Anonymous asked:
I actually cringed at his wording. It seemed unnecessarily baity to me. There's always the chance he was misquoted tho, as often seems the case at cons. That said, his having sex with male or a female doesn't bother me, his having sex for no reason other than to have Cas have sex bothers me and probably would result in me giving up on the show, tbh.

INT. ASPIRING SCREENWRITER'S MIND
INT. ASPIRING SCREENWRITER'S MIND answered:

The wording seems consistent across all the tweets I’ve seen (which is why I feel okay speculating about it now). About the only difference I’ve seen is “character” versus “person”, which isn’t a big difference. I will be very curious to see the transcript though.

As for Cas having sex just to have sex, we’ll have to agree to disagree. We have no context for the scene yet, for one, but mainly, while I know that people disagree with me on this (you, I assume, included), sex is a pretty significant human interaction for many people. That is enough reason. Even as an angel, Cas was not particularly asexual. His sexual urges were slight, and usually in direct response to an advance or a result of Jimmy’s own preferences, but he was capable of being attracted. He does not need to have sex but I am far from surprised that he is doing so, when that is such rich terrain for a character previously mostly unhindered by hormones to explore. Now his urges won’t just be Jimmy’s, or activated in response to others’ advances. He gets to actually feel them, and that’s fascinating (and given some of the pics we’ve seen, clearly perplexing to him). I would do the same thing if I were writing him, to be honest.

11
  1. sarasarai posted this