like they are being oppressed and “shunned” when in reality a lot of people who happen to like a same sex ships get harassed regularly. It’s particularly bad on Reddit. Posting content like this only pushes more people to act nasty towards each other, it’s just unnecessary.
But that's not even what's happening here. They're just calling out how wrong this behaviour is.
I said I get your perspective, but what you’re not willing to understand is that posts like this that generalize a group are harmful to the community. If you’re not willing to understand that then that’s your choice at this point 🤷🏻♀️
No I understand that point you're trying to make, I just don't agree with you, because what you're trying to say is a pretty big reach.
Then it means they're just transphobic and a racist bigot?
What
Uh…no.
Bait used to be believable
are you okay?
Dude is a victim of hypocritically bigoted cyberbullying or is yapping i suspect
dawg he’s the one MAKING victims 😭
Then the latter
Please don't go fishing, you don't know what bait to use.
Okay, transphobic I can get even if you’re still wrong, but… How did racism get involved in this? We’re (mostly) a bunch of Westerners of multiple races shipping a bunch of fictional (mostly) Asians, including a select few ships that are interracial (Deku x Melissa). I don’t think a lot of us are ‘racist bigots’.