Meta: Cara Mason and the Bisexual Paradox
I have Thoughts about the latest LOTS episode. About the AU and what it says about Richard; about the writing and why I'm not entirely satisfied with it (call it The Curious Case of Kahlan's Passiveness *g*); about our heroes' ruthlessness. But I'm not writing about that right now - there's something more important on my mind. So I'm going to focus on one particular aspect, one that's not limited to LOTS although this episode makes an excellent example.
I call it the Bisexual Paradox.
We're all longing for more queer representation on TV. I'm bi; I especially want more bi characters on screen. But what happens when we get them? Sometimes, how we react when we do get them makes me twitch.
Bi or omni; not straight but also not gay or lesbian. Look at this: as soon as such a character has been established as bisexual or omnisexual, at least a significant section of fandom starts resenting anything that depicts them in a relationship with someone of the opposite gender. There's a palpable sense of betrayal when a bi or omni character is shown having meaningful opposite-sex relationships.
I imagine most of us have felt that at times. It's not very surprising; we want visible queer relationships on screen, and there's not much queerness visible in a bi character who's in an established monogamous het relationship. In an ideal world we wouldn't need that visibility so much that every single instance of it is precious; in the real world we certainly do. But at the same time, if these characters must only be depicted in gay/lesbian relationships to be visibly queer, where does that leave us? With a character who's not really shown as bi, either.
Are bi characters only allowed to have same-sex relationships, their bisexuality affirmed merely through past love interests? As a bi woman, I resent that. Sometimes it can feel like bi characters are being co-opted for gay and lesbian identities.
And yet I've felt that sense of betrayal myself. It's a gut reaction; something visible is taken away, leaving something far less obvious, and I think: No. Then I catch myself and cringe. That's the bisexual paradox.
So here's this: When Torchwood comes around again (which I do hope will happen in the foreseeable future), Jack Harkness is allowed to have a female main love interest. It doesn't undermine his sexuality; it doesn't undermine the queerness of Torchwood; it doesn't bring Jack or his show back into the fold of heteronormativity. So long as his same-sex relationships aren't being elided, erased, or otherwise invalidated by the text, that is or should be no problem whatsoever.
Because Jack Harkness is not gay. And on Legend of the Seeker, Cara is not a lesbian.
So yes, Cara Mason is allowed to have a male love interest. Even a male soulmate, if needs be - and hell, if that were the way it went I'd definitely not complain about getting a monogamous bisexual character! Some clichés need all the undermining they can get.
Let's look a little closer at Cara again. Cara has two established love interests on this show prior to this week's episode: Leo and Dahlia. Now we're getting thrown into an AU in which Cara was never made Mord'Sith and her life took a vastly different turn.
We find Cara as a teacher, a widow with two small children. And we find her meeting Leo again, whom she had a brief relationship with in the original timeline. (Whatever one might think of the Cara/Leo relationship - and I'm definitely among those who didn't feel she was quite in love with him, although there were certainly feelings - her attraction to him isn't exactly coming out of nowhere.)
It all looks very heteronormative at first glance, this AU. There's Richard's and Kahlan's wedded bliss; there's Cara's previous marriage; there's the budding Cara/Leo relationship. Never mind that all of this is shown as only on the surface a better world than the original one; never mind that it all falls into darkness quickly enough. All of that is there; you can't deny it.
But there's also Dahlia. Not only does this episode reaffirm the strength of Cara's feelings for Dahlia in the original universe (it's only seeing Dahlia confessed that distracts her in a fight so that Richard can knock her out) - look at Dahlia in the AU world.
Look at the scene where she receives orders to kill Cara. Dahlia, unlike Cara, is still Mord'Sith in this universe - and yet when she hears the name of a girl she hasn't seen since they were children, she has a strong, unmistakable "oh fuck DO NOT WANT" reaction. That's a pretty damn strong bond there: Dahlia knows immediately who Cara is; she remembers their bond; she's not at all happy about her orders. The episode heavily implies that in either universe, Cara and Dahlia were childhood sweethearts. In this one, they were ripped apart. Dahlia does set aside her remaining feelings and fulfils her orders - she's Mord'Sith; she's been broken three times, and in this universe she had to go through all of that without Cara by her side. So she does kill Cara, but does that invalidate any of the above? No. Nothing is being elided, erased or invalidated here.
No. And it's just as easy to imagine a third universe in which "fate", as Zedd puts it, brings Cara and Leo together again while she's in Darken Rahl's service, and she kills him. Or a fourth in which neither Cara nor Dahlia became Mord'Sith, and they lived happily ever after together. (I'd like to see this AU, btw.)
Do I wish this episode had spent more time on Cara's part of the storyline, had spelled some of this out more clearly? Sure I do. (Just as I wish it had criticised Richard a bit more ouvertly, and made Kahlan a lot less subdued and passive.) Do I like the prominence Leo is given? Not particularly, no. But all in all? I have no problem with this.
This episode might not have been as brilliant as last week's, on a variety of different counts, but I take nothing back from what I said a week ago. They're still doing it right.
I call it the Bisexual Paradox.
We're all longing for more queer representation on TV. I'm bi; I especially want more bi characters on screen. But what happens when we get them? Sometimes, how we react when we do get them makes me twitch.
Bi or omni; not straight but also not gay or lesbian. Look at this: as soon as such a character has been established as bisexual or omnisexual, at least a significant section of fandom starts resenting anything that depicts them in a relationship with someone of the opposite gender. There's a palpable sense of betrayal when a bi or omni character is shown having meaningful opposite-sex relationships.
I imagine most of us have felt that at times. It's not very surprising; we want visible queer relationships on screen, and there's not much queerness visible in a bi character who's in an established monogamous het relationship. In an ideal world we wouldn't need that visibility so much that every single instance of it is precious; in the real world we certainly do. But at the same time, if these characters must only be depicted in gay/lesbian relationships to be visibly queer, where does that leave us? With a character who's not really shown as bi, either.
Are bi characters only allowed to have same-sex relationships, their bisexuality affirmed merely through past love interests? As a bi woman, I resent that. Sometimes it can feel like bi characters are being co-opted for gay and lesbian identities.
And yet I've felt that sense of betrayal myself. It's a gut reaction; something visible is taken away, leaving something far less obvious, and I think: No. Then I catch myself and cringe. That's the bisexual paradox.
So here's this: When Torchwood comes around again (which I do hope will happen in the foreseeable future), Jack Harkness is allowed to have a female main love interest. It doesn't undermine his sexuality; it doesn't undermine the queerness of Torchwood; it doesn't bring Jack or his show back into the fold of heteronormativity. So long as his same-sex relationships aren't being elided, erased, or otherwise invalidated by the text, that is or should be no problem whatsoever.
Because Jack Harkness is not gay. And on Legend of the Seeker, Cara is not a lesbian.
So yes, Cara Mason is allowed to have a male love interest. Even a male soulmate, if needs be - and hell, if that were the way it went I'd definitely not complain about getting a monogamous bisexual character! Some clichés need all the undermining they can get.
Let's look a little closer at Cara again. Cara has two established love interests on this show prior to this week's episode: Leo and Dahlia. Now we're getting thrown into an AU in which Cara was never made Mord'Sith and her life took a vastly different turn.
We find Cara as a teacher, a widow with two small children. And we find her meeting Leo again, whom she had a brief relationship with in the original timeline. (Whatever one might think of the Cara/Leo relationship - and I'm definitely among those who didn't feel she was quite in love with him, although there were certainly feelings - her attraction to him isn't exactly coming out of nowhere.)
It all looks very heteronormative at first glance, this AU. There's Richard's and Kahlan's wedded bliss; there's Cara's previous marriage; there's the budding Cara/Leo relationship. Never mind that all of this is shown as only on the surface a better world than the original one; never mind that it all falls into darkness quickly enough. All of that is there; you can't deny it.
But there's also Dahlia. Not only does this episode reaffirm the strength of Cara's feelings for Dahlia in the original universe (it's only seeing Dahlia confessed that distracts her in a fight so that Richard can knock her out) - look at Dahlia in the AU world.
Look at the scene where she receives orders to kill Cara. Dahlia, unlike Cara, is still Mord'Sith in this universe - and yet when she hears the name of a girl she hasn't seen since they were children, she has a strong, unmistakable "oh fuck DO NOT WANT" reaction. That's a pretty damn strong bond there: Dahlia knows immediately who Cara is; she remembers their bond; she's not at all happy about her orders. The episode heavily implies that in either universe, Cara and Dahlia were childhood sweethearts. In this one, they were ripped apart. Dahlia does set aside her remaining feelings and fulfils her orders - she's Mord'Sith; she's been broken three times, and in this universe she had to go through all of that without Cara by her side. So she does kill Cara, but does that invalidate any of the above? No. Nothing is being elided, erased or invalidated here.
No. And it's just as easy to imagine a third universe in which "fate", as Zedd puts it, brings Cara and Leo together again while she's in Darken Rahl's service, and she kills him. Or a fourth in which neither Cara nor Dahlia became Mord'Sith, and they lived happily ever after together. (I'd like to see this AU, btw.)
Do I wish this episode had spent more time on Cara's part of the storyline, had spelled some of this out more clearly? Sure I do. (Just as I wish it had criticised Richard a bit more ouvertly, and made Kahlan a lot less subdued and passive.) Do I like the prominence Leo is given? Not particularly, no. But all in all? I have no problem with this.
This episode might not have been as brilliant as last week's, on a variety of different counts, but I take nothing back from what I said a week ago. They're still doing it right.