Is Cloud Strife Transgender?

[Winter]

I read this a while ago and it got me thinking, could Cloud be trans? The basic idea is that Cloud is either Nonbinary, a closet trans woman or a trans man partially because of the infamous Disguised in Drag arc of the story, but also because of elements such as his struggles with identity and wanting to be different from the other boys in his village.

Of these three I personally think the trans man is the most likely due to how Cloud Dislikes being dressed as a woman and being treated as such annoys him to no end. Also, keep in mind that when he believes that he was a solider that he created a persona for himself that he was most comfortable with which was the brooding bad boy and overall pretty masculine. Not like Barret but still, it's telling that his ideal version of himself is that of Zack or rather, his interpretation of Zack.

Thoughts?

[ProfessorDetective]

No, but he CAN rock that dress, especially in Remake. Hell, maybe that's why this one is popular: wishful thinking.

[Poipoi]

Is he Transgender?

No. Cloud has issues that are not gender-related. In both versions of FF7, he is not comfortable in women's clothing. His idea of what Soldier First class should be was more made up from seeing how Sephiroth acted. His idol, Sephiroth, tended to come off as cold and jerky. If it was just Zack, he would have been more flirty and friendly. He has low self-confidence. Due to what he sees as a failure to achieve his dreams and the trauma of seeing Zack die, he constructed a new persona in his head. When he was forced to face his lies, had a mental breakdown. All that was the first game. Not sure how things will pan out in the Remake series, as Cloud was forced to remember Zack existed in remake part 1. But who knows at this point? I just don't see Cloud as transgender.

[clearspira]

He's a guy who was forced into a dress because ''ha ha man in dress be funny.'' And even then, you honestly think that this was on anyone's mind back in 1997? Any ''trans symbolism'' is in the minds of people today.

[TGLS]

Even then, you honestly think that this was on anyone's mind back in 1997? Any ''trans symbolism'' is in the minds of people today.

So what? Death of the Author applies here as much as it does with Wolf 359 as a 9/11 allegory (which is in part why I find ST: Picard's Mars attack annoying).

Then again I do agree with the first part anyway.

[clearspira]

Even then, you honestly think that this was on anyone's mind back in 1997? Any ''trans symbolism'' is in the minds of people today.

So what? Death of the Author applies here as much as it does with Wolf 359 as a 9/11 allegory (which is in part why I find ST: Picard's Mars attack annoying).

Then again I do agree with the first part anyway.

See... that gets us onto Death of the Author as a discussion point. Its all very well having headcanon. I have mentally rewritten large swathes of latter day Star Trek, Star Wars and Dr Who so I can actually continue watching the show. But ultimately, it isn't true. Discovery still exists, Luke Skywalker became a coward, Dr Who didn't die with Eleven when his regenerations ran out. The only true story is what ''is'' not what we ''want.''

Regarding Wolf 359 being a 9/11 allegory. Of course that isn't literal. But its also not untrue that Wolf 359 fundamentally changed the Star Trek universe in ways I think probably amounted to an intentional soft reboot. And given how Picard and Guinan reference the fall of Rome during BOBW, I actually think Wolf 359 was originally meant to be an allegory about the decadent Republic (Federation/possibly Gene Roddenberry) poncing about thinking that they are so awesome whilst their enemies are thundering through their territory. And just as the Republic led to Empire, Wolf 359 led to Picard putting his phaser rifle through a glass case in his ready room.

[TGLS]

Even then, you honestly think that this was on anyone's mind back in 1997? Any ''trans symbolism'' is in the minds of people today.

So what? Death of the Author applies here as much as it does with Wolf 359 as a 9/11 allegory (which is in part why I find ST: Picard's Mars attack annoying).

Then again I do agree with the first part anyway.

See... that gets us onto Death of the Author as a discussion point. Its all very well having headcanon. I have mentally rewritten large swathes of latter day Star Trek, Star Wars and Dr Who so I can actually continue watching the show. But ultimately, it isn't true. Discovery still exists, Luke Skywalker became a coward, Dr Who didn't die with Eleven when his regenerations ran out. The only true story is what ''is'' not what we ''want.''

Well, two points:
1) Death of the Author is going to be a bit screwed up when the series are actively being developed (or perhaps get restarted). If I understand correctly, Final Fantasy are a bunch of one offs (but I might be wrong).
2) Death of the Author makes better arguments when centered on the Subtext, as opposed to the Declarative text. Discovery declares that Burnham is Spock's adopted sister. Nigh impossible to say otherwise, without silly things like: "Alternate Universe" or "All a Dream" to make it work.

Compare with, say, The Matrix. Was it a sci-fi reimagining of Plato's Cave? Transgender allegory? Just a cool Action/SF movie with dystopian elements? The subtext has element that support all three, the declarative text says little about allegory, so DoA can make good arguments.

Here (Cloud FF7), the declarative text is silent (and would be hamfisted if it were otherwise), and you can read in to it a little. Honestly I don't think there's enough here to support the argument the OP wants to make. That might be because there is no more evidence, or because the OP is writing for fun on a forum and not a persuasive essay.

TL;DR: Even with Death of the Author, things that are declared outright are nigh impossible to argue with.

[Winter]

Even then, you honestly think that this was on anyone's mind back in 1997? Any ''trans symbolism'' is in the minds of people today.

So what? Death of the Author applies here as much as it does with Wolf 359 as a 9/11 allegory (which is in part why I find ST: Picard's Mars attack annoying).

Then again I do agree with the first part anyway.

See... that gets us onto Death of the Author as a discussion point. Its all very well having headcanon. I have mentally rewritten large swathes of latter day Star Trek, Star Wars and Dr Who so I can actually continue watching the show. But ultimately, it isn't true. Discovery still exists, Luke Skywalker became a coward, Dr Who didn't die with Eleven when his regenerations ran out. The only true story is what ''is'' not what we ''want.''

Well, two points:
1) Death of the Author is going to be a bit screwed up when the series are actively being developed (or perhaps get restarted). If I understand correctly, Final Fantasy are a bunch of one offs (but I might be wrong).
2) Death of the Author makes better arguments when centered on the Subtext, as opposed to the Declarative text. Discovery declares that Burnham is Spock's adopted sister. Nigh impossible to say otherwise, without silly things like: "Alternate Universe" or "All a Dream" to make it work.

Compare with, say, The Matrix. Was it a sci-fi reimagining of Plato's Cave? Transgender allegory? Just a cool Action/SF movie with dystopian elements? The subtext has element that support all three, the declarative text says little about allegory, so DoA can make good arguments.

Here (Cloud FF7), the declarative text is silent (and would be hamfisted if it were otherwise), and you can read in to it a little. Honestly I don't think there's enough here to support the argument the OP wants to make. That might be because there is no more evidence, or because the OP is writing for fun on a forum and not a persuasive essay.

TL;DR: Even with Death of the Author, things that are declared outright are nigh impossible to argue with.

It's posted for fun mainly due to the game's theme of Identity and how one sees themself being THE main theme of the FF7 series.

[hammerofglass]

He's a guy who was forced into a dress because ''ha ha man in dress be funny.'' And even then, you honestly think that this was on anyone's mind back in 1997? Any ''trans symbolism'' is in the minds of people today.

I mean the cyperpunk genre (and punk culture in general) that the game pulls heavily from has had trans elements and themes baked in pretty much since it's inception in the 70's, so yeah. It would be reasonable to assume it was on the writers' minds.

[clearspira]

He's a guy who was forced into a dress because ''ha ha man in dress be funny.'' And even then, you honestly think that this was on anyone's mind back in 1997? Any ''trans symbolism'' is in the minds of people today.

I mean the cyperpunk genre (and punk culture in general) that the game pulls heavily from has had trans elements and themes baked in pretty much since it's inception in the 70's, so yeah. It would be reasonable to assume it was on the writers' minds.

How big was cyberpunk in Japan back in 1997?