Just my 2cents

Omg where can I see mojitos sketch about Seth you wrote about?? On her Twitter? I had no idea there where short sketch comics

Obsessive love and forced relationships are always poison, no matter the sexual orientation

Yup its on her X’s TL. She also did some QnA for each characters as well. It’s heartbreaking when it comes to Seth n Anubis’s QnA about each other. Fun fact: the cute ribbon tied around young Anubis’s neck was Seth’s gift for him because he told Nept not to put any jewellery around his neck as it is too heavy for him.. awww

But You need to do some digging though, most translated sketches were from private acc. But im sure the raw version is still there on her platform. There’s like a gdrive link or smthg. It was many moons ago, so I hope you will be able to find it. Be ready to get your heart crushed because that’s what our Ennead’s future should look like before the green toad ogre ruins everything.

I agree! But im still curious about his past. The panel when he met Ra and ranted as if he’s the biggest victim that everything got stolen from him is….intriguing. How can someone become this evil and vile.

I agree with your take but what a bizarre way to frame this. Osiris isn't forcing his homosexuality on Seth, he is forcing his lust and obsession on him. Even if Seth was gay (imo he is bi) or a straight girl it wouldn't make it ok. Seth wouldn't love Osiris even if he was gay. It's kind of weird that you frame this as a straight vs gay story, and the way you wrote it implies that Osiris "love" is only wrong because it's homosexual love. He isn't an example of forcing homosexuality unto anyone because it's not a wide spread issue that needs adressing, unlike forcing feelings on anyone even if your orientations match.

I see where you're coming from, but I still believe Osiris's actions can be framed as forcing his sexuality onto Seth, especially given the historical context. While Seth's sexuality is open to interpretation, the cultural norms of ancient Egypt would likely have positioned him as mostly straight. Osiris’s obsession with his brother, trying to win him over despite Seth’s lack of interest, mirrors the harm caused when someone forces their own sexual desires onto another person who doesn’t share them. It’s not just about lust—it’s about disregarding Seth’s identity and autonomy, which feels very much like forcing someone into a relationship or sexual orientation that isn’t theirs.

When I say Osiris is forcing his sexuality onto Seth, I’m not just talking about romantic feelings but the imposition of his desires and expectations, regardless of Seth’s consent. Just as it would be wrong to pressure someone into a heterosexual relationship, it’s equally harmful for Osiris to force a connection based on his own desires without considering Seth’s feelings. The real issue here isn’t just that Osiris is obsessed, but that he refuses to respect Seth’s boundaries, attempting to control how Seth feels and who he loves.

So, I use the term “straight” not to assume Seth’s exact sexual orientation but to reflect the historical context, where he would likely be seen as straight. By framing it this way, I’m highlighting how Osiris’s obsession is essentially a form of forcing his sexual desires onto Seth, which would be harmful regardless of their sexual identities.

The thing is, "homosexuality" and "heterosexuality" are very, very recent terms. They didn't exist until the 19th century and there was no word before to describe sexual orientation in most culture, including Egypt. When the act of two men having sex was seen as wrong, it was only the act and not the sexual orientation as that, again, was not seen as something that exist. Seth would not have been seen as straight and Osiris could not have assumed that he was not into men because they did not have the idea that sexual orientation was linked to one's identity. I understand your take better now (and again agree with all of it besides the "forcing sexual orientation" part, I really dont get why it's important to your view because a gay man forcing another gay man would be just as much disrecpecting someone's boundaries and autonomy) but I think that it's a very modern way to look at a story, which is fine, but you seem to suggest that the historical context matters to your reading of the story, but you didnt seem to know that sexual identity was not a thing in Ancient Egypt.

I think what you need to pay attention to this part in your first sentence: "forcing his sexuality onto others, making his own pain everyone else's problem." The "pain" sounds as if you're talking about the pain of having to hide his sexual orientation (since the word comes right after "sexuality", which many people equal to "sexual orientation" even if those two words are not necessarily identical, even though still related). However, if this is actually how you intended it, then there are two issues:

One is what SirKevin said in their last post, as in, that sexual identity was not a thing in Ancient Egypt, because sex with a person of the same gender was considered a practice, not an identity. And there were places in the past where the "practice" was tolerated as long as they kept it behind closed doors, or/and at least one of the same-sex partners maintained a cover in public (marriage with a woman or just having a kid or two). Osiris, for example, said he was willing to "tolerate" up to Seth being married to Nephthys. Sure, he WAS jealous and draw the line for anything beyond that, like Seth actually having kids with her...But the point is, Osiris was willing to let Seth keep up his marriage to Nephthys, at least "in appearance" (when he finally told Seth his feelings, he didn't outright tell Seth to completely ditch Nephthys and marry himself). And when Seth rejected him, the main argument he used was that his marriage with Nephthys was an exclusive relationship (meaning, that if Isis or any other women or men had tried to make a move on him, Seth would have rejected out of a desire to be faithful to his wife, not because they weren't the right gender). That was when Osiris so dementedly decided that, since his own gender easn't apparently the problem, then his "inability" to give Seth a blood-related family eas probably it... but that's only because Osiris couldn't accept the fact that Seth would remain 100% faithful to Nephthys, having her as his only sexua partner, and choose her over him for any other reason than wanting to get a child out of her. Osiris was completely unwilling to accept that Seth would choose Nephthys for any other reason than her "ability" to give him blood descendants. Thus, it wasn't that Osiris was in pain because he thought Seth would never choose him for a romantic relationship (extramarital or not) due to him being a man; nope, Osiris was in pain because he thought Seth would never choose him for a romantic relationship because Osiris couldn't give him children (as in, that Seth's proclaimed wish to stay faithful to his wife was only an excuse he was giving, according to Osiris, in order to be able to stay longer in his relationship with a woman, Nephthys, long enough for her to provide him with a baby...). But, the thing is, sexual identity and sexual orientation have nothing to do with a person's desire and ability to have blood related children.

The second issue is that saying Osiris was "forcing his sexuality onto others, making his own pain everyone else's problem" makes it sound as if Osiris' pain is that other people (along with Seth, himself) would have to be made to accept his and Seth's romantic relationship, by force, so that they wouldn't oppose it, which is not true because Osiris' pain is that he can't use the only kind of bait that he thought would have tempted Seth into having a romantic relationship with ANYBODY: dangling the option of having a kid. Moreover, the other people's opposition to the above would have only been true in the sense that they would have only opposed to Osiris forcing Seth into a relationship, and not to them having a romantic relationship, altogether (I mean, they would have been more angry at the infidelity, rather than at the fact that they were two men in a relationship with each other)

To sum up (TLDR): that for that first sentence in ypur first post to be correct, it should have been "Osiris is a prime example of someone forcing *homonormativity* onto others, making his own pain *of unrequited same-sex love* everyone else's problem.

I'm absolutely impressed about the ability of everyone in this topic to give intelligent, respectful and well explained answers regardless of their opinion. Honestly it's super nice to see polite disagreement on here