Some Cozy Kurtanchel Vibes For @katimanki For The @gleeful-holiday-art-swap ! Hope You're Having A Happy

Some cozy Kurtanchel vibes for @katimanki for the @gleeful-holiday-art-swap ! Hope you're having a happy holiday season ☕❄️

Santana Lopez in the early seasons: a case study in compulsory heterosexuality, part 1 - season 1

Once upon a time I decided to take a deep-dive into Santana’s relationship with her sexuality in the early seasons and specifically her sexual and/or romantic relationships with men. Today is the day we finally do that, or at least the first half of it by covering season 1. Thank you to anon from the other day a few weeks months back for the final push and for putting into words a lot of what has been living in my mind rent-free for ages.

Before we really begin, I want to establish a few things. First, like Anon said, all of what I’m going to detail is really just a happy accident as Santana wasn’t actually written to be a lesbian and therefore not one struggling with comphet in season 1. We can acknowledge that authorial intent, or rather the lack thereof, but still find meaning in how the show actually turned out and how it reads in retrospect, now that we know that Santana is a lesbian. I think this is important to note because my goal with these two posts isn’t to argue that it’s always been that deep; far be it from me to give Glee too much credit. No, I’m simply arguing that, intended or not, a comphet reading still exists and makes Santana’s character all the more fascinating in the context of her later journey and characterization. Aka we’re going to read into things but hey, if the things present themselves in such a fitting way then why not.

Second, let’s define what comphet even is before we go any further. So compulsory heterosexuality is what it says on the tin and usually refers to lesbian women who, because of outside pressure or internalized homophobia, feel like they have to conform to heteronormative standards and be attracted to and be with men. It’s often associated with the erasure of lesbianism and female desire, as outlined in Adrienne Rich’s essay who popularized the term in the 80s. I don’t want to recite a whole wikipedia page here so going to link it here and proceed with the definition from above. Alternatively, see the Equality Archive for more of an overview. It’s something many lesbians struggle with to differing degrees, whether that includes lying to themselves as well or just forcing themselves to be with men even though they know they’re not attracted to them due to heteronormative expectations and a fear of being perceived differently. It’s often the explanation as to why a lesbian woman has been with men in the past and yet identifies as a lesbian. As an aside though, lesbians don’t owe anyone an explanation for anything and can do whatever they like 😊 But the concept of comphet can help explain these tendencies and make sense of one’s own identity.

Okay, with that out of the way, I’ll be exploring through the course of two posts how this concept of comphet relates to Santana and her relationships with men as portrayed in seasons 1 and 2. This first post is going to be divided into two main portions, her relationships with Puck and Finn in season 1. Since Santana isn’t a main character in season 1 and just serves a purpose in others’ stories, most of her stuff does relate to the two boys and it’s through those relationships that we get a glimpse at her character.

This is an important thing to note about Santana’s beginnings as a character and therefore her season 1 story: that it’s not actually about her. What I mean is that she starts out as a background character who, even as she starts getting less generic lines, is still ultimately there as a supporting character to main players. She starts getting actual plotlines in the second half of the season but they’re still not about building her own character; they’re about stirring the pot for the main cast, so the story she does get makes sense from that perspective but also serves the point I’m trying to make about comphet. I’d also just like to acknowledge that it might sound counterintuitive to center a discussion about a lesbian around her relationships with men but that is exactly what comphet is, at the end of the day, so I figured the way to combat it would be through deconstructing it.

And now, without further ado!