Board Thread:Spoilers!/@comment-26385535-20160127061149/@comment-27792191-20160214182619

ChocolatEyes613 wrote: Eskaver wrote: Perfect! They were already a close trio XD...It isn't the audience fault because it was definitely presented to be Phillip, but even so, they could just come out and say on the show "her", "Aurora" or something at least. No reason should they play the pronoun game. There is the possibility, that the LGBT couple will be Ruby and Dorothy. So, Mulan can still go and have a threesome with Phillip and Aurora.

For some odd reason I think, OUaT's Dorothy and Toto are one in the same. Ruby went back to the Enchanted Forest, to search for more werewolves. Seeing her new friends happy, then gives Mulan the courage to reunite with her best friends. I love the Dorothy/Toto idea! Didn't Ruby say that she was looking for "people like me"? Whether or not that is meant to be a love interest is beside the point ... it can be implied, or not. I feel sad for Mulan's heartbreak. But the ideas expressed in this thread, that a warrior lesbian has to be paired with a "girly" girl, make me uncomfortable. I've been told it's a stereotype, that we heterosexuals want to think that gay/lesbian relationships have a "masculine/feminine" component so we can pretend that we understand those relationships as an echo of our own. Part of avoiding stereotypes is taking any person (or relationship) as an individual, rather than making sweeping generalizations that won't ever apply to everyone in that "group." And on the other hand, from my stereotypical glasses I am willing to see Ruby as bisexual because of her adventurous and high-spirited nature. I see college coeds IRL coming out as lesbian or bisexual without shame and without fitting a "butch" stereotype; they state they are open to people as individuals, male or female. Storybrooke Ruby is a millenial, which (in abstract) aren't as pressured to fit stereotyped sexual roles. As far as I know, Mulan does not have a Storybrooke persona? Again as a "heteronormative" (?) viewer I perceived Mulan's affection as being for Phillip. I didn't notice the pronoun game in The Bear King ep until you all pointed it out: she says she "loved *someone*", but "didn't tell *them*". Singular/plural number disagreement, and no masculine or feminine indicator of "him/her." With your perceptions of her first confession of love, I guess it could imply Aurora, Phillip, or both. But while we are on the subject of inclusion, I'd like to take issue with the show's token non-white females. The men have been played by decent actors - but the non-white actresses have been *terribly* stiff and wooden. I mean cringe-worthy. It's not that damn hard to find a decent actress of any color. So why has OUAT chosen poor actresses to play non-white females? It's as if they are trying to demonstrate that only white women can act. Or perhaps they've required stiffness for all of the traditional pretty princesses that are not leads. (Ariel was awkward, and Cinderella and Aurora were no great prizes, either.) :-( Mulan previously performed in the mid-range - she is much better in the Bear King.   Would it be further marginalizing to form Mulan into a non-hetero role? Or is it an important thing, to give viewers an example that an Asian or non-white woman isn't required to be heterosexual?   I've talked myself in circles. To anyone who is still reading this, thanks for listening. ;-D