Thread by @Princessponies8, An open letter to @rickriordan about aro/ace-coded characters in #PJO

An open letter to @rickriordan about aro/ace-coded characters in #PJO - i'm including both a transcript thread and resource thread below

TRANSCRIPT THREAD:

Dear Rick Riordan,
Hello - I wanted to speak with you about a concern I’ve had for a few years now regarding a particular aspect frequent in some of your books and that you’ve mentioned on social media on occasion.

I’ve wanted to make note of this to you as you seem to have fallen into a few less-than-ideal stereotypes, negative associations, and misconceptions.

I will detail these issues as thoroughly as I can, with explanations of where the problems lie with them and some information about these identities along with resources so that you may be able to better understand why these fallings are concerning.

Specifically, my concerns lie in your portrayal and language surrounding aromantic/asexual-coded characters. As someone who is aro/ace, I’ve always felt a strong connection to the Hunters of Artemis.

However, your portrayal of the Hunters of Artemis is exactly where these issues begin to arise. You’ve mentioned before, outside your series, that you see at least some of the Hunters of Artemis as aro and/or ace, and I will say that I certainly do as well.

However in the way you’ve written the Hunters of Artemis, and Artemis herself, there are a number of harmful stereotypes that you have fallen into. Aromanticism and Asexuality, alongside other A-spec identities, are often misunderstood and thus commonly misrepresented.

There are a number of common misconceptions relating to asexuality that apply to your series, and I will do my best to explain them.

Equation with Celibacy / “It’s a choice.”
This is the most prominent issue when it comes to the Huntresses and Artemis.

While plenty of young a-spec (individuals who fall under the aromantic/asexual umbrella) kids would jump at the opportunity to join the Huntresses due to not particularly having to give up anything, there is a great deal of harm in the blanket statement that

"The Huntresses are aro/ace.” Particularly because, to be a Huntress, one must take a vow of chastity/celibacy.

A common misconception surrounding aromanticism/asexuality is that it is a conscious choice to avoid and not partake in romantic/sexual relationships, and so equal to celibacy.

While some a-spec individuals may avoid romance/sexual relationships, there are plenty who still partake in such activities, especially those who identify as aromantic but not asexual, or asexual but not aromantic.

Even aromantic people may date, or even if they don’t date they may have a or multiple queerplatonic partners- abbreviated as QPP(s), which are not quite like romantic partners and more than simply “best friends,” but it can be hard to articulate to alloromantics

(“allo-” being the opposite of a-spec identities). There are also a multitude of other identities under the a-spec umbrella, such as grey-romantic/sexual, demi-romantic/sexual, and others (and identities where the individual is only aro or ace but not both)

that each have varying relationships with romance and et cetera. For those who don’t participate in relationships, their lack of attraction is often regarded as a conscious choice by outside allo parties.

By making what is possibly the only example of a-spec characters in the series a group whose basis is almost entirely founded on a vow of celibacy, you create the equation of a-spec identities to being a choice, like celibacy, even if doing so is unintentional.

Equation with youth / “You’re just a late bloomer” / “You’ll grow out of it”
This category is one of the most prevalent in the series, and one of the few that is explicitly stated in-text. The worst instance of this I will directly quote from The Titan’s Curse:

“Are you surprised by my age?” [Artemis] asked.
“Uh… a little.”
“I could appear as a grown woman, or a blazing fire, or anything else I want, but this is what I prefer. This is the average age of my Hunters, and all young maidens for whom I am patron, before they go astray.”

“Go astray?” I asked.
“Grow up. Become smitten with boys. Become silly, preoccupied, insecure. Forget themselves.”

Some of the most common things a-spec people are told about their identity is “Oh, you’re just a late bloomer,” “You’ll grow out of it,” “You just haven’t found the right person,” or “It’s just a phase.”

By equating the only characters you have ever implied might be a-spec with this idea that they could grow out of it (Like Jo and Emmie for example), this misconception is an extremely present and harmful element.

Also relating to Jo and Emmie, having the only “adult” huntresses being depicted as ex-huntresses who are no longer immortal as a result follows the same line of associating a-spec identities with this group comprised solely of younger teens and children,

as they have not yet “grown into” feelings of attraction.
Related to that excerpt, as I’m sure you know there are generally three Greek Goddesses on Olympus that can be regarded as a-spec: Artemis, Hestia, and Athena.

(Hekate/Hecate is also sometimes depicted as a virgin goddess, but she has associations with Artemis in general and interpretations of Hekate vary wildly due to how long she has existed, so we’ll excuse her from this section.)

Out of these three, specifically in PJO, Athena is the only one demigod children, though they are born through her brain. This implies she still experiences romantic attraction.

Perhaps she’s still asexual, which would be fantastic, considering the other two goddesses included here are explicitly almost always depicted as appearing very young, usually as a young teen.

Again, this is an instance where the only characters we see who aren’t particularly interested in romance are depicted as being at an age where they haven’t yet “grown out of it.”

Historic depictions of Hestia show her simply as a modestly dressed woman, with no indication of her needing to be described in the series as deliberately choosing to appear as an eight year old.

Artemis, while not always seen as a-spec historically or in modern worship, also has no reasoning to be depicted as young as you often write her appearing as.

Athena, out of these three goddesses, is the only one you do not regularly depict as a child, and she is the only one out of the three that you do not equate with not having children or romantic relations.

“Romance is a part of us and is what makes us human”
Not to call you out or anything, but you really seem to like perfectly pairing off your protagonists. The majority of characters have some kind of romance plot. Even your minor characters usually seem to end up dating.

[TBM SPOILERS] If they’re not in a relationship, they will be soon, or they already were and maybe their boyfriend or significant other took a couple dozen arrows and a spear to the chest and they just aren’t ready to buckle up with somebody else just yet. Y’know. It happens.

But really, you have a tendency that with your characters, if they aren’t immediately crushing on somebody or in a relationship, they will be within a book or two. The only exception is maybe Meg, but again, see the previous section.

Even with the Huntresses, we see former members of the Hunt having left because they found love, to-be Huntresses seemingly in conflict with someone they love, characters who are either in relationships or seeking them attempting to be recruited,

[TTT SPOILERS] and Huntresses who joined because they were heartbroken, had failed relationships, or their love life was generally bad and they wanted to escape romance (Such as Zoë or Reyna).

With Huntresses who we don’t particularly see this with (who are generally very minor characters), they’re used as death fodder (see: Blood of Olympus), which leans somewhat into the “Bury Your Gays” trope

(Killing off the only instances of queer characters/minorities in a story to further the story of a straight/cis/white character, similar to “Fridging Women” or other tropes where female characters or minorities are injured/abused/killed

to further the usually white male protagonist’s narrative) if we’re giving them the blanket statement of “some of them might be aro/ace.”

It’s unfortunately common for a-spec individuals to not see ourselves represented in media. It’s simply a fact of life that an emphasis on romance is all too present in our society.

Advertisements rely on it, it becomes secondary plots that stories rely on to push the narrative forward, and romance may even be shoehorned in at the sacrifice of the plot just so that it exists,

because better to pair off that character we left single with the odd-out extra main character than to just leave a main character happy with being single.

(That was a general example, I promise. It just happens so often in media that I could probably name nine examples off the top of my head. That was not a passive-aggressive reference to your books.)

Far too often, A-spec individuals are belittled or their identities disregarded because to some it’s just impossible to comprehend someone who just simply does not experience romantic or sexual attraction.

When so often society believes that romance/sex, in the words of comedian and entertainer Dan Howell ( @danielhowell), “is the primal force propelling all of these humans forward by their hips,” how could it be possible for someone to… simply not adhere to that idea?

How possibly could society function if that one person just isn’t interested in smooching people? Civilization would collapse!

Wait, no, we’re still here and perfectly alive. What a bummer.

So What?
I would also like to make a quick note here of the inherent issue of the only example of representation being a “Word of God(s)” comment outside of canon works (in this case, on Goodreads).

Saying “I think this, personally, but I never said it in the series so you all are welcome to think whatever you like!” is perfectly fine, but also when that interpretation falls into harmful stereotypes and tropes it’s important to take note of them.

It should also be noted that it doesn’t count as representation for that group (see: J.K. Rowling. Yikes), though I doubt that was what you were intending.

It is okay to say “Hey, there aren’t any prominent confirmed canon characters of this minority right now in this series. I can’t speak for the future, because I haven’t gotten there yet, but as of right now there are none that are confirmed in-canon.”

I appreciate that you tend to handle questions of those topics in that manner. I just wanted to say thank you for not pulling a J.K. Rowling (though also I’m sure you’ve been getting that a lot lately).

Now, I don’t mean to sound like I’m saying “You’ve completely failed and all is lost! There’s no turning back from this!” Obviously there are plenty of ways to band-aid things, especially since technically, you have never explicitly stated characters being aro/ace in the series

(See paragraph prior). I won’t explicitly suggest any specific ways of including a-spec characters or how tell you how you should “fix” these fallings, and I don’t even mean to say they have to be fixed, because again it’s not something explicit in the series,

given that it’s only something you’ve ever mentioned online. I trust that you are capable of sorting it out yourself. I won’t tell you how to write your books, because (pardon my French) that’s a jerk move.

I only mean to bring your attention to it and explain why it is concerning and offer resources and the first-hand experiences of an a-spec individual if you would like.

I will link various resources below this tweet in a thread if you’d like to do some research on your own alongside a transcript thread [This!] of these paragraphs. I have also compiled a list of some common a-spec experiences that I can DM you if you’d like.

Thank you for your time,

An Aro/Ace reader

[END TRANSCRIPT]

Latest Threads Unrolled: