When the omega told his fiancé “this is the one I was telling you about,” and fiance gives this ‘look,’ makes a comment about alpha’s appearance, then says he’ll be seeing a lot more of him from now…
After reading that, 100% gotta be a lavender marriage
When the omega told his fiancé “this is the one I was telling you about,” and fiance gives this ‘look,’ makes a comment about alpha’s appearance, then says he’ll be seeing a lot more of him from no... worm
lavender marriages are when a girl and a guy get married in order to hide that one or two of them is gay. this cant be a lavender marriage if they are both men. it could, however, definitely be a fake marriage to just cover up ml’s subgender or a marriage of convenience with no love to boost their careers.
When the omega told his fiancé “this is the one I was telling you about,” and fiance gives this ‘look,’ makes a comment about alpha’s appearance, then says he’ll be seeing a lot more of him from no... worm
I’m aware of what it was alluding to, but a Lavender marriage is between a man and a woman (either one queer) who marry for convenience or security to hide their sexuality and to visually conform to heteronormative standards. Those are two gay men, and believing a perceived Alpha x Omega to be anywhere near equivalent is ignorant. God I hate how A/B/O is just the patriarchy repackaged and adds nothing but a normalcy of queerness while still upholding heteronormativity.
?? im referring to this in an omegaverse fiction context where the society is fixated on a secondary gender rather than queerness. in this scenario the lavender marriage is used to conceal and hide a secondary gender (the bottom)/avoid a forced pairing/safety reasons. historically yeah its between a man and a woman but it this context i meant it in a way that it fits and adapts towards an omegaverse oriented society.
I’m aware of what it was alluding to, but a Lavender marriage is between a man and a woman (either one queer) who marry for convenience or security to hide their sexuality and to visually conform to heteronor... Abow
But they're not “two gay men???” They’re presumably two omegas (marrying for convenience or to hide their secondary gender or to visually conform to their world’s standards as you say).
Honestly, your argument is inconsistent. You're applying the real-world category “gay men” to A/B/O, while saying we can't apply “lavender marriage” because its original definition belongs to a different social system. If we're allowed to use real-world concepts to describe analogous social dynamics in A/B/O, why is this particular analogy off-limits?
Especially when you then argue that A/B/O reproduces heteronormative social structures. If an alpha/omega relationship is functioning as the socially acceptable norm, and an omega is concealing their status by presenting as an alpha and marrying another omega, then “lavender marriage” seems like a pretty accurate analogy.
Ofc, you can dislike it, but that's different from the analogy being invalid or people being “ignorant”.
grl ik a lavender marriage when I see one they both got their own side chicks
Lavender where…
When the omega told his fiancé “this is the one I was telling you about,” and fiance gives this ‘look,’ makes a comment about alpha’s appearance, then says he’ll be seeing a lot more of him from now…
After reading that, 100% gotta be a lavender marriage
lavender marriages are when a girl and a guy get married in order to hide that one or two of them is gay. this cant be a lavender marriage if they are both men. it could, however, definitely be a fake marriage to just cover up ml’s subgender or a marriage of convenience with no love to boost their careers.
I’m aware of what it was alluding to, but a Lavender marriage is between a man and a woman (either one queer) who marry for convenience or security to hide their sexuality and to visually conform to heteronormative standards. Those are two gay men, and believing a perceived Alpha x Omega to be anywhere near equivalent is ignorant. God I hate how A/B/O is just the patriarchy repackaged and adds nothing but a normalcy of queerness while still upholding heteronormativity.
?? im referring to this in an omegaverse fiction context where the society is fixated on a secondary gender rather than queerness. in this scenario the lavender marriage is used to conceal and hide a secondary gender (the bottom)/avoid a forced pairing/safety reasons. historically yeah its between a man and a woman but it this context i meant it in a way that it fits and adapts towards an omegaverse oriented society.
But they're not “two gay men???” They’re presumably two omegas (marrying for convenience or to hide their secondary gender or to visually conform to their world’s standards as you say).
Honestly, your argument is inconsistent. You're applying the real-world category “gay men” to A/B/O, while saying we can't apply “lavender marriage” because its original definition belongs to a different social system. If we're allowed to use real-world concepts to describe analogous social dynamics in A/B/O, why is this particular analogy off-limits?
Especially when you then argue that A/B/O reproduces heteronormative social structures. If an alpha/omega relationship is functioning as the socially acceptable norm, and an omega is concealing their status by presenting as an alpha and marrying another omega, then “lavender marriage” seems like a pretty accurate analogy.
Ofc, you can dislike it, but that's different from the analogy being invalid or people being “ignorant”.