Yes you are, you are concluding they are straight unless the work specifically says they are not. Other people do the opposite, and this bothers you so much that you felt the need to start a thread on how much this bothers you. This could be in a textbook, it’s such a good example of irony.
And we all know that Cap is definitely topping Bucky.
Indeed so. 
My wife has been an aficionado of (and writer of) fan fiction for two decades. In fact, Steve / Bucky has been one of her favorite pairings ever since the first Cap film came out in 2011.
I’m not sure I entirely understand why the primary audience for “slash” male / male fanfic (and most of the writers of it) seem to be middle-aged and older women, and that’s probably gone back as far as Kirk / Spock (and Starsky / Hutch) fanfic in the 1970s (if not before), but my wife’s observations of it, from numerous conventions and forums, is that the community is overwhelmingly female.
QFT.
If it doesn’t show up in the book then it only matters to you. Your process might be interesting to hear about but ultimately it doesn’t matter. If you had information that was supposed to be subtly part of the character and it doesn’t come through to the reader then your failure isn’t important either. What’s on the page is. Characters may exist in a writers head but to everyone else they exist only on the page. That goes for gay, republican, Lutheran, high cholesterol, or being a big fan of Duran Duran.
I mean, he could be engaging in some sort of Schroedinger’s Sexuality where any given character is simultaneously all and no orientation until something happens in the story to collapse the literary waveform, but that seems unlikely. Humans don’t tend to work that way.
Definitely.
And otherwise, the only real emotional moment for the character that I remember is her being face to face with the other Valkyrie, who died to save her. That’s a moment that struck me at the time as probably establishing a romantic text for the relationship (and I don’t think I’m a big hoyay-er). I didn’t think about it after the film because it didn’t matter to me, but it seems perfectly viable for someone to take the same message from it that I did = Valkyrie was in a relationship with this other woman.
I agree, just as important. Its important to you as a writer. Not to me as a reader. It’s important to some writers to come up with a complex back story for characters. Other writers don’t do that. You can have a full dossier on a character’s background and write a shitty character. Or have a great character without knowing what job he had in high school. What’s on the page?
Readers have varying levels of ability to perceive. In the Thor movie, I didn’t think it was subtle or hidden at all, though this OP thought it wasn’t there.
Soldiers sacrifice for each other without sex being involved. Without additional information the only thing shown was an unnamed and unknown soldier sacrificing herself for another. It’s what they give out medals for. The only thing notable about the one who sacrificed herself is that she looked like the comic book character Valkyrie. You don’t need to be lovers for there to be survivors guilt. Go to a VA hospital and see for yourself.
Yeah, I found it a very non-subtle statement that there was a romantic relationship. It uses very well-established film tropes. If we’re going to talk about audience response, you don’t actually get to invalidate mine.
Loach, I think you’re being too reductionist. In a movie, the cinematography, music, and editing are all viable pieces of information that color the interpretation of a given scene.
The trope of one soldier (or cop, or knight) sacrificing themselves for another without any romantic involvement is just as established. And since these were two soldiers that’s what was on the screen. For there to be something else all that was needed was a touch, a glance, anything but they decided to not put it in. It’s really no different than reading a sexual overtone into Cap trying to save Bucky on the train and failing.
Right. We are talking about a very short scene to begin with. All that was used to show the power and might of the Valkyries, how Hela was about to cut through them with little effort, and establish how our character survived. What was left to interpret as a deep relationship was at most a second long facial expression on the unnamed one. Our Valkyrie showed grief for a second. Grief does not mean lovers. It doesn’t mean they weren’t either. It just means for whatever reason they didn’t show it.
Sure, but… cinematography is a thing, you know? Filmmakers frame shots and pair it with musical cues to communicate significant information all the time, and this scene was very strongly communicating that this particular woman meant something to Val above and beyond what she felt for every other woman who was killed in that scene.
I 100% saw that glance there. I’d also argue that, given there was a cut scene that explicitly established Val as bi, that glance was intended to be read as establishing a romantic connection between the two characters.
To be perfectly honest, I didn’t pick-up any romantic overtones from that scene, I thought it was more of a familial relationship. But in a vacuum I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that interpretation and with the other facts at hand (the comics, deleted scene) the romantic interpretation is the most correct.
As far as Steve and Bucky goes, we are outright told they are interested in women.
Yeah, the OP seems to be conflating two things. One is situations where a relationship is ambiguous, and some viewers read a homosexual relationship into that ambiguity. This is somewhat complicated by the fact that different people will have different standards for “ambiguity,” particularly if its someone who has a background in queer expression in the arts, where such ambiguity was often a deliberate and necessary precaution. Val and her dead comrade fit into this category. IMO, it’s no more or less correct to say that Val, in this film, is queer than it is to say that she’s straight.
The other situation is when fans take two characters with an expressly non-sexual relationship, and fantasize about what it would be like if they did have a sexual relationship. “Bucky and Cap” fit into this category, as do “Kirk and Spock,” but also “Mulder and Scully” and “Picard and Dr. Crusher.” Nobody is arguing that the characters of Captain America and Bucky Barnes, as shown in the popular films, are actually gay characters. But a lot of people like to pretend that they are, because it’d be fun and/or sexy if they were.
Agreed.
Directors 50 years ago maybe could have two male soldiers in such a moment without most people thinking “Hey, they’re gay!” but I don’t think that’s the world of film making we’re living in now. As with every art form, tropes change and meanings get conveyed in the shorthand the audience has already been primed to see. Fifty years ago, you’d spend a whole movie explaining it. Twenty years ago, maybe that takes a chunk of exposition. Five years ago, it turns into a quick moment. (The years may be off, but the progression is right-ish.)
I think that audience members in general should stop attempting to make 100% definitely absolutely canon statements about certain character traits that a person may or may not have when there is little or no evidence to suggest one way or another.
If a character is never seen in a romantic or sexual relationship with another character, then we should not make 100% definitely absolutely canon statements about their romantic or sexual preferences one way or the other, unless the creator gives direct input on the matter.
Let me use another franchise to make my example, since I’m more comfortable with this than the Marvel universe.
Some people say that Olivia “Sombra” Colomar from Overwatch is 100% definitely absolutely canonically gay because of the way that she teases Katya Volskaya in her animated short. Some people say, no, that’s nonsense, there’s no indication of there being any sort of romantic or sexual interest there, it’s all conjecture, there’s no hard evidence for it, therefore, Sombra is 100% definitely absolutely canonically straight, because if you’re not 100% definitely absolutely canonically gay, then you must be 100% definitely absolutely canonically the opposite, the default, which is straight.
Both read far too much into things that aren’t even there for the sake of validating their own beliefs about a character without any well-defined traits in the areas of romance and sexuality.
Me? I just like to ship characters and ogle fan-art and write smut about them, not worrying about whether it’s “canon” or not and definitely not trying to assert my fantasies about their romantic or sexual interests as true, verifiable fact.
There was a “campaign,” which these days means 1 person on Twitter and a few others retweeting (low effort times) tomake Captain America gay. That was incredibly bothersome, as he was well established as heterosexual, Are they saying that it’s a choice, or that to be straight you have to be a womanizer/visibly in a relationship? Or that a guy whose main superpower is being brave is too scared to come out of the closet, and instead spends all his time with beards?
I thought the fact that they were playing an Indigo Girls song pretty much gave it away.
No, I haven’t seen the movie yet, but I hope to soon.
And don’t you guys even get me started about the LoTR movies. Frodo was not gay!!! And Gandfalf was not… oh, that’s a bit of sticky wicket isn’t it?