That godawful “genderbends are transphobic” post is as good a time as any to argue this: my biggest problem with “your fave is problematic” stuff is that it takes a valid way of interpreting a story or trope and treats that as the only correct way of interpreting it. Like if they say a story is racist, I look at their argument, and usually they’ve constructed a self-consistent argument for why a racist interpretation of the story would be possible. Then there are other, less- or non-racist interpretations that would also be possible, and the only way to figure out which specific one the author intended would be to ask them directly. I do think writers have some obligation not to muddle their message, e.g. I’ve argued that M. Butterfly can easily be read as sexist despite the playwright’s explicit statement that he didn’t intend sexism. But I think there’s more to analysis than just picking the most offensive interpretation and saying that’s the one true interpretation.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
