![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Okay, here’s something I’ve noticed that’s been bugging me, so I’m gonna go over it just to see if I’m crazy or if anyone else has noticed it. And that is this unspoken assumption in most fiction that depictions of male homosexuality are artistic, while depictions of female homosexuality are base/exploitative/pornographic. Like, by definition. To whit:
If a man and a man kiss, it’s transgressive and subversive. I.e. good.
If a woman and a woman kiss, it’s titillating and gratuitous. I.e. bad.
The impression I get is that most fiction is geared toward a male audience, so something a male audience would theoretically find pleasing (pretty girls kissing) is therefore pandering. While something a male audience would theoretically not enjoy (handsome men kissing) is challenging! And art! Woo!
Which I personally find ridiculous. Obviously, your average showrunner is coming to be well-aware of how vocal slash fandom can be, since a lot of shows are OBVIOUSLY catering to women with a bromance/homoerotic interest. So, for instance, John and Sherlock kissing because they’re undercover or they’ve had too many martinis could be just as gratuitous as the same thing happening to Rizzoli and Isles, just to a straight female audience.
Of course, there’s no reason a lesbian kiss, even one between ridiculously pretty ladies that would be male-audience-friendly, has to be gratuitous. To take a pretty standard scene: Emma and Regina are in a relationship. They get into a fight and one of them storms off, only to get into a crisis in which she’s almost killed. That night, relieved that they’re still together, the two make passionate love, signaling to the audience that the fight is forgiven and they have a renewed interest in making their relationship work. All well and good, right?
But I get the impression that for a lot of people, most especially progressive politically correct people, that scene would be derided as pandering and crude because it involved two beautiful women. There’d be jokes about OuaT trying to appeal to 13-year-old boys. But if that scene happened between Captain Hook and Graham (you can have that one for free, slashers), there’d be lots of talk about how brave the showrunners were for honestly depicting a homosexual relationship.
Not that depictions of male homosexuality are all beer and chips. Depending on the show, you’d probably be far more likely to get a cheap homoerotic moment between women than men (notice that OuaT has a couple of teased lesbian relationships; c’mon, you’re telling me Belle/Ruby, Aurora/Mulan, and Regina/Emma are ALL unintentional? But no male character has a corresponding bromance). Buuut if there’s a serious depiction of a homosexual relationship, it’s likely to be between two guys.
Related: It seems like polysexuality comes in two brands on film. There’re one guy/two girl threesomes, which are always one time only ‘party!’ things (and generally comes off as two girls being into one guy and also each other a little but not too much, instead of three people all wanting each other). Then there’s one girl/two guys, which are always treated as epic, romantic open relationships that are transgressive and daring. Because there’re dudes kissing, you see. I don’t recall hearing about any show or movie where there’s an all-girl or all-guy threesome. Maybe that’s a little too transgressive.
