Sometimes when I read posts that go
"MM was trying to impose her heteronormative views on Patrochilles by making Patroclus feminine, in the iliad both were very masculine warriors"
I have the desire to just go and say
📣"In your pursuit of accusing MM of imposing heteronormative views you have failed to recognize that you yourself are imposing modern views of masculinity, femininity and sexuality into the Iliad
As not only these things weren't the same in the context of the Iliad, but also you don't recognize the multiple times where the narrator compares both Achilles and Patroclus to feminine things
Even Achilles compares himself multiple times to a motherly figure, and Patroclus takes the role of the wife by doing household duties during the embassy plus the famous comparison between him and Cleopatra in the Meleager story, while later Achilles takes the role of the closest female relative in Patroclus's funeral
Now, the role Achilles fulfills in the funeral could be interpreted as either a wife or a mother. And the concept of Achilles acting as Patroclus's mother might seem weird to a modern audience, but I think it reflects the sentiment Andromache expressed to Hector in book 6 "Hektor, thus you are father to me, and my honored mother, you are my brother, and you it is who are my young husband." So she's basically saying that Hector is everything to her; the most important and loved person in her life. Likewise Achilles and Patroclus are everything to each other, including father, mother, brother, and maybe even wife and husband
And so while the criticism of forcing heteronormative dynamics to Patroclus and Achilles is valid (criticism I personally don't think applies to tsoa, but that's another post) The idea of both Achilles and Patroclus taking what today we consider a hypermasculine role in their relationship to each other isn't just anachronistic but also inaccurate and it seems more likely that both performed a mix of femininity and masculinity within their relationship
Also, womp womp"
my problem isn't with what is in tsoa(I mean I've but not patroclus' character, it's thetis but yeah different matter)
My problem is that it's wrong to categorise him only as a healer. A 𝙝𝙚𝙖𝙡𝙚𝙧 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙗𝙚 𝙖 𝙛𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩𝙚𝙧 𝙖𝙨 𝙬𝙚𝙡𝙡!
Patroclus was a fighter and still kind, gentle soul. He deserved to be that. He deserves to kill, who knows how many Trojans he killed In Iliad.. He did not deserve the character assassination where he killed Sarpedon, Zeus' Son, by fucking mistake. He.bloody.did.not. and i hated that.
Patroclus died and it is achilles fault but not in the way Briseis says it is. Honestly the way I was shaking, crying and laughing while reading that.
“How could you have let him go? You knew he could not fight!” like sir? Gods I hated her when she said this! Though other things she said were certainly not wrong.
Achilles is not ready to leave patroclus' body next day and leaves only when his mother promises she'll do all she can to preserve the body. Like my Thetis did not deserve that character assassination.
MM turns him into just a healer and goes with the same opposite attracts trope, same old het trope where one is stay at home wife and other is macho man. And if patroclus was female and someone turned og character into this...whatever it was, all would've shamed Miller. But because it's a man, people call it progressive.
That's my problem with tsoa and it ain't going anywhere. Sadly. There's no way one can turn into a positive thing. I don't see how it's gonna happen. Again I'd say the same thing. Patroclus deserved to heal and kill men. Tysm.