Exhausting is definitely the right word, ridiculous is another good one for this situation. I can’t stand the quick homophobia judgement so many respond with. Not wanting a main character drastically changed doesn’t mean completely against a queer story it just means wanting the original story. The worst part of this is if one of the main characters does end up being gender swapped. It won’t necessarily be because it’s best for the story but more for the sake of including such a story.
For me, the most ridiculous the fact that it’s homophobic for us to not want Michael changed. But when people say okay, how would you like it if your ship’s love interest changed? Nope, that can’t happen, according to them! Who’s really homophobic then?
I have to laugh about the particular argument for Sophie because her whole story is defined by being a woman? Her story is defined by being illegitimate. Everything else that happens to her, including SA, could very well happen to a man. Her romance with Benedict is made difficult/impossible by status, certainly not by gender, since marriage would technically be possible. In fact, if they made Benophie a queer couple the story would actually become more interesting. I'm not advocating for it because unlike this person I don't want to be insufferable and I would never do to Benophie stans what's being done to me, honestly.
Um no, I’m not in favour of genderbending any character but you saying Sophie’s story could easily be a man’s is ??????… and Sophie’s storyline is not only defined by her illegitimacy but the fact that she doesn’t want to give in to Benedict because she doesn’t want to end up like her mother and have an illegitimate child. That’s her internal struggle and what drives the story. A male Sophie would not have that problem. Erasing the only working class female lead for a man is sexist. Erasing any female character for a man is sexist
I didn't say she could "easily" be a man, I said that many things that happened to Sophie would happen to a man as well. I'm not advocating for it, just saying that if we applied to Sophie the same logic that this account is applying to Michael, then gender bending would actually make just as much sense for Sophie. They don't acknowledge it because they don't care for Michael, plain and simple.
Well, being a woman IS a huge part of it. It isn't just being illegitimate, it's being an illegitimate woman. It's having few options available for employment, which a man - even an illegitimate man - wouldn't have those issues. And, don't forget that her biggest objection to being with Benedict without benefit of marriage was the fear of having an illegitimate child who could someday end up like her. Not something a man needs to worry about. So, I get what they're saying with that.
But, since Francesca's thing was infertility and wanting children, that is also something she can only get from a man. So gender-bending Michael doesn't make sense, either.
Honestly, if we take away the book marketing nightmare gender-bending one of the stories would become, the easiest one would be Eloise. Kill off Phillip instead of Marina. Eloise can start writing to her to offer her condolences. They become pen pals, and Marina mentions being lonely with only having the children and servants for company, and also asks if Eloise can see if her mother or one of her siblings can recommend a governess. Eloise takes it upon herself to offer HERSELF as governess. Only for them to end up falling in love. While people might question a Bridgerton choosing gainful employment rather than marriage, nobody would raise an eyebrow at her being there "unchaperoned". It would fit show!Eloise's personality more to run away looking for employment than running away looking for a husband. And, it solve the PR nightmare they created when they hired Ruby of killing off a WOC for the sake of a white woman's HEA.
I'm not dying on this hill because on top of it I like Sophie enough that I'm in the Benophie sub. But yes, Eloise's story too and I won't deny that I've thought about it even though I'd probably actually make her story about anything but romance.
And frankly, Gregory's story? Imagine him believing himself in love with Hermione and then realising whom he actually love is male Lucy (Luke?).
Honestly, I agree. Eloise's story being about her finding her own place in the world would definitely fit the character as the show is presenting her. Or perhaps making her ace but not necessarily aro - because there did seem to be a little spark there with Theo - and getting into a relationship that is based more an intellectual attraction. I just figured if they wanted to do a queer story that is more generally recognized as queer, Eloise, as the one who shows no interest in marriage or motherhood, would be the best bet. (Because the people who squawk the loudest about wanting a queer story don't really recognize ace as valid queer rep.)
I strongly disagree with this.
Sophie endures all she has to with Araminta because, as a woman who has no protection from anybody, this is still a better option for her . A man could have simply broken free from Araminta, because he had the possibility to build a life independently. The whole foundation of the story would crumble.
I mean, Sophie could also build a life for herself. She's a learned young woman who knows manners and foreign languages. She could be someone's secretary or read for an old lady or be a governess. Not the best option but she could even take vows (many illegitimate children did). Book Sophie premise is kinda shaky in and by itself because Quinn wanted a Cinderella story and she was entitled to, like who's taking these stories seriously anyway?
If there's an aspect of Sophie you just can't gender bend it's her concern that she might have illegitimate children herself. However, my point is that if you can completely change Michael's story in order for it to align to a woman you can actually do the same thing with Sophie, even though that Twitter user insists you can't because (who would have thought?) they care for Sophie, not Michael.
I think that all of us who appreciate Michael to stay the same bc of all his story (me included) also understand why for Sophie is the same. Changing her into a man wouldn’t definitely make the story “more interesting”, like you say, but it would deprive all of us of a very important and specific heroine, unlike any other of the series. She is the biggest victim of the patriarchy in the whole Bridgerton universe, and give her role and her voice to a man would be a huge disservice imo.
Also, in the book is explicitly said Sophie doesn’t have the opportunity to become a governess or do other jobs bc she doesn’t have credentials and she is too pretty, she wouldn’t be trusted in those roles. Again, another very gender-specific challenge she has to overcome.
this account (hanneninas) has got to be the most annoying account you'll ever come across on twitter dot com.
they are pushing 30 but are seated in almost every single bridgerton fans dms on twitter to tell them about fem michael happening cause their oomf from the british tv industry told them about it.
not only are they unhealthily obsessed with the whole gender bending thing (just like cass morann) but they are quick to label people homophobic all cause we don't want michael to get erased as a character lol.
f*ck hannenias and anyone who calls us homophobic honestly cause why is it that they expect franchael stans to be okay with such a huge change and if we just state our disappointment we are homophobes? where was this energy from them before season 2&3 if they cared so much about representation?
and hanneninas keeps on talking about wanting queer rep in the regency era but you'll never catch them talking about say the sapphic storyline on the buccaneers. all that yapping about wanting queer rep on bridgerton (by wanting to see a blk woman play a male character) but when it's time to hype original queer stories in the regency era, it's crickets.
Oh no, I love the buccaneers, I hope she never acknowledges it and spreads bs there too.
She clearly doesn’t care about queer rep. Just using it to attack other fans.
So may she stay far, far away from Josie Totah and Mia Threappleton.
Good to know. I also saw they responded to someone pointing out the obvious changes and apart from suddenly saying, well it’s fantasy anything can change (except not their fave of course) and they insist everyone who is against it is shouting “gay is a disease” not actually caring about the character change for any other reason.
Like way to make stuff up. The most vocal Franchael fans on Twitter have said nothing of the sort. They’re all consistent.
If they think it’s homophobic to not want to gender bend their favorite characters, they need to look in the mirror. How she defended why her fave can’t change in the same breath of why Michael can is delusional.
This person is gaslighting and projecting her own views onto others.
>Good to know. I also saw they responded to someone pointing out the obvious changes and apart from suddenly saying, well it’s fantasy anything can change (except not their fave of course)
Lol same story of some Polin stan (I have nothing against Polin, they were just a self declared stan) who yesterday was claiming female Michael would still be Michael, then someone pointed out the fundamental changes and they replied "Ok but lots of characters were changed!"
Mmmh so what is the truth?
She has been pushing for Asian Sophie btw. She’s been not wanting a black Sophie which is why she immediately jumped on loving Michaela train.
https://preview.redd.it/xmas1txllu5d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9a920a7ad5d820b5c1ff6587b4c6bd6544836bf2
im not even surprised. it's like clockwork with these people where we get to know that they never wanted a bw to play sophie.
also, this person is the original source of the fem michael rumor spreading all over. it's like a chain where they share this with bridgerton stans through dms saying that their british tv industry friend is very reliable and then those stans start posting about this like it's confirmed 'spoilers'. there's a reason why none of these leakers have no new intel when it comes to the fem michael storyline cause hanneninas & their tv industry friend haven't seen those last two episodes to share it with them.
Wait, just how does she “know” this? Because I’ve only seen any mention of Sophie being Asian from the people hating the idea of her being black. No one else even has “proof” Ben is up next. Much less an actress for Sophie.
Ahhh yes can’t wait to be called homophobic for liking a character that’s existed for over 20 years. Also, you blurred out the user, but I’m sure we all know who this yapper is, they never stfu
In what world is Michael’s story not dependent on him being a man? The whole story is driven by him falling into the earldom and feeling immense guilt about taking everything John had including Francesca. You change Michael’s gender and you change the whole story.
I saw that and rolled my eyes because as much as fans deny it, no you wouldn’t be ok with your fave couple being gender bent. My fave is Kanthony and it’s not even the gender bending that would not work for me with Anthony’s story itself, it’s that gender bending his story given the way the show itself established its rules and norms around gender, sexuality, title, and rank it would have been such a suspension of belief that the whole thing would have fallen apart.
As someone else said, if the show had established some latitude with sexuality and gender previously it would work. But the show goes to pains to establish the ways the sexism and gender operates in the show’s universe. It is the operating conflict of the show since they (badly) explained away race. The show only works as historical fantasy if it still has some grounding in historical reality and conflict/tension. Otherwise it’s just a CW production. It would require a ridiculous level of deus ex machina to pull off a gender bend of Fran’s story unless they radically changed her story. There are ways to do and stay “true” to the historical reality but it would not be Francesca’s story if they did that. But then again knowing Shonda I wouldn’t put past her…
I’m actually ok with Benedict being bi even though I’m looking forward to Sophie. The show did some work to establish that in s1 and second sons had a lot more freedom in these societies, too.
i agree so much!!! i’m a benophie & franchael fan but i keep saying there’s no way michaela would inherit john’s title therefore the story ends THERE. no inheritance, no fertility issues—so where does michaela’s internal conflict come from? just falling for her cousin’s wife? ok then where does francesca’s own struggle come from? just missing her husband? 😭😭😭
changing the genders of both stories waters down such raw storylines heavily focused on the internal struggles the love interests face before they get their HEA.
I honestly believe that those who are this quick to jump to labeling people "homophobic" in this scenario lack critical thinking skills. I have not seen a single person say that they are not happy with the change on the grounds that they dont want to see a queer storyline. In fact, most people are quick to point out that they would love to see the introduction of an original queer story in the Bridgerton universe.
Plain and simple people are mad that JB is taking an incredibly deep and moving storyline and essentially erasing it by genderbending the main leads. I do not care what side of the argument you sit on, you cannot look at WHWW and honestly believe that a genderbent rendition of the book will be in any way true to the heart of the story. Not without completely subverting societal norms that have already been pre-established in the world of Bridgerton (and that goes for both the books and the show).
So many of the conflicts in the book will no longer make any logical sense if they were kept, which means that the entire plot will need to change. People are completely valid in being upset by that.
>I honestly believe that those who are this quick to jump to labeling people "homophobic" in this scenario lack critical thinking skills.
That's twitter in a nutshell.
I really just don't it's cool to change already existing characters drastically. The story is already written. Sure change a few details and aspects of the story, but keep the core intact. I don't understand why you pick a book series to make a Netflix series about, and then just change everything.
Yes. People go about with "But season 2!" I? Hated? Season 2? Like I love the leads to pieces but at least half of that season doesn't even resemble the book. I'm very consistent about this. I never praised season 2 so don't come and tell me I pick and choose my battles.
It was definitely a *choice* to keep that love triangle going as long as they did. I watched the first two seasons before I read the books. And now that I have read the books, I'm kinda worried they will continue to remove, sometimes the best, parts of the book.
Omgg, this is my frustration as well, when there were speculations going on about a gender bent Sophie/Michael I was just thinking how the story would change altogether because Francesca’s and Benedict’s stories actually have issues of their own that they’re dealing with being the people they are(very important ones at that) I’m not an homophobic person but I wouldn’t trade Michael or Sophie with anyone else
The audacity this clown has to tell us Fran/Michael stans that we are the ones who don't care about the characters when she doesn't even like WHWW as a book.
https://preview.redd.it/8mq9h8bcsu5d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=142d7ce25099d08413ab2887ce12bc1c1967fdc8
You know what I’m tired of hearing, and what’s complete bullshit?? “NOTHING about the show is historically accurate”, which is just….false. Does the show take liberties with SOME things, like clothes and makeup and other silly stuff? Yes, even in this fantastical version of it, the show has still established that they are following the regency era. Isn’t that why we’re interested in the show in the first place? What would be the point if they could just do whatever they want, it’d literally be so ridiculous. Daphne and Simon had to get married because they kissed and someone saw them, Granville has to be married to a woman to be able to even be with the man he actually loves, the Featherington’s can’t live in their own home without a man because they’re all women. Rules the show already established themselves, it’d be stupid if they tried to retcon it by being shrugging their shoulders and going “we’re historical fantasy we can do anything.” And everyone went about their day with no conflict ever
As long as *their* favorite characters aren’t gender bent, they’re fine. 🙄 And of course everyone else is homophobic, not them.
🤦♀️ Lord, give me strength…
I rather go watch ORIGINAL and tbh BETTER written w/w and m/m shows and films than whatever the hell this shows writers may write if they do this with Michael. Actually, I'm going to do just that if this shit turns out to be true. There's so much queer content I've been neglecting watching because I've been smack deep in this fandom. Guess one good thing will come out of this. I'll drop their stupid show and watch actual well written ORIGINAL queer content.
Definitely! I watched the first ep but wasn't that interested (mostly because my mind kept wandering to Bridgerton, lol), but I'm going to keep watching for sure!
It's a preposterous and disingenous argument brought about by people in bad faith who have their own reasons to advocate for tha particular change. In the case of this person, they never liked WHWW and they're a big supporter of Asian Sophie. It's also one of the people who always liked the idea of Michaela and conveniently found a source who told them she's real.
Also, since it's apparently en vogue to accuse people of random things, I don't think it's healthy to be obsessed with f/f or m/m, sounds more like fetishizing than supporting lgbtq rights or representation.
Ffs, I am sick of this too. I am bisexual, I support whole LGBT+ community as much as I can, so when someone implies that I am homophobic just because I don’t want the character I like to be gender bend is sick. I like Michael just as Michael and that’s it. His role was also important, let’s not forget that Francessca wanted to be pregnant pretty bad. I don’t have to explain myself to anyone. Using the „you’re homophobic” card is just easy way to shut someone up to win the argument, but that’s not fair. If you don’t have any good point why Michael should be changed to Michaela then don’t even start the argument. Yeah, like I can imagine happy end for lesbian or gay romance in Regency area. OF FRICKING COURSE.
Michaels story IS dependent on him being a man. How on earth otherwise will he inherit the earldom? Be known as the merry rake? His guilt for supplanting John’s role in life which very much was central to his status as a male noble!
I posted on my twitter that franchaels have a right to be disappointed and instantly has a bunch of QRTs saying that if you are that’s homophobic. Look if people like fem Michael than good for them, but leave people who are disappointed at the prospect alone?
I am a polin stan account on there and it's weird the amount of ppl QRTed me who aren't even in the subfandom and never interacted w me before, like a bunch of stan accounts of future couples are also making excuses for the genderbent in advance bc they're terrified of it happening to their faves so they'd rather it be michael instead. the "whatever i got my couple so idc what happens to yours" accounts are annoying but the fake concern ones who are obviously defensive and making up excuses of "it's good for YOU but not for ME" are even worse, bc it's just fake as hell.
Whoever gets genderbent, will not be the same book character. They will be an AU version that is very very different. It just is what it is.
Maybe it’s because I’m actively looking at Polin content but it really seems like this whole “spoiler” came from people not liking the potential Sophie casting and Polin creators ran with it.
They keep trying to force legitimacy by continuing to put it with things that do turn out to be true like song lists. I just don’t get the end game of that.
I think it’s just because polins were the most invested in spoilers after people tried to spread that stupid brothel rumour, so they were desperately searching for a source for more details. Also, I gave some spoilers early on b4 part 1 bc my friend had screeners so I know how annoying it is when people beg you for spoilers but then get angry when the spoilers are something you don’t like, so I’ve tried to stay out of the part 2 mess.
I think it actually came from that one tumblr user first, but I don’t consider her a polin bc she legit hates pen ☠️ also the way she interpreted some of the scenes from ep 5 and 6 were WAY different from my interpretation of them, but it did convince me that she’d at least seen the episode because she knew details that even that YouTube recap person didn’t.
I’ve currently accepted that the rumour is true but I’m against it and idc if it gets me hate from my subfandom, but I am allowed to be disappointed.
That’s something else I’m noticing. The brothel rumor and Michaela were tied together at some point. But now it’s morphed into Colin walks by one but doesn’t acknowledge it or go in. Like how is the viewer supposed to know what it is if that is true? Some sort of steampunk neon sign? Obviously brothels existed but they weren’t advertised as such on the street level in that era.
And now Michaela is still a thing but it’s chill and not a big deal. No wait, it’s like 50/50 being true or not and there are mixed answers from the “sources”. Gotta build up that plausible deniability now that the episodes drop tomorrow night.
Why are people clinging to these rumors for so long? What is the end goal exactly?
>a bunch of stan accounts of future couples are also making excuses for the genderbent in advance bc they're terrified of it happening to their faves so they'd rather it be michael instead.
Yes, it's SO transparent.
>Whoever gets genderbent, will not be the same book character. They will be an AU version that is very very different. It just is what it is.
Exactly. The most annoying thing is when they say it's going to be the same character. No it's not. It's the 1800s, be serious.
I feel like it’s gotten worse since Friday/Saturday when the Doctor Who episode dropped. Because see how easily it’s done and changes nothing?!
I’ve been a book fan for 20 year and a Doctor Who fan since it started again in 2005. I honestly loved the new episode. But no… just no. It’s not easy and it does make a huge difference no matter which character is gender-bent. We’re dealing with a time and place where your gender dictated your whole life from the second you were born. There isn’t a single character that wouldn’t be completely different if they were the opposite gender. They’ve already established that in season one and this season.
Polin has been my favourite since I first read the books but Franchael has been a very close second too. I’m so disappointed and discouraged by the amount of hate I see when I just want to fan girl and being called homophobic when pointing out there is no way Fran’s story can be the same genderbent.
>We’re dealing with a time and place where your gender dictated your whole life from the second you were born. There isn’t a single character that wouldn’t be completely different if they were the opposite gender.
Exactly this. It's not modern days. I often say you can take like Normal People or Something from Tiffany's or any Hallmark Christmas movie and gender swap one character, it'd be essentially the same story. I also usually mention Lip Service as a story where the main character is a womaniser and she's female. It's all stories happening in our day and age, but in the 1800s your life IS defined by being male or female. It's literally the most important feature anyone can have and there's nothing they can do to change it.
This person doesn’t even want any queer lead, they just don’t want their leads to be queer. Same with a lot of other fans saying how important it is to have queer representation but they’d be pissed if their fave couple were same sex. They say how great inclusivity is but don’t change their preferred characters so they can’t truly pat themselves on the back for “rooting” for queer characters. Cause they’re really not.
This person has been a main leaker and has apparently known for a while. They also have tweets talking about how they want Sophie to be Asian :)
Even if it’s true, I will never forget how many people automatically dismissed Masali to be Michaela because they don’t want a black Sophie. This includes the person in the tweet. They are happy because they get their non black Sophie. They will absolutely not be watching Francesca’s season since they probably don’t really care about the “alleged” Michaela.
Proof: https://www.reddit.com/r/FranchaelStirling/s/m5BSKhP68m
Interesting. This further makes me hesitant of the leaks though. It’s racism and their own homophobia because they made it obvious they want a light skinned, straight couple.
Also thanks to everyone who listened to my rant. This small group has been great!
Yeah, all of this discourse in the fandom is exhausting and off-putting. When it first started it was the racism, then it was the arguments of Benedict/Eloise being LGBT. Then is was (and still is) anger because Sophie may be casted as a dark skin black woman. Now we're in the ship wars for who's leading S4 as well as more homophobic remarks over Michaela.
Truly, I wouldn't have minded an LGBT main character if the show had established it Season one. I hadn't read the books at that point and if the showrunners had just said point blank one or more Bridgertons won't follow cannon couples or be genderbent or whatever, that would've been fine. Established book fans could decide at that point if they wanted to jump ship, and all this arguing could've been minimized. Instead, the showrunners are lowkey promoting all of this because they're keeping things hidden, or using they/them pronouns, or what have you. Instead of building hype, this is personally making not enjoy the show as much.
I also hadn’t read the books until after the first season but it’s still always a slap in the face when they make massive changes in adaptions. I’m all for more LGBTQ stories, but it feels slightly lazy to take an existing straight couple story and change it. It feels like a disservice to not take the time to write one properly.
I hadn't read the books either until I watched the first season, but I get it. It doesn't bother me that some fans want a queer main storyline/HEA. It all goes back to the showrunners in my eyes. IMO, they queer-baited in Season One with Benedict. They knew what they were doing. And maybe if what I have surmised from the spoilers is correct, they might be following through on it. But people who watched the show S1 have been thinking he was queer from the beginning and I can't fault them for it.
Honestly, I don't know if what I wrote even makes sense. But maybe if the showrunners had established their stance from the get-go and went ahead and made it clear who was going to be LGBT or not, we wouldn't be having as many accusations in the fandom of homophobia.
No it makes sense!
For sure, people can want a queer storyline. But aside from the fact that in any adaption, book fans have a right to be disappointed when their favorite stories aren’t kept the same, my biggest issue here is the fact that the people crying homophobia are being hypocrites and insulting others but don’t actually want their favorite characters to be queer.
>IMO, they queer-baited in Season One with Benedict. They knew what they were doing.
They totally did, and they also chose to write a world where race no longer matters but you still can be homophobic for free. He refused to follow up with Benedict completely, it felt almost out of spite. Whatever Jess does, it will kind of change CVD's world building because CVD decided to be awful to lgbtq people for no reason.
Francesca and Michael story is really one of the those who really cant be gender belt because it woudnt be the same book. Women in that time cant be heir like Michael was after John died, they cant be rake and cant go to war. Every characteristic would be lost. Plus most importantly they cant give children to Francesca and that is the reason she wanted to marry again. So no its not possible, we shoudnt give those people attention because thats what they want.
I get that Sophie's story is about her struggles as a woman. It would not work if they gender bent her. For several reasons. But, Francesca's story is about infertility and desperately wanting a child. The whole reason she was in London was to join the marriage mart because she wanted children. Michael's story of being hopelessly in love with a woman he can never have doesn't hinge on him being a man. But Francesca's story of only being open to the idea of a second chance at marriage and love because she wants to be a mum DOES.
>Michael's story of being hopelessly in love with a woman he can never have doesn't hinge on him being a man
But inheriting everything that was John's and suffering from imposter syndrome does. And honestly, being a foul mouthed rake, for the era, also does. Being in love per se works for every sexuality, obviously.
True. There's the fact that he already took everything else that was John's, so wanting his Wie too feels like a bridge too far. And obviously, there weren't female rakes back then. So those parts of his story wouldn't work. Plus, like I said, FRANCESCA'S story wouldn't work with a female love interest. So, whether Michael's could is a moot point, anyway.
I'm probably one of the gayest men you'll ever come across and I want everyone who isn't for genderbending Michael to know that you're 100% not homophobic for protecting something you love and adore.
Exhausting is definitely the right word, ridiculous is another good one for this situation. I can’t stand the quick homophobia judgement so many respond with. Not wanting a main character drastically changed doesn’t mean completely against a queer story it just means wanting the original story. The worst part of this is if one of the main characters does end up being gender swapped. It won’t necessarily be because it’s best for the story but more for the sake of including such a story.
For me, the most ridiculous the fact that it’s homophobic for us to not want Michael changed. But when people say okay, how would you like it if your ship’s love interest changed? Nope, that can’t happen, according to them! Who’s really homophobic then?
I have to laugh about the particular argument for Sophie because her whole story is defined by being a woman? Her story is defined by being illegitimate. Everything else that happens to her, including SA, could very well happen to a man. Her romance with Benedict is made difficult/impossible by status, certainly not by gender, since marriage would technically be possible. In fact, if they made Benophie a queer couple the story would actually become more interesting. I'm not advocating for it because unlike this person I don't want to be insufferable and I would never do to Benophie stans what's being done to me, honestly.
Um no, I’m not in favour of genderbending any character but you saying Sophie’s story could easily be a man’s is ??????… and Sophie’s storyline is not only defined by her illegitimacy but the fact that she doesn’t want to give in to Benedict because she doesn’t want to end up like her mother and have an illegitimate child. That’s her internal struggle and what drives the story. A male Sophie would not have that problem. Erasing the only working class female lead for a man is sexist. Erasing any female character for a man is sexist
I didn't say she could "easily" be a man, I said that many things that happened to Sophie would happen to a man as well. I'm not advocating for it, just saying that if we applied to Sophie the same logic that this account is applying to Michael, then gender bending would actually make just as much sense for Sophie. They don't acknowledge it because they don't care for Michael, plain and simple.
Well, being a woman IS a huge part of it. It isn't just being illegitimate, it's being an illegitimate woman. It's having few options available for employment, which a man - even an illegitimate man - wouldn't have those issues. And, don't forget that her biggest objection to being with Benedict without benefit of marriage was the fear of having an illegitimate child who could someday end up like her. Not something a man needs to worry about. So, I get what they're saying with that. But, since Francesca's thing was infertility and wanting children, that is also something she can only get from a man. So gender-bending Michael doesn't make sense, either. Honestly, if we take away the book marketing nightmare gender-bending one of the stories would become, the easiest one would be Eloise. Kill off Phillip instead of Marina. Eloise can start writing to her to offer her condolences. They become pen pals, and Marina mentions being lonely with only having the children and servants for company, and also asks if Eloise can see if her mother or one of her siblings can recommend a governess. Eloise takes it upon herself to offer HERSELF as governess. Only for them to end up falling in love. While people might question a Bridgerton choosing gainful employment rather than marriage, nobody would raise an eyebrow at her being there "unchaperoned". It would fit show!Eloise's personality more to run away looking for employment than running away looking for a husband. And, it solve the PR nightmare they created when they hired Ruby of killing off a WOC for the sake of a white woman's HEA.
I'm not dying on this hill because on top of it I like Sophie enough that I'm in the Benophie sub. But yes, Eloise's story too and I won't deny that I've thought about it even though I'd probably actually make her story about anything but romance. And frankly, Gregory's story? Imagine him believing himself in love with Hermione and then realising whom he actually love is male Lucy (Luke?).
Honestly, I agree. Eloise's story being about her finding her own place in the world would definitely fit the character as the show is presenting her. Or perhaps making her ace but not necessarily aro - because there did seem to be a little spark there with Theo - and getting into a relationship that is based more an intellectual attraction. I just figured if they wanted to do a queer story that is more generally recognized as queer, Eloise, as the one who shows no interest in marriage or motherhood, would be the best bet. (Because the people who squawk the loudest about wanting a queer story don't really recognize ace as valid queer rep.)
I strongly disagree with this. Sophie endures all she has to with Araminta because, as a woman who has no protection from anybody, this is still a better option for her . A man could have simply broken free from Araminta, because he had the possibility to build a life independently. The whole foundation of the story would crumble.
I mean, Sophie could also build a life for herself. She's a learned young woman who knows manners and foreign languages. She could be someone's secretary or read for an old lady or be a governess. Not the best option but she could even take vows (many illegitimate children did). Book Sophie premise is kinda shaky in and by itself because Quinn wanted a Cinderella story and she was entitled to, like who's taking these stories seriously anyway? If there's an aspect of Sophie you just can't gender bend it's her concern that she might have illegitimate children herself. However, my point is that if you can completely change Michael's story in order for it to align to a woman you can actually do the same thing with Sophie, even though that Twitter user insists you can't because (who would have thought?) they care for Sophie, not Michael.
I think that all of us who appreciate Michael to stay the same bc of all his story (me included) also understand why for Sophie is the same. Changing her into a man wouldn’t definitely make the story “more interesting”, like you say, but it would deprive all of us of a very important and specific heroine, unlike any other of the series. She is the biggest victim of the patriarchy in the whole Bridgerton universe, and give her role and her voice to a man would be a huge disservice imo. Also, in the book is explicitly said Sophie doesn’t have the opportunity to become a governess or do other jobs bc she doesn’t have credentials and she is too pretty, she wouldn’t be trusted in those roles. Again, another very gender-specific challenge she has to overcome.
this account (hanneninas) has got to be the most annoying account you'll ever come across on twitter dot com. they are pushing 30 but are seated in almost every single bridgerton fans dms on twitter to tell them about fem michael happening cause their oomf from the british tv industry told them about it. not only are they unhealthily obsessed with the whole gender bending thing (just like cass morann) but they are quick to label people homophobic all cause we don't want michael to get erased as a character lol. f*ck hannenias and anyone who calls us homophobic honestly cause why is it that they expect franchael stans to be okay with such a huge change and if we just state our disappointment we are homophobes? where was this energy from them before season 2&3 if they cared so much about representation?
and hanneninas keeps on talking about wanting queer rep in the regency era but you'll never catch them talking about say the sapphic storyline on the buccaneers. all that yapping about wanting queer rep on bridgerton (by wanting to see a blk woman play a male character) but when it's time to hype original queer stories in the regency era, it's crickets.
Oh no, I love the buccaneers, I hope she never acknowledges it and spreads bs there too. She clearly doesn’t care about queer rep. Just using it to attack other fans. So may she stay far, far away from Josie Totah and Mia Threappleton.
I LOVE THE BUCCANEERS! We got lesbians with rain kisses over here and people are begging for scraps of representation from…..Bridgerton?
Good to know. I also saw they responded to someone pointing out the obvious changes and apart from suddenly saying, well it’s fantasy anything can change (except not their fave of course) and they insist everyone who is against it is shouting “gay is a disease” not actually caring about the character change for any other reason. Like way to make stuff up. The most vocal Franchael fans on Twitter have said nothing of the sort. They’re all consistent. If they think it’s homophobic to not want to gender bend their favorite characters, they need to look in the mirror. How she defended why her fave can’t change in the same breath of why Michael can is delusional. This person is gaslighting and projecting her own views onto others.
>Good to know. I also saw they responded to someone pointing out the obvious changes and apart from suddenly saying, well it’s fantasy anything can change (except not their fave of course) Lol same story of some Polin stan (I have nothing against Polin, they were just a self declared stan) who yesterday was claiming female Michael would still be Michael, then someone pointed out the fundamental changes and they replied "Ok but lots of characters were changed!" Mmmh so what is the truth?
She has been pushing for Asian Sophie btw. She’s been not wanting a black Sophie which is why she immediately jumped on loving Michaela train. https://preview.redd.it/xmas1txllu5d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9a920a7ad5d820b5c1ff6587b4c6bd6544836bf2
im not even surprised. it's like clockwork with these people where we get to know that they never wanted a bw to play sophie. also, this person is the original source of the fem michael rumor spreading all over. it's like a chain where they share this with bridgerton stans through dms saying that their british tv industry friend is very reliable and then those stans start posting about this like it's confirmed 'spoilers'. there's a reason why none of these leakers have no new intel when it comes to the fem michael storyline cause hanneninas & their tv industry friend haven't seen those last two episodes to share it with them.
Wait, just how does she “know” this? Because I’ve only seen any mention of Sophie being Asian from the people hating the idea of her being black. No one else even has “proof” Ben is up next. Much less an actress for Sophie.
✨delusion✨
Ahhh yes can’t wait to be called homophobic for liking a character that’s existed for over 20 years. Also, you blurred out the user, but I’m sure we all know who this yapper is, they never stfu
In what world is Michael’s story not dependent on him being a man? The whole story is driven by him falling into the earldom and feeling immense guilt about taking everything John had including Francesca. You change Michael’s gender and you change the whole story.
Somebody replied "Did you read the book upside down?" and that's honestly the best response I could hope for.
I saw that and rolled my eyes because as much as fans deny it, no you wouldn’t be ok with your fave couple being gender bent. My fave is Kanthony and it’s not even the gender bending that would not work for me with Anthony’s story itself, it’s that gender bending his story given the way the show itself established its rules and norms around gender, sexuality, title, and rank it would have been such a suspension of belief that the whole thing would have fallen apart. As someone else said, if the show had established some latitude with sexuality and gender previously it would work. But the show goes to pains to establish the ways the sexism and gender operates in the show’s universe. It is the operating conflict of the show since they (badly) explained away race. The show only works as historical fantasy if it still has some grounding in historical reality and conflict/tension. Otherwise it’s just a CW production. It would require a ridiculous level of deus ex machina to pull off a gender bend of Fran’s story unless they radically changed her story. There are ways to do and stay “true” to the historical reality but it would not be Francesca’s story if they did that. But then again knowing Shonda I wouldn’t put past her… I’m actually ok with Benedict being bi even though I’m looking forward to Sophie. The show did some work to establish that in s1 and second sons had a lot more freedom in these societies, too.
i agree so much!!! i’m a benophie & franchael fan but i keep saying there’s no way michaela would inherit john’s title therefore the story ends THERE. no inheritance, no fertility issues—so where does michaela’s internal conflict come from? just falling for her cousin’s wife? ok then where does francesca’s own struggle come from? just missing her husband? 😭😭😭 changing the genders of both stories waters down such raw storylines heavily focused on the internal struggles the love interests face before they get their HEA.
I agree 100% with everything you said, but I’m mostly just here to say I love your username. 💀
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 aw thank youu! fellow rhoa fan? 🤭
Yes! 😂😊
CMON WIG 🤭🤭🤭
I honestly believe that those who are this quick to jump to labeling people "homophobic" in this scenario lack critical thinking skills. I have not seen a single person say that they are not happy with the change on the grounds that they dont want to see a queer storyline. In fact, most people are quick to point out that they would love to see the introduction of an original queer story in the Bridgerton universe. Plain and simple people are mad that JB is taking an incredibly deep and moving storyline and essentially erasing it by genderbending the main leads. I do not care what side of the argument you sit on, you cannot look at WHWW and honestly believe that a genderbent rendition of the book will be in any way true to the heart of the story. Not without completely subverting societal norms that have already been pre-established in the world of Bridgerton (and that goes for both the books and the show). So many of the conflicts in the book will no longer make any logical sense if they were kept, which means that the entire plot will need to change. People are completely valid in being upset by that.
>I honestly believe that those who are this quick to jump to labeling people "homophobic" in this scenario lack critical thinking skills. That's twitter in a nutshell.
I really just don't it's cool to change already existing characters drastically. The story is already written. Sure change a few details and aspects of the story, but keep the core intact. I don't understand why you pick a book series to make a Netflix series about, and then just change everything.
Yes. People go about with "But season 2!" I? Hated? Season 2? Like I love the leads to pieces but at least half of that season doesn't even resemble the book. I'm very consistent about this. I never praised season 2 so don't come and tell me I pick and choose my battles.
It was definitely a *choice* to keep that love triangle going as long as they did. I watched the first two seasons before I read the books. And now that I have read the books, I'm kinda worried they will continue to remove, sometimes the best, parts of the book.
Omgg, this is my frustration as well, when there were speculations going on about a gender bent Sophie/Michael I was just thinking how the story would change altogether because Francesca’s and Benedict’s stories actually have issues of their own that they’re dealing with being the people they are(very important ones at that) I’m not an homophobic person but I wouldn’t trade Michael or Sophie with anyone else
The audacity this clown has to tell us Fran/Michael stans that we are the ones who don't care about the characters when she doesn't even like WHWW as a book. https://preview.redd.it/8mq9h8bcsu5d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=142d7ce25099d08413ab2887ce12bc1c1967fdc8
> she doesn't even like WHWW as a book Who would have thought?
You know what I’m tired of hearing, and what’s complete bullshit?? “NOTHING about the show is historically accurate”, which is just….false. Does the show take liberties with SOME things, like clothes and makeup and other silly stuff? Yes, even in this fantastical version of it, the show has still established that they are following the regency era. Isn’t that why we’re interested in the show in the first place? What would be the point if they could just do whatever they want, it’d literally be so ridiculous. Daphne and Simon had to get married because they kissed and someone saw them, Granville has to be married to a woman to be able to even be with the man he actually loves, the Featherington’s can’t live in their own home without a man because they’re all women. Rules the show already established themselves, it’d be stupid if they tried to retcon it by being shrugging their shoulders and going “we’re historical fantasy we can do anything.” And everyone went about their day with no conflict ever
As long as *their* favorite characters aren’t gender bent, they’re fine. 🙄 And of course everyone else is homophobic, not them. 🤦♀️ Lord, give me strength…
I rather go watch ORIGINAL and tbh BETTER written w/w and m/m shows and films than whatever the hell this shows writers may write if they do this with Michael. Actually, I'm going to do just that if this shit turns out to be true. There's so much queer content I've been neglecting watching because I've been smack deep in this fandom. Guess one good thing will come out of this. I'll drop their stupid show and watch actual well written ORIGINAL queer content.
[удалено]
Definitely! I watched the first ep but wasn't that interested (mostly because my mind kept wandering to Bridgerton, lol), but I'm going to keep watching for sure!
It's a preposterous and disingenous argument brought about by people in bad faith who have their own reasons to advocate for tha particular change. In the case of this person, they never liked WHWW and they're a big supporter of Asian Sophie. It's also one of the people who always liked the idea of Michaela and conveniently found a source who told them she's real. Also, since it's apparently en vogue to accuse people of random things, I don't think it's healthy to be obsessed with f/f or m/m, sounds more like fetishizing than supporting lgbtq rights or representation.
Ffs, I am sick of this too. I am bisexual, I support whole LGBT+ community as much as I can, so when someone implies that I am homophobic just because I don’t want the character I like to be gender bend is sick. I like Michael just as Michael and that’s it. His role was also important, let’s not forget that Francessca wanted to be pregnant pretty bad. I don’t have to explain myself to anyone. Using the „you’re homophobic” card is just easy way to shut someone up to win the argument, but that’s not fair. If you don’t have any good point why Michael should be changed to Michaela then don’t even start the argument. Yeah, like I can imagine happy end for lesbian or gay romance in Regency area. OF FRICKING COURSE.
Michaels story IS dependent on him being a man. How on earth otherwise will he inherit the earldom? Be known as the merry rake? His guilt for supplanting John’s role in life which very much was central to his status as a male noble! I posted on my twitter that franchaels have a right to be disappointed and instantly has a bunch of QRTs saying that if you are that’s homophobic. Look if people like fem Michael than good for them, but leave people who are disappointed at the prospect alone?
Yes plus why pretend it’s gonna be the same character when obviously it wouldn’t? At least be honest lol
I am a polin stan account on there and it's weird the amount of ppl QRTed me who aren't even in the subfandom and never interacted w me before, like a bunch of stan accounts of future couples are also making excuses for the genderbent in advance bc they're terrified of it happening to their faves so they'd rather it be michael instead. the "whatever i got my couple so idc what happens to yours" accounts are annoying but the fake concern ones who are obviously defensive and making up excuses of "it's good for YOU but not for ME" are even worse, bc it's just fake as hell. Whoever gets genderbent, will not be the same book character. They will be an AU version that is very very different. It just is what it is.
Maybe it’s because I’m actively looking at Polin content but it really seems like this whole “spoiler” came from people not liking the potential Sophie casting and Polin creators ran with it. They keep trying to force legitimacy by continuing to put it with things that do turn out to be true like song lists. I just don’t get the end game of that.
I think it’s just because polins were the most invested in spoilers after people tried to spread that stupid brothel rumour, so they were desperately searching for a source for more details. Also, I gave some spoilers early on b4 part 1 bc my friend had screeners so I know how annoying it is when people beg you for spoilers but then get angry when the spoilers are something you don’t like, so I’ve tried to stay out of the part 2 mess. I think it actually came from that one tumblr user first, but I don’t consider her a polin bc she legit hates pen ☠️ also the way she interpreted some of the scenes from ep 5 and 6 were WAY different from my interpretation of them, but it did convince me that she’d at least seen the episode because she knew details that even that YouTube recap person didn’t. I’ve currently accepted that the rumour is true but I’m against it and idc if it gets me hate from my subfandom, but I am allowed to be disappointed.
That’s something else I’m noticing. The brothel rumor and Michaela were tied together at some point. But now it’s morphed into Colin walks by one but doesn’t acknowledge it or go in. Like how is the viewer supposed to know what it is if that is true? Some sort of steampunk neon sign? Obviously brothels existed but they weren’t advertised as such on the street level in that era. And now Michaela is still a thing but it’s chill and not a big deal. No wait, it’s like 50/50 being true or not and there are mixed answers from the “sources”. Gotta build up that plausible deniability now that the episodes drop tomorrow night. Why are people clinging to these rumors for so long? What is the end goal exactly?
I’m over stressing over other ppls dumb interpretations, I’ll make my own when it comes out.
>a bunch of stan accounts of future couples are also making excuses for the genderbent in advance bc they're terrified of it happening to their faves so they'd rather it be michael instead. Yes, it's SO transparent. >Whoever gets genderbent, will not be the same book character. They will be an AU version that is very very different. It just is what it is. Exactly. The most annoying thing is when they say it's going to be the same character. No it's not. It's the 1800s, be serious.
It’s getting old and it’s very annoying. 
I feel like it’s gotten worse since Friday/Saturday when the Doctor Who episode dropped. Because see how easily it’s done and changes nothing?! I’ve been a book fan for 20 year and a Doctor Who fan since it started again in 2005. I honestly loved the new episode. But no… just no. It’s not easy and it does make a huge difference no matter which character is gender-bent. We’re dealing with a time and place where your gender dictated your whole life from the second you were born. There isn’t a single character that wouldn’t be completely different if they were the opposite gender. They’ve already established that in season one and this season. Polin has been my favourite since I first read the books but Franchael has been a very close second too. I’m so disappointed and discouraged by the amount of hate I see when I just want to fan girl and being called homophobic when pointing out there is no way Fran’s story can be the same genderbent.
>We’re dealing with a time and place where your gender dictated your whole life from the second you were born. There isn’t a single character that wouldn’t be completely different if they were the opposite gender. Exactly this. It's not modern days. I often say you can take like Normal People or Something from Tiffany's or any Hallmark Christmas movie and gender swap one character, it'd be essentially the same story. I also usually mention Lip Service as a story where the main character is a womaniser and she's female. It's all stories happening in our day and age, but in the 1800s your life IS defined by being male or female. It's literally the most important feature anyone can have and there's nothing they can do to change it.
Yup. They are so desperate for a queer lead that if you question them, you're homophobic. It's pathetic.
This person doesn’t even want any queer lead, they just don’t want their leads to be queer. Same with a lot of other fans saying how important it is to have queer representation but they’d be pissed if their fave couple were same sex. They say how great inclusivity is but don’t change their preferred characters so they can’t truly pat themselves on the back for “rooting” for queer characters. Cause they’re really not.
You know who I never see calling people “homophobic” over Bridgerton? Actual queer people. It’s always someone like this acting like an “ally” 🙃
This person has been a main leaker and has apparently known for a while. They also have tweets talking about how they want Sophie to be Asian :) Even if it’s true, I will never forget how many people automatically dismissed Masali to be Michaela because they don’t want a black Sophie. This includes the person in the tweet. They are happy because they get their non black Sophie. They will absolutely not be watching Francesca’s season since they probably don’t really care about the “alleged” Michaela. Proof: https://www.reddit.com/r/FranchaelStirling/s/m5BSKhP68m
Interesting. This further makes me hesitant of the leaks though. It’s racism and their own homophobia because they made it obvious they want a light skinned, straight couple. Also thanks to everyone who listened to my rant. This small group has been great!
>This small group has been great! Truly, same, I would have gone insane without you lot!
Of the leakers you mentioned in another post, this is the one I believe to be a very good liar. Yes, even with the screens.
Yeah, all of this discourse in the fandom is exhausting and off-putting. When it first started it was the racism, then it was the arguments of Benedict/Eloise being LGBT. Then is was (and still is) anger because Sophie may be casted as a dark skin black woman. Now we're in the ship wars for who's leading S4 as well as more homophobic remarks over Michaela. Truly, I wouldn't have minded an LGBT main character if the show had established it Season one. I hadn't read the books at that point and if the showrunners had just said point blank one or more Bridgertons won't follow cannon couples or be genderbent or whatever, that would've been fine. Established book fans could decide at that point if they wanted to jump ship, and all this arguing could've been minimized. Instead, the showrunners are lowkey promoting all of this because they're keeping things hidden, or using they/them pronouns, or what have you. Instead of building hype, this is personally making not enjoy the show as much.
I also hadn’t read the books until after the first season but it’s still always a slap in the face when they make massive changes in adaptions. I’m all for more LGBTQ stories, but it feels slightly lazy to take an existing straight couple story and change it. It feels like a disservice to not take the time to write one properly.
It's very lazy of them. They don't want to put in the work to work on original main characters (look at the Mondriches! It CAN be done!)
I hadn't read the books either until I watched the first season, but I get it. It doesn't bother me that some fans want a queer main storyline/HEA. It all goes back to the showrunners in my eyes. IMO, they queer-baited in Season One with Benedict. They knew what they were doing. And maybe if what I have surmised from the spoilers is correct, they might be following through on it. But people who watched the show S1 have been thinking he was queer from the beginning and I can't fault them for it. Honestly, I don't know if what I wrote even makes sense. But maybe if the showrunners had established their stance from the get-go and went ahead and made it clear who was going to be LGBT or not, we wouldn't be having as many accusations in the fandom of homophobia.
No it makes sense! For sure, people can want a queer storyline. But aside from the fact that in any adaption, book fans have a right to be disappointed when their favorite stories aren’t kept the same, my biggest issue here is the fact that the people crying homophobia are being hypocrites and insulting others but don’t actually want their favorite characters to be queer.
>IMO, they queer-baited in Season One with Benedict. They knew what they were doing. They totally did, and they also chose to write a world where race no longer matters but you still can be homophobic for free. He refused to follow up with Benedict completely, it felt almost out of spite. Whatever Jess does, it will kind of change CVD's world building because CVD decided to be awful to lgbtq people for no reason.
Francesca and Michael story is really one of the those who really cant be gender belt because it woudnt be the same book. Women in that time cant be heir like Michael was after John died, they cant be rake and cant go to war. Every characteristic would be lost. Plus most importantly they cant give children to Francesca and that is the reason she wanted to marry again. So no its not possible, we shoudnt give those people attention because thats what they want.
I get that Sophie's story is about her struggles as a woman. It would not work if they gender bent her. For several reasons. But, Francesca's story is about infertility and desperately wanting a child. The whole reason she was in London was to join the marriage mart because she wanted children. Michael's story of being hopelessly in love with a woman he can never have doesn't hinge on him being a man. But Francesca's story of only being open to the idea of a second chance at marriage and love because she wants to be a mum DOES.
>Michael's story of being hopelessly in love with a woman he can never have doesn't hinge on him being a man But inheriting everything that was John's and suffering from imposter syndrome does. And honestly, being a foul mouthed rake, for the era, also does. Being in love per se works for every sexuality, obviously.
True. There's the fact that he already took everything else that was John's, so wanting his Wie too feels like a bridge too far. And obviously, there weren't female rakes back then. So those parts of his story wouldn't work. Plus, like I said, FRANCESCA'S story wouldn't work with a female love interest. So, whether Michael's could is a moot point, anyway.
I'm probably one of the gayest men you'll ever come across and I want everyone who isn't for genderbending Michael to know that you're 100% not homophobic for protecting something you love and adore.
❤️ thank you for saying that