On Loki Being Bisexual
Just recently the titular character of Loki revealed that he was bisexual. This is causing quite the controversy with some people.
People are saying that it doesn't matter if Loki was bisexual in the mythology; it shouldn't affect the MCU interpretation.
I feel that is a hypocritical stance. Comic fans (myself included) are the ones who push the most for modern interpretations to be story accurate. So often I hear comic book readers saying how they ruined a character because they didn't get the details right.
"Jimmy Olsen is supposed to be a red head."
"Magneto can't be black because he was a Polish Jew who survived the holocaust."
And you know what? I'm fine with that. I'd rather the character be more true to the source material than inaccurate.
But how is the Loki situation any different? In one example, the source material should influence the character, but in the other example, it shouldn't?
In the Norse mythology, Loki IS bisexual. In fact, he's more than that. Loki follows the (weird) tradition of mythological gods transforming themselves in order to copulate with other beings. Norse Loki transformed himself into a mare, a girl horse, where he was impregnated and gave birth to the legendary Norse beast Sleipnir. His transformation isn't some arbitrary thing, it is integral to the greater mythology itself. That transformation alone would make Norse Loki any or all of the following: Gay, Bisexual, (Literally) Transsexual, and even a Zoophile.
When people criticize MCU Loki's sexuality, they are not being consistent. When the female Loki character Sylvie appeared no one questioned it. Do you know why? Because it is a known concept that Loki can transform himself into other forms. It was only later on that we learned that Sylvie was actually inherently female, but we didn't know that at the time. For all anyone knew, she was just a male Loki that had transformed himself. And that was accepted as a possibility, because part of Loki's character is being deceptive and tricky. He would willingly forsake his body image in order to pull off a ruse.
He's not really tied down to his gender identity.
But critics insist that his gender fluid nature is specifically apart of the Norse mythology, and that it conflicts with the MCU interpretation so far.
How so?
Loki up to this point hasn't really expressed ANY sexuality. His whole narrative revolved around him grasping for power or trying to redeem himself. He has not once expressed any romantic interest in any other character, let alone sexual interest. If I were to assume his sexuality up to this point, I would have said he was asexual.
But that was only in light of the fact that he hadn't been given a sexuality in the MCU yet. You cannot say being bisexual conflicts with his character. He wasn't straight before, he wasn't anything.
Critics may say, "Well, that's Norse Loki. The MCU needs to follow the comics."
I've got bad news for you. Marvel Comics (616) Loki is way more Norse accurate than the MCU version. It's not like the 616 version is even THAT accurate to the mythology, but it's more accurate than the MCU. 616 Loki can only be more sexually alternative than you are assuming the MCU version is.
Although it was only recently, 616 Loki was revealed to be bisexual. This predates the MCU version, so it is fair to say that the MCU is being accurate to the comics. Even if 616 Loki's sexuality is new, the same rationalization applies. If he was never given a sexuality before, and his original interpretation was bisexual, than it is safe to assume that the version in question is bisexual as well.
I am aware that there are certain agendas in Hollywood. I am also aware that the person responsible for the Loki episode in question (Bisha K. Ali) is a premiere woke identitarian. However, despite her agenda, this was NOT propaganda. Loki was not tokenized into being bisexual, and Loki's conflict does not stand on his sexuality. The point of the scene in question was not to comment on sexuality,, but to portray the rapport that he and Sylvie were developing.
The scene doesn't say that alternative sexualities are better, or that they are oppressed. The only thing it says is that they exist. Just like a scene of a man flirting with a woman, it comments that heterosexuals exist. It's not propaganda, it's just society.
If you feel that alternative sexualities shouldn't be mentioned because they shouldn't exist, well I suppose you have the liberty to believe that. But then, Loki was never the straight ideal you may have imagined him to be anyway.