KayCurious

This post is part two of my written version of my Beastars panel I gave at Anime Central and Otakon this summer. For the first part, click here!

C. Hunger, Desire, Devouring, and Sex

So we’ve gotten this far into talking about sexuality in Beastars and somehow we haven’t actually talked yet about the thing itself - sex.

The erotic is a measure between the beginnings of our sense of self and the chaos of our strongest feelings. It is an internal sense of satisfaction to which, once we have experienced it, we know we can aspire. For having experienced the fullness of this depth of feeling and recognizing its power, in honor and self-respect we can require no less of ourselves [1]

Apologies to Ms. Audre Lorde, who I am pretty sure did not imagine her life-changing work being used in a blog post about the “anthropomorphic animals have sex and murder each other” anime. But I would be remiss if I did not start here, with this quote, because Audre Lorde’s concept of the erotic is essential for my understanding of sexuality and is core to the themes in Beastars that I’d like to address. So please, as we move forward, keep this quote in your mind.

First, let’s start by talking about human desire. If you are familiar with the terms “spontaneous” and “responsive” desire, it’s mostly likely through the work of Emily Nagoski, sex researcher and educator.[2] If you are not, luckily they are pretty intuitive to understand. Spontaneous desire is desire that is automatic and involuntary – think seeing someone you find attractive and going “God damn, I want to fuck them” or getting randomly horny during a work meeting. This is desire that is intense and make you want to act on it immediately, whether or not you choose to do so. In Beastars, carnivores’ urges to devour or hunger for meat are portrayed as a type of spontaneous desire. Carnivores want, immediately and uncontrollably. Whether or not they act on this desire is up to their own decision, but the desire itself will exist even if they do nothing. Anecdotally, this is the type of desire that tends to be more common in folks with testosterone dominant systems, though please note that research shows people regardless of gender can experience both kinds of desire.

Legoshi braces himself against a wall with drool dripping from his mouth. He thinks, "I can't stop drooling. I'm filled with ugly desires. I can't let go of them.

Responsive desire is a bit different and a bit less obvious. Responsive desire only shows up when prompted, hence the name. Responsive desire is also automatic, but it requires a bit of stimulation first before showing up to the party. Think needing a bit of foreplay, or a nice dinner and some heavy flirting before feeling the urge to have sex with someone. That doesn’t mean that it is less genuine or intense than spontaneous desire, and it certainly doesn’t mean that attraction doesn’t exist in a given situation, but it does mean that people who experience primarily responsive desire are less likely to initiate sexual activity, because responsive desire does not show up on its own. Anecdotally this desire tends to be more common in folks with estrogen dominant systems, though my disclaimers from above still apply. Funnily enough, responsive desire is shown by herbivores in Beastars, though in a less obvious way than you might think. In their first explicitly sexual encounter, Haru notes that her body tries to get eaten by Legoshi’s against her will. When Legoshi instinctively goes to devour her, her body responds to this stimulus in kind with its own instinct – to jump straight into Legoshi’s mouth, terrifying both of them. Responsive desire.

Haru and Legoshi look at each other. The narration says, "Just as predators have feral instincts, prey have feral instincts of their own." Haru says, "I'm sorry... My body just... tried to get eaten by you..."

I say this because I want to reinforce as much as possible that in Beastars, the desire to devour is sexual. Devouring and sex occupy the same place in a carnivore’s brain – and in herbivores’ brains too, despite what their society may teach. Thus, any moral imperative or societal belief must apply equally to both. And it does, because the world shown to us in Beastars is almost violently puritanical. In order to live in “harmony”, beasts must control their biological instincts and show only parts of themselves deemed appropriate and inoffensive to others. Every part of the body considered “animal” in Beastars is seen as a potential source of friction between beasts, and because these instincts and desires are held in the physical body, the body itself is deemed deviant or even sinful. This is why they literally have designated “biology hours” in school where, on a regular schedule, they go to engage with their bodies’ natural needs, even for things as basic and harmless as wolves howling at the moon or squirrels climbing trees. While the manga does not spend much time on this, passing these biology hours by in just a few pages, it highlights the dysfunctional and dystopian nature of the Beastars world. Can you imagine if, in human society, we only had government-regulated hours and places where we could cuddle, play, or love each other? Wait…

Black narrative text over a picture of Legoshi running states, "He lives life struggling with his developing body, his feral instincts, and his pure heart...

D. Carnivorous Desire

As I stated above, for carnivores it is almost impossible to differentiate between lust and hunger. The clearest example I can think of to show this is my beloved Juno, who repeatedly laments to Legoshi that she has gained weight since developing feelings for Louis, because every time she thinks about him she gets hungry (note: fatphobia is also a huge part of this dynamic - weight also being a symbol for “gluttony” or out-of-control desire - but that is a different post). Because they can’t tell the difference between these two feelings (they’re the same feeling), the shame that carnivores carry applies to both. And shame is a true mood-killer, to the point where I question whether or not anyone in Beastars is actually having good sex. Do we see anyone having good sex? Maybe the characters in the gay BDSM club where Yahya brings Legoshi – beasts who have already had to unpack their relationship to societal norms are more likely to freely engage with what they want, a statement that applies to humans, too. But of our main cast, I doubt it. Some of this is from real and present danger, sure – it can be hard to enjoy a moment where you are fearing from your life – but I’d argue that most of their dissatisfaction comes from stigma. After all, both of these desires are inherent to a creature’s being. They are not things that can be turned off and on at will. They are things that beasts carry with them wherever they go, a constant reminder of their status, of the taboo of their bodies.[3]

Legoshi and Juno look at each other. Juno looks sad. She says, "I think I have an unconscious desire to eat him. It's hard for me to differentiate love and appetite. I can only turn to you for help."

But devouring can also be a source of intimacy. Going back to our complicated friend Riz, he originally considers devouring Tem as a “gentle, peaceful” act that turned Tem into his closest herbivore friend. And it makes sense, to some extent. Devouring combines two creatures into one. It allows beasts to see each other at their most genuine, pieces of themselves normally confined to biology hours or outright banned being brought to light and shared with someone else. This is why Legoshi devouring Louis’ leg with his consent is such a beautiful and life-changing act for both of them – Legoshi takes a piece of Louis into himself, in the process showing Louis that he is indeed the powerful carnivore he tries so hard not to show to the world, the part of himself that carries the most shame. Louis, in exchange, allows Legoshi to see him at his weakest and yet paradoxically most powerful – while he is physically giving in to a carnivore, he’s also letting Legoshi free him from the chains of his past, the branded #4 on his foot which serves a reminder of his origins as a trafficked child, finally gone. Ironically, it is this act that allows Legoshi to finally defeat Riz, whose concept of intimate devouring was indeed delusion, devoid of the one thing that allows closeness to actually occur: everyone involved saying yes.

Remember kids, consent is sexy.

Riz the bear lays in bed. In the next panel, he is peeling a carrot and then adding it to a soup. He thinks, "But, I ate Tem the alpaca consensually, which is how he became my one true herbivore friend. It's like how food ingredients offer no resistance. The act was gentle...peaceful...and therefore consensual. Legoshi is wrapped around Haru from behind like he is going to devour her. He says, "It feels like you're becoming a part of me..."

In this way, devouring serves not as an exact stand-in for human concepts of sexuality – going back to my original point about how Beastars is not concerned with being an allegory – but as a mirror held up to our own world’s ideas about desire, connectedness, and yes, the erotic. It’s there directly in the text – when Legoshi eats Louis’ leg, he literally becomes a “registered meat offender”, a status that impacts his ability to relate to other animals. Legoshi himself states that his devouring and the existence of Melon, who is half carnivore and half herbivore, are “similar agonies” coming from a carnivore and an herbivore becoming “too close to each other.” His eating Louis’ leg is just sex in another form.

Legoshi looks sad and thinks, "The hybrid that's born from a carnivore and herbivore too close to each other... I feel like my act of predation and melon's existence are similar agonies."

Of course there is no way that all of this repression and stigmatization of carnivores’ instinctual desires do not affect them emotionally. In Part 1, I discussed how carnivores in Beastars are often shown having complex relationships to their own identity, including its associations with strength and predation. How this looks for them in practice manifests in a variety of different ways, but it too mirrors sex and sexuality in the human world.

To discuss this, I have to dip back into the field of sex education and sex therapy for a bit. In the world of sexuality professionals, there is a therapy model called the PLISSIT model.[4] The PLISSIT model is used to provide a linear pathway for sexuality professionals to use with clients in session. PLISSIT stands for the stages of the model: Permission giving, Limited Information, Specific Suggestions, and Intensive Therapy. Permission giving is first and the largest section of the model because it makes up the vast majority of any sexuality professional’s initial consultations. What permission giving looks like in practice is largely reassurance – telling someone that it is okay to be what they already are, that it is okay to want what they already want. Giving them permission to exist as themselves. Saying that they are okay, their desires are okay, their existence is okay. They are allowed to exist and they are allowed to desire. They are not harming anyone by wanting. They are not evil nor are they alone.

Let me say that again: You are okay. Your desires are okay. Your existence is okay. You are not harming anyone by wanting. You are not evil, and you are not alone.

Permission giving resolves genuinely almost all struggles for which someone is seeking the assistance of a sex therapist or educator. Very few clients actually get to the limited information stage, and fewer still require specific suggestions or intensive therapy. Why? Because we live in a society where people are taught that the things they naturally want are immoral, sinful, or wrong. Because we are taught that our bodies are things to be fought, not things to be honored or treasured. That desire is a sign of moral failure. Of course unlearning this requires some help – why wouldn’t it?

Louis looks forward aggressively while saying, "Right now, what carnivores need most is "allowance"... If you see that even one herbivore recommends the use of the Back-Alley Market, then you can bet more carnivores will be coming here."

You can see this in Beastars with the way carnivores desire forgiveness – permission – from herbivores. Legoshi specifically asks Haru to forgive him for being a carnivore. Yahya makes Legoshi repent on his knees for his carnivorous nature. And Louis, when becoming the head of the Shishigumi, states that the one thing carnivores desire most is permission. He knows that a carnivore seeing him, a red deer, as the head of a Black Market mob family will let them think it’s okay to devour. He has the power to provide them with this absolution, and he knows that once he does, carnivores will flock to the Black Market, their desires finally let loose. Going back to Part 1 again, this is another example of Louis using his devourability as a way to gain power over other beasts. And it works, because he’s right. The one thing carnivores, like all beasts, and like all humans, desire most is the permission to exist as their true self. Going back to Audre Lorde, to recognize their erotic and embody it freely.

E. Orientations and Queerness

It is impossible to discuss sexual desire and not discuss sexual orientation, and Beastars sure loves to discuss orientation as well, so let’s move on. For the purposes of this post, I’d like to make something very clear – queerness is not solely defined by orientation. It can and does encompass other aspects of identity as well. Ask any queer theorist for their definition of queerness and you will come away with probably several paragraphs of dense text that could otherwise be summarized easily as “difference from the status quo.” Because to be queer is to be different, to be strange. It is to go against the grain of society and to do so with some level of intention. Using this definition, it becomes clear that queerness is not something that exists on its own, but as something that is created, and even strengthened, by the existence of a dominant script from which to deviate.

Let me give an example – I grew up in a very conservative small town, where there was a strong sense of normality and a very intense dominant culture. Most people dressed the same, acted the same, and had the same opinions. But those of us who were different? We were very different. We were loud, proud, and held our sense of deviancy close to us. Why? Because the intensity of that dominant culture created an opposite reaction in us – we felt the need to rebel. Our difference was so highlighted that it became central to our identities. Our difference was created by the suffocation of the prevailing norm. Queerness is the same way. Queerness is the natural outcome of trying to force beings to live in a society that constrains their desires instead of being shaped by them and working with them constructively. In my small town, if there had been acceptance and room for any sort of difference, my band of gay little freaks probably would not have existed, dissolving into the mainstream culture. But because we were not accepted, we were gay little freaks, and we bonded over having that in common. In Beastars, queerness is created by the cultural norm that beasts are solely attracted to members of their own species, or at least their own side of the carnivore/herbivore divide. To experience attraction across that divide is to be queer. Whether or not a beast is actually attracted to beasts of their same gender is somewhat irrelevant when considered next to the much bigger and messier picture of species, because as we discussed in Part 1, species is the most relevant identifier a beast can have.

By adding this additional variable – predator or prey attraction – Beastars complicates our human understanding of sexual and romantic orientation. Instead of being a single axis between gay and straight, like the Kinsey scale, sexuality becomes an X & Y axis with quadrants. Of course, it’s much more complex than this, just like human sexuality – many people have kinks or fetishes that take the place of a gender-bases orientation, and many people are asexual. But for the purposes of this post, let’s consider it like an X&Y. The creation of this alternate axis expands not only the definition of queerness, but the definitions of relationships and orientations themselves. Beasts can have relationships to each other that are romantic, sexual, or neither, that defy societal norms or follow them rigidly.

Through this lens, Beastars becomes a story about a cast of queer young adults navigating their relationships to each other and their sexualities, attempting to live authentically in a world that shames, stigmatizes, and erases their identities. This subtext isn’t particularly subtle – I’d argue it isn’t even subtext so much as it is just the text itself. Louis’ father straight up asks him if he’s uninterested in females, or just female deer (in the same sentence!). Why? Because he attempted to have sex with Azuki against a backdrop of a conservative news station fearmongering about carnivores and instead of fucking his arranged-fiancé like was expected of him, he panicked, then vomited. And then immediately called his pack of carnivores to come pick him up and comfort him. Totally straight behavior, totally. Totally not exactly what a gay man would do in an arranged marriage to a woman. Yep. No queerness in sight here.

Louis looks aggressively down while thinking, "Have sex, have sex, have sex, have sex!! Have sex with Azuki, your fellow red deer!!"

Meanwhile Juno, who has verbally expressed attraction to both carnivores and herbivores, presents like a young girl who is struggling with external pressures on her bisexuality. She knows who she is, but as soon as she starts facing the real discrimination that beasts in interspecies relationships experience, her relationship to her sexuality changes and she is forced to grapple with the fact that she may have to hide who she is in order to even get a sliver of what she wants. This manifests in maybe my favorite moment of Juno’s. At the very end of the manga, Louis chooses to remain in his arranged marriage to Azuki instead of following his desire and attraction to Juno. Juno, obviously hurt by this, kisses Louis on their last date, and as she turns to leave, says, "...with this, a fangless kiss will not satisfy you anymore.” Talk about a Good Luck, Babe Moment! She has learned that she needs to be in a relationship with someone who isn’t ashamed of her, and Louis can’t give her that. I will never forgive the anime for cutting this line because to me, it is central to Juno’s character development and the resolution of her conflict around her sexuality. She is choosing herself. Louis is not.

Juno looks backwards over her shoulder and says, "...with this, a fangless kiss will not satisfy you anymore."

And then there is Legoshi. If I were to list all of the times that Legoshi’s internal monologue overlapped with archetypical queer coming of age stories, we’d be here literally all week. So instead I will just say that his entire self-acceptance arc is one of a queer teenager realizing the strength that comes with his queerness and building a community for himself around his identity. He is always commenting on finding herbivores beautiful, and even states that he cannot be turned on if his body doesn’t recognize a woman as a carnivore or an herbivore, because he is so exclusively attracted to herbivores. He describes it as a fetish, which it very well may be, but in Beastars it is an entire aspect of his orientation and identity (side note: fetishes are like this for many humans as well, but once again – another post). Legoshi reacts strongly with disdain when attempting to picture his future with a grey wolf wife and grey wolf child – he cannot see himself wanting that at any point. Much like a gay teenager would react when trying to picture their future with an opposite gender spouse, it is like trying on an outfit and immediately recognizing that it just will never fit.

Legoshi is shown wearing a gas mask that covers his face and has fake antlers. He says, "There's also that, well, weirdly enough, I have an apparent herbivore fetish... My body doesn't react to females if they're wearing masks that conceal their species."

F. Where Does This Leave Us?

So what is Beastars actually saying with all of this extensive worldbuilding and societal mirroring? Well, first of all it is saying that the status quo, the dominant culture, is deeply entrenched – and on purpose, for the benefit of those who wish to stay in control. Systemic change is difficult, even in light of “radical” events like those that occur at the end of the manga. One flash in the pan attempt to liberate society by making animals hold hands in the dark will not disrupt the layers of fear and repression that are baked into every aspect of the Beastars world.

And yet, the erotic will always exist. The erotic is a radical force for change that cannot be stamped out, no matter how much people may try. As beings, we all have inalienable truths about ourselves that no laws or cultural norms can erase. And these truths are powerful. One truth: carnivores need meat to survive. Another truth: herbivores deserve to live in peace. Yet another truth: sometimes love crosses boundaries in ways that make these needs conflict, even if no one has done anything wrong. It’s how we navigate these truths that determine what kind of life we live.

Haru and Legoshi look at each other. He looks surprised and upset. She looks determined. She says, "Right now, you're overflowing with confidence... so strong, so kind, so perfect. If I just let myself live a happy life with you... I... would still lose... Nothing would have changed... I hate being just a rabbit who loses to a wolf."

Beastars offers no real resolution to the carnivore/herbivore power gap, or to the intensity and danger of carnivorous desire. It doesn’t even offer a strong resolution to the relationships of its main characters. While that may be partially because of a rushed ending to the manga and Paru’s inability to balance an escalating plot with the needs of such a large cast, I do think it serves a purpose. Haru and Legoshi’s relationship ends on conversation, mediation, navigation. Authenticity across difference requires constant work. There is no such thing as two beings who perfectly understand each other, whose worlds perfectly line up. Instead, there are just animals. As Haru says, at the end of the day she will always be a rabbit and Legoshi will always be a wolf. They will never share the same experiences, and their worlds will always be drastically different. But they can start to bridge that gap – and they do.

Louis is shown on a large outdoor TV screen at a press conference. He is agitated and says, "This is a plea for every species: Please don't avert your eyes from the Back-Alley Market!! Please direct your eyes on the reality that surrounds it!!"

Haru and Legoshi prove only way to bridge gaps in relationships is through open, honest communication. Louis and Legoshi prove that only way to make structural change is by building relationships. Real ones, founded on trust and care for each other. And it is fundamentally impossible to build a genuine relationship without acknowledging the real truth of oneself and one’s identity. Systemic change cannot, will not happen until we can honestly talk about our experiences, our desires. Until we can bring our erotic into the room with us and be seen in our entirety. This is Louis’ goal when he pleads for the world to not avert their eyes from the Black Market. He knows that relationships between carnivores and herbivores will never improve as long as both sides keep pretending that this violence is not occurring, like this desire does not exist, like devouring is a series of freak accidents and not a real tangible conflict that must be dealt with from its root. Like carnivores are monsters for their biology. Like herbivores are destined to only be prey. It is easier for some to look away – for herbivores to dissociate from their dangerous realities as a trauma response and for carnivores to shove their desires down, down, down until they can pretend they do not exist. But it does not make the truth less true. There is tension here, and everyone knows it. But until we see that tension, until we lean into it, until we allow everyone’s full selves to take up space even if it means colliding with each other, until we acknowledge the depths of our hunger – we will never know what it means to be satisfied.

P.S. As a reward for making it to the end of this incredibly long post, I’ll leave you with a creation of my own: a Beastars orientation chart. Why is Sagwan gay? Well, reader, because I wanted him to be. Thank you so much for reading!

A Tiermaker.com chart of Beastars characters placed on an X&Y sexuality axis between straight (gender) and gay (gender) and between straight (species) and gay (species)

[1] Audre Lorde, “The Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic As Power”, Sister Outsider, 1978, p. 54

[2] Emily Nagoski, “The Science of Saving Your Sex Life”, March 27, 2015, https://medium.com/galleys/the-science-of-saving-your-sex-life-ed9cfeb4edd7

[3] Melon operates in a fascinating way here narratively – and all credit to the person who came up to me after I gave this panel at Otakon for this incredibly important insight. Because Melon is neither herbivore nor carnivore, he is not able to access his own sense of his erotic. He has no desire – food has no taste to him, and he carries no instinct to consume or be consumed. He exists outside of the societal herbivore/carnivore paradigm. Paradoxically, this frees him and allows him to be the one character in Beastars truly chasing what he wants. Because he has been forced to the margins of society, he is allowed to engage in truly deviant behavior without fear of being ostracized – what can they do to Melon that has not already been done to him? Not to defend Melon’s actions as he is quite literally a serial killer, but he does prove my point pretty spectacularly, so I’ll give him some credit for that.

[4] Annon, J. S. (1976). The PLISSIT Model: A Proposed Conceptual Scheme for the Behavioral Treatment of Sexual Problems. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 2(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01614576.1976.11074483

Hungry Like The Wolf: Sex and Sexuality in Beastars - Part Two

Comments