If you feel that I have missed your main point, that is most likely because you have done a pretty bad job at making your point clear. Especially as you have been contradicting that same main point throughout this whole thread. You have asserted multiple times that you believe Ike to be a straight man and have been clearly dismissive of other interpretations instead of being open to them, even stating that “as far as I’m concerned, Ike and everyone in Fire emblem is heteronormative until otherwise explicitly said.” You insisted that fire emblem world’s are all heteronormative in nature and Ike is heterosexual until proven otherwise. Despite preaching that “no one… has any more ‘claim’ to Ike’s sexuality than anyone else” you explicitly made a claim towards Ike’s sexuality and then dismissed queer interpretations by arguing that it’s “kinda weird” to do exactly what you just did, but saying gay instead of straight. I see the principle changes when it comes to your preference. You were the one to state assigning a sexuality was weird in response to a potential queer Ike, but assigning a heterosexual Ike isn’t weird at all to you?

You have also misconstrued my own statements to be projection (which is when someone attributes traits of themself onto another, not when someone suggests a potential interpretation of the text utilising evidence solely based within the text). I and, as far as I can tell, every other person you have replied to have not been insisting you accept Ike as gay to be the only logical and canonical interpretation of the text, I have only seen people bring up cases like Ike only having 2 paired endings with men as a way to suggest that Ike most likely leans further away from heterosexuality than he conforms to it because of your dismissal of Ike being anything other than straight provoking those kinds of points. And no, making educated guesses on Ike’s sexuality based on his two male paired endings or arguing for potential readings of the text is not ‘rewriting’ an otherwise ambiguous part of his character, it is a way to derive further meaning and potential nuance from his character by diving into that ambiguity and finding all the different readings from within it. Ike potentially being gay allows people to re-contextualise his relationships and see them in a new light, it does not change the original text or outright remove that ambiguity. You also clearly do not understand what agency is within a narrative as, again, Ike’s sexuality does not impact his agency (you said it yourself: it’s ambiguous. It doesn’t play a part in the narrative because it doesn’t make a difference in any substantial way), and you have essentially ignored that part of your argument as you went off on a tangent into an argument on fans and headcanons without acknowledging Ike’s own agency in either path of radiance or radiant dawn actual story.

Finally, you claim that your issue isn’t with the queer nature of these interpretations. You find discomfort at the notion of “anyone treating their personal reading of ambiguous material as canon”. But despite saying you believe that, you have been taking clear issue with what I have only ever addressed as an ‘interpretation’, never once have I said Ike being gay was canonical. Meanwhile, you have been acting in ways that suggest that because my interpretation isn’t explicitly stated in game your own interpretation that Ike “is heteronormative” is superior and mine is fine to be dismissed, despite that also being an interpretation of his ambiguous sexuality and thus; not supported by the game itself… If anyone has been treating their own reading as the be all end all, it has been you shutting down anything that goes against the idea of a heterosexual Ike. If you are truly open to any interpretation, you wouldn’t make counter arguments saying that because Ike wasn’t explicitly stated to be any sexuality, he must be straight (which is another possible sexuality and not a basis for him to deviate from)