Just a little vid I did with all my fave femslashy fandoms. I love this song and it seemed to go so perfectly with these fandoms. Includes some Xena, Callica, Jemily, Camerah and Lindsay/Cindy.
Oh, and just to kind of add to that. The Lindsay/Cindy pairing definitely reminds me of Xena and Gabrielle. A brooding dark-haired tough chick and a lighthearted, happy-go-lucky petite kid that loves to follow her around with a tad bit of hero worship. Hmmm, yeah, sounds awfully familiar. :)
I don't know what it is with it either. Maybe it's something about being a Xenite that makes us so hyper aware of that particular archetype. To me, it's classic and I tend to see it everywhere, but I have such a love affair with X&G that I can't seem to help but see it.
It really is classic. I mean I've been reading manga/watching anime that go back way before Xena and you already have the same type of people in the same type of subtextual relationships.
Uber definitely knew what it was doing. It fit perfectly with what was already out there. But yeah I'm with you, X/G are the original ones in my head, from which all else makes sense. And seeing how they are the "perfect" couple I probably have a tendency to project them onto others.
I wonder if it's a lesbian thing though, or if the archetype works as well with a straight or gay couples.
I wonder if it's a lesbian thing though, or if the archetype works as well with a straight or gay couples.
Hmmmm, that's an interesting thought, and I'm thinking of some classic straight and gay ships (Batman and Robin, for instance). They fit into that same archetypical mold (the dark, brooding tortured soul and the younger, innocent protege/helper/companion). I can't seem to call up and common straight ship (Scully and Mulder, perhaps). I didn't watch X-Files much, but from what I know, I can see a similar archetype to X&G.
It makes you wonder if it's the characteristics that draw us to the pairing and not the gender/sexuality that we identify with. For example, I can see why lots of people ship Gabrielle and Ares (not that I would! :), but it's a similar concept to X&G.
I think you might be on to something, seeing how I enjoy all those pairings you mentioned. :D
I think there might be a certain amount of biased in some people. I mean a couple is just more interesting to watch if you somehow can relate, and sexuality and sex is part of that relation. Still now that you point it out I do think a lot of us are more drawn to specific archetypes rather than some other factor.
It's like how I've never been able to understand X/A. Not because they're straight cause to me that's irrelevant, but because there is nothing in the interactions and relationship that speaks to me. It's just a dynamic that holds no interest to me.
It's like how I've never been able to understand X/A. Not because they're straight cause to me that's irrelevant, but because there is nothing in the interactions and relationship that speaks to me. It's just a dynamic that holds no interest to me.
Exactly! It's for the same reason that I could never buy the Gabrielle/Joxer or Gabrielle/Perdicus pairing (or hell, even Gabrielle/Virgil!). Maybe it's because they're too much alike. X&G were very different from each other and could learn a lot and grow in many ways by interacting with each other. I still have a hard time seeing that in pairings.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-26 03:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-26 03:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-26 03:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-26 02:00 pm (UTC)Perhaps I should watch through WMC during Christmas to truly expand my femslash horizons. After all it's only one season, not many episodes.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-27 04:01 am (UTC)The first few WMC eps were SOOOOO subtexty!! I loved them. It was a shame it was cut short.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-27 04:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-27 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-29 03:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-29 07:20 am (UTC)Uber definitely knew what it was doing. It fit perfectly with what was already out there. But yeah I'm with you, X/G are the original ones in my head, from which all else makes sense. And seeing how they are the "perfect" couple I probably have a tendency to project them onto others.
I wonder if it's a lesbian thing though, or if the archetype works as well with a straight or gay couples.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-29 03:58 pm (UTC)Hmmmm, that's an interesting thought, and I'm thinking of some classic straight and gay ships (Batman and Robin, for instance). They fit into that same archetypical mold (the dark, brooding tortured soul and the younger, innocent protege/helper/companion). I can't seem to call up and common straight ship (Scully and Mulder, perhaps). I didn't watch X-Files much, but from what I know, I can see a similar archetype to X&G.
It makes you wonder if it's the characteristics that draw us to the pairing and not the gender/sexuality that we identify with. For example, I can see why lots of people ship Gabrielle and Ares (not that I would! :), but it's a similar concept to X&G.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-29 04:27 pm (UTC)I think there might be a certain amount of biased in some people. I mean a couple is just more interesting to watch if you somehow can relate, and sexuality and sex is part of that relation. Still now that you point it out I do think a lot of us are more drawn to specific archetypes rather than some other factor.
It's like how I've never been able to understand X/A. Not because they're straight cause to me that's irrelevant, but because there is nothing in the interactions and relationship that speaks to me. It's just a dynamic that holds no interest to me.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-29 06:00 pm (UTC)Exactly! It's for the same reason that I could never buy the Gabrielle/Joxer or Gabrielle/Perdicus pairing (or hell, even Gabrielle/Virgil!). Maybe it's because they're too much alike. X&G were very different from each other and could learn a lot and grow in many ways by interacting with each other. I still have a hard time seeing that in pairings.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-27 09:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-29 03:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-28 05:30 am (UTC):)
no subject
Date: 2008-11-29 03:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-30 10:21 pm (UTC)