#either make it Only for aces or actually commit to being inclusive | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

smokeonshadows · 4 years ago

Text

We need to talk about the Bobbseys

Strap in, kids. This is going to be...a lot.

To put it bluntly, the way the Bobbseys were handled was messy, unnecessary, and probably the worst thing about an otherwise great season.

It's really disappointing because the Nancy Drew writers have already proven themselves to be not only good writers, but also socially conscious writers. They actively and publicly aim to be inclusive in their storytelling, so I think it's fair to hold them to that standard.

There was a lot of potential in the Bobbseys–they're a morally ambiguous brother-sister team of codependent twins from a rough/tragic past who sometimes lie, cheat, and steal in order to make ends meet. This is interesting, this is full of possibilities as to how they could fit in with the Drew Crew, and, most of all, this was a great opportunity to have complex representation of the south asian community that subverts popular stereotypes (model minority, traditional upbringing, perpetual foreigner, etc.). Amanda and Gil would've been great characters in their own rights...but instead they were used as nothing more than cannon fodder for an unnecessary, half-baked love square with low key racist undertones.

Problematic elements

I've already talked about the racist undertones in previous posts, but in a nutshell, Gil is portrayed as being controlling/aggressive/domineering (particularly towards Nancy and Amanda) and it's a stereotype that south asian men (and I'd say black and brown men in general) are misogynistic, aggressive, and otherwise abusive towards women. This portrayal is made even worse because he's meant to be a foil for Ace, a soft/gentle/sensitive/emotionally stable white guy who Nancy is obviously meant to be with. And for Amanda, she's also portrayed in line with the stereotype of asian women being very submissive (particularly to their male counterparts). I don't think any of this was intentional, but it's just not a good look.

This problem could've at least been somewhat alleviated if Gil and Amanda had been written as fully fleshed out characters who were going on their own journeys and were consequential to the story, but that didn't happen.

Stereotypes aside, another problematic aspect of the Bobbseys is that they both fall into the unfortunately common trope of being the character of color that the white character has a superficial relationship with and leads white character to realizing that they should actually be with this other white character who's been there all along.

Even when they have roles in the episode apart from being superficial love interests, oftentimes they don't do much aside from being useful for getting the Crew from point A to point B of a mystery.

Underdeveloped relationships

Was I the only one who found the resolution of the Nancy x Gil relationship in the season finale to be a bit abrupt?

While I appreciate that they showed how seemingly small transgressions within relationships can actually be red flags and that a situation doesn't need to escalate to full-on physical abuse in order to count as domestic violence, I found that the moment when Nancy has this realization and then breaks up with Gil lacked the emotional weight befitting that situation. I think this was the case because Nancy and Gil barely had a relationship. There was attraction and sexual tension, they hooked up a few times, but it was never shown to be a real relationship. It's not just that we didn't often see them together, but with or without him, Nancy didn't think much about Gil or what he thought of her and, more importantly wrt the breakup, we aren't shown all the ways that his treatment of her affected her sense of self or the way she operated. Nancy's relationship with Gil was inconsequential, so the stakes were low.

And yes, casual hookup situations can also turn abusive, but from a narrative standpoint, the way this particular situation was portrayed, it was given both more and less weight than it should've been given. It felt like the writers wanted the breakup to be big and impactful but they not only didn't work for that payoff, they also wanted to resolve it quickly so they could move onto more important plot points (the breakup was at the beginning episode and Nancy never mentions it or even hints at any emotional fallout from it ever again).

(Amanda was done dirty)

Actually, if anything, the big dramatic breakup should've been between Amanda and Gil. Even with her severely limited screentime, almost every time we do see Amanda, we are reminded of how close she is with Gil, how badly he treats her, how much she values his opinion, and how smothered she feels by him. And it sucks that we never actually get to see Amanda make the realization, stand up for herself, and confront Gil. All we see is Ace encouraging her to break away and then cut to her living her best life post-sibling breakup.

In the end, it's as if Amanda's pain and suffering was made to be less about her and more about Nancy/being evidence that Gil is not good for Nancy. Again, not a good look.

And Amanda and Ace's relationship is also underdeveloped compared to the impact that the writers seem to want it to have. Like, I don't understand why Ace would give her a pseudo-ultimatum ("I'll prioritize you if you prioritize me") at this stage of their relationship. Yes, they do seem to be more of a relationship than Nancy x Gil, but it always felt like they were very much in the budding romance stage. While he does talk about her when they're apart, we still rarely saw them interact with each other outside of the context of Ace needing to use Amanda's connection at the hotel or to her father or brother in order to help solve the mystery. And we don't learn more about or see a different side either character through their relationship with each other.

Poorly executed, unnecessary love triangles

The whole point of having a love triangle is to raise the emotional stakes.

It's always been my belief that if you're going to have a love triangle, you need to commit to it. That means making both legs of the triangle equally viable, developing both romantic options and both relationships equally.

As noted in the sections above, this was not the case with either love triangle, which makes the whole thing feel cheap and unsatisfying. Like I said in a previous post, I think it would've been more powerful if Nancy had two really great options, but in the end chose Ace because that’s what her heart really wants no matter how great the other guy is.

Anyone with a healthy understanding of love and relationships would choose Ace over Gil. It's no contest, no real choice, so it adds nothing to the conversation, it says nothing about Nancy or her feelings for Ace. It's inconsequential, the emotional stakes are practically nonexistent.

Literally, I feel like if you took the Bobbsey love triangles out of this season, Ace and Nancy would still end up in pretty much the same place wrt their feelings for each other. I mean, yes, the whole jealousy/green eyed epiphany thing did play a role, but the relationships with the Bobbseys featured so little and were so underdeveloped that it would be more or less the same as one of them flirting with a background character every once in a while.

And Nace still didn't end up together after all that! It's hinted that for some reason, Ace will be stringing Amanda along next season while he pines for Nancy. Which is exhausting.

This is really what we sacrificed two perfectly interesting characters of color for. I'm upset.

#nancy drew cw #gil bobbsey #amanda bobbsey

89 notes · View notes

vampish-glamour · 4 years ago

Note

I never watched G*od Om*ns, so it was fandom again with the "they're gay"???

At least Star Trek did this right, you know, not lying to please someone. Spock and Kirk was never a thing and also was never meant to be a thing. But the creator himself said, if you wanna see them like that, it's fine. Do what you want. But in canon it's not that way.

But really, somehow fandom seems to make it easy for creators to just bait, but never commit and they're happy, wtf.

And IF they get actual lgbt rep, they're upset because it's not the character they WANTED to be lgbt....

Actually, the fandom is largely against them being gay because they claim it’s “nonbinary and asexual representation”.

Which bothers me just because they’re basically applauding homophobic tropes simply because they benefit from homophobic tropes.

I want to make it clear that my problem isn’t “why aren’t you making the characters canonically gay?!!?!!? This is homophobic!!!11!1!1”. I’m fine with the relationship remaining a close friendship canonically. And canonically speaking, I think I might prefer that tbh.

My problem is with how the original homophobia in the book sort of goes ignored, and how the writer teases and hints and in this case I would actually say baits… and then receives praise from the fandom for doing what everyone else does when it comes to gay pairings.

Basic overview of the situation from my POV:

Book establishes a character as a gay stereotype

Immediately goes “but he isn’t gay because angels are sexless unless they make an effort” (IMO the sexless thing could’ve been established in many other ways. Did it really have to be done in a “don’t worry he’s not gay” way?)

Book proceeds to make the gay stereotype thing a running joke, with the character being called various homophobic slurs (but see, it’s funny because it’s misplaced homophobia. He doesn’t actually deserve the homophobia he experiences like an actual gay person would /s)

Show comes out, includes romantic music, lots of subtext, and the writer confirming that it’s a “love story”, as well as the actors confirming they acted “in love”. Except… it’s done vaguely enough that anyone can come away with their own interpretation. Which is nothing new. There’s literally nothing revolutionary about leaving a same sex relationship “up for interpretation”.

All the “representation” actually comes from what the writer says on Twitter. He goes on about how they’re sexless and therefore cannot possibly be gay but are also inherently “queer”… but doesn’t actually add this into canon. So casual viewers are not experiencing any sort of “representation”.

IMO this is a homophobic media trope. Give two men or two women scenes that would be explicitly romantic if it were a man and a woman, tease the audience with “maybeee~”, but still make sure that ultimately, homophobes won’t be offended and can come away from the material thinking “what good friends!”. Say “it’s up for interpretation”, which is something I hardly see with M/F pairings. Especially with the virtue signalling on social media.

Keep in mind, something isn’t “representation” if everyone comes away with different ideas of what was represented. If one person can think “they’re gay and married” and another can think “they’re aspec and in a QPR”, that’s not representation. Representation only happens when something is undeniable. For example, a character who is undeniably bisexual because they are shown to be interested in both men and women (biphobic pannies coming to their own conclusions don’t count here lol, since bi = pan and pan = bi, so even if they claim the character is pansexual, they’re still getting the same outcome)

Now here’s where my issue comes in.

Instead of calling this out, the fandom runs with it and benefits from it. A vague relationship on screen allows them to claim representation for themselves, usually for made up labels like aspec, SAM type asexuality, queerplatonic, etc.

They praise the writer for being “inclusive”, and for “representing” them… when really this “inclusivity” is a result of homophobic tropes, and there’s actually no representation at all. Keep in mind, all the clues for what could be going on come from social media. A casual viewer is either going to see two gay men, or two good friends. They have no way of knowing about the woke “queer” bullshit unless they’re heavily involved in fandom.

The writer has a habit of teasing things and being intentionally misleading. Here’s an example

Not telling what’s going to happen and not giving spoilers, is very different from intentionally baiting. “Wait and see” sounds like a “yes”… because it would be incredibly shitty to lead people on when the answer is a solid “no”.

However, considering he’s only half of the writers, and establishing a relationship other than what he and the other writer discussed would be disrespectful… the answer is very likely “no”.

So just say “no”. It’s okay to say “no, they’re not getting together”. But he knows that people are more likely to watch if they’re waiting for the two to get together the whole time…so he has to keep it vague and mysterious and he has to keep baiting.

Of course the answer could very well be “yes” and that’s what he’s hinting at. But I highly doubt it, mostly because of the “only one author around” issue. So until I’m proven wrong, I will maintain that this is him being intentionally misleading, as he admitted to.

So that’s where I have the issue—I wouldn’t have an issue if he just straight up said “no, they’re not going to hook up, they’re good friends”. What is an issue, is perpetuating classic homophobic media tropes, of giving just enough but not too much…and then saying “it’s up for interpretation”. Which roughly translates to “here’s some crumbs for the gays”. What’s especially an issue, is then disguising this under woke kweer language and lapping up all the praise you can get for being such an “Ally” to “queers”.

And of course, I have an issue with how the fandom receives this. Because instead of calling the bullshit out for what it is, they actually call gay people talking about homophobia “aphobic discourse”, and say things like “gay men have enough representation!!”, and try to argue that actually, the homophobic trope of vague same sex relationships that are left up to interpretation, is actually super inclusive and amazing and progressive because it represents asexuals, aromantics, nonbinary people, queerplatonic relationships, etc.

Or they put down gay people for wanting more explicit representation, because “uhh… some people are aro!!! Some people are ace!!”. Despite missing that non romantic or non sexual relationships between men can be found in pretty much every single piece of media ever, and is 100% socially acceptable. Explicit gay relationships however, are still looked down upon.

And then they act like the religious homophobes, by taking “explicit gay representation” to mean “explicit hardcore sex scene”. Like I’ve seen nobody demand a sex scene when they’re talking about gay representation in G O. I’m certainly not. Yet the kweers always manage to interpret gay people wanting proper representation as “you want sex!!! You want porn!!!”. To me, it really seems no different from religious homophobes seeing an advertisement with two men and immediately talking about how it promotes “deviant gay sex”.

What worries me is that these types of fandoms—who applaud creators for giving gay people crumbs—set a precedent for other creators. They make it known that gay representation actually isn’t needed for media to be praised. They give creators a safe way to get out of representing gay couples—while keeping both the queers and homophobes happy at the same time. Now they can hop on social media and say “no, they’re not gay, but it’s up for interpretation!” And the queers will think this is top tier representation, and praise the creators for it.

As always, this turned into a long spiel lmao. But that’s an explanation of my thoughts and why I’m frustrated. Again—I’m not mad that a romantic relationship isn’t canon. That in itself isn’t homophobic. But the way that the writer and fandom are handling it, is.

I’m not familiar with Star Trek (I do want to watch it, mostly to understand the Star Trek vs Star Wars stuff lmao.), but it sounds like that’s a good way to handle it. If you don’t want to make a relationship canon—that’s fine. But be honest about it, don’t drag fans along with teasing and baiting.

#sorry for the ramble again lol #I have nowhere else to rant about this because the fandom would absolutely crucify me for being ‘aphobic’ or ‘enbyphobic’#as if that holds any weight compared to the homophobia they cheer on lmao #can’t make it clearer that my problem isn’t not having canon gay rep #I’m happy having the two dudes be friends. I like their friendship.#I’m not happy with the fandom and the writer’s bullshit.#asks #anon #q slur

22 notes · View notes

hellomynameisbisexual · 4 years ago

Text

Dr. Lauren Beach was 14 years old when she/they first came out as bisexual. Beach revealed the truth to friends and curious classmates at her/their suburban Michigan high school. The reactions varied, but not many were affirming.

"I experienced a lot of people who eroticized my attraction to femme people. It's like, 'oh, you're bi. That's so hot,'" says Beach, who has a Ph.D. in molecular, cellular, developmental biology and genetics.

Other friends asked Beach if she/they were doing it for attention. Beach says only three people, including Beach, at her/their school were openly out as queer. Instead of being embraced by them, Beach received flak for her/their sexuality.

"One of the other people there who was queer was like, 'You're a fence sitter! You're a switcher. You can't be trusted, you might date men after dating me," recalls Beach.

This kind of biphobia, which perpetuates stereotypes, hatred, and prejudices about bisexual people, is not uncommon — even (or sometimes especially) within the queer community. Stigma against bisexual people stems from a larger culture of homophobia, Rory Gory, digital marketing manager of the Trevor Project, an LGBTQ youth suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization, wrote in an email to Mashable.

"Since bisexuals often move between straight and queer spaces, they are subjected to both homophobia and biphobia," Gory explains.

Bisexual people make up a sizable population within the LGBTQ community, given more than 50 percent of queer people in America identify as bisexual, according to the Williams Institute. The think tank does research on sexual orientation and gender identity to ensure stereotypes don't influence laws, policies, and judicial decisions. To be clear, bisexuality means a person is attracted to more than one gender. It doesn't mean bisexual people are more sexually active than others or going through a phase (two common myths).

As a teenager, Beach bought into stereotypes about bi people. But now 22 years later, she/they are a professor at Northwestern University where she/they focus on the health of bisexual people and works to dispel myths about them. Additionally, Beach co-founded the Chicago Bisexual Health Task Force, a coalition that advances the heath equity of bisexual people.

Mashable spoke with Beach, and representatives from advocacy organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), GLAAD, and the Trevor Project to learn about the unique challenges bisexual people face and how to be an ally.

1. View bisexual people as individuals

It's easy to lump a single group together but resist that trap. Like anyone else, bisexual people are individuals and their personalities and preferences vary. As Beach says, "there's not one single experience of bisexuality."

For example, Beach is asexual or ace. This means Beach doesn't experience sexual attraction, but she/they are romantically attracted to people across the gender spectrum. One can be both asexual and bi, with some asexual people preferring to identify as biromantic. Although many asexual people are not interested in having sex, some may choose to engage in sexual activity; asexual people can have varied preferences and experiences. Beach's experience doesn't mean all bisexual people feel the same way.

Getting to know more bisexual people can help scrub away your pre-conceived notions. You could already have friends who are bisexual and not know it. Be open about your intentions to learn so you can tear down your misconceptions about bisexual people, Beach recommends.

"You'd be surprised by how many people are like 'Oh, I'm actually bi. Let's talk," says Beach. "From understanding the breadth of experience, you personalize people."

2. Challenge negative stereotypes

As you expand your knowledge about bisexual people, speak up when you hear people perpetuating harmful misperceptions. Sometimes we don't even know we've absorbed negative stereotypes if we're not informed, says Mackenzie Hart, coordinator of GLAAD's Media Institute, which advises media, television, and film professionals on accurate LGBTQ representation.

An easy way to interject when you hear a myth about bisexual people is to say, "Actually, that's not true, my friend who is bisexual does not fit that stereotype," suggests Hart. It can also help to arm yourself with accurate statistics to further back up what you're saying, says Madeleine Roberts, HRC's assistant press secretary. HRC is a helpful resource for these stats.

"Barsexual" is a hurtful label often used to demean bisexual people. It refers to the incorrect belief that bisexual people will only interact with certain genders when they are intoxicated, explains Hart. It upholds the myth that bisexual women are actually straight as it implies they only flirt or make out with women when drunk. It also contributes to bi erasure, which GLAAD says happens when "the existence or legitimacy of bisexuality (either in general or in regard to an individual) is questioned or denied outright."

You should also push back against the harmful stereotypes that bisexuals can't be trusted to commit to a relationship, says Gory. "Embrace bisexuals as valid members of the [LGBTQ] community, rather than referring to them as 'allies' of the community."

Additionally, you can be an ally by understanding certain words and promoting proper usage. For example, you can clarify the difference between bisexual and bi+. Bi+ is an umbrella term inclusive of people who are pan, queer, fluid, and those who don't prefer labels. Use the full acronym of LGBTQ rather than gay as an umbrella term for queer people, explains Roberts. By taking these steps, you can "create spaces where people are hearing these words," says Hart.

3. Healthcare providers need to educate themselves

One time, a clinician asked Beach how many sex partners she/they had.

"I was like, OK, what do you mean by sex?" says Beach. The practitioner questioned why Beach would ask this. Beach told the clinician she/they are bisexual and, therefore, needed clarification about what sexual behavior she was referring to.

"She got really uncomfortable and said 'deep vaginal penetration,'" says Beach. "She started off guessing. She said, "you seem like a nice girl. So what is it, like one or two people?"" says Beach. The provider then said, “So, what you’re saying is more than 30 or 40 people.”

"It shows how someone [in a healthcare setting] can make this jump based on biphobic stereotypes of what my sexual behavior would be,” explains Beach.

After that encounter, Beach never went back to that doctor. To this day, Beach doesn’t have a designated primary care provider.

“I have to work up the emotional energy to want to go put myself through that potential experience," Beach says about seeking out healthcare.

Beach's experience isn't uncommon. Biphobia may discourage bisexual people from going to the doctor, with 39 percent of bisexual men and 33 percent of bisexual women reporting that they didn't disclose their sexual orientation to any medical provider, according to a 2012 study by the Williams Institute. Comparably, 13 percent of gay men and 10 percent of lesbians did not share their sexual orientation with a doctor.

Providers shouldn't presume anyone's sexual behavior because they know their sexual identity, says Beach. Hart echoes this advice. A doctor once asked Hart, "Are you seeing anyone?" Hart said no. She then asked, "If you were seeing anyone, would you be seeing a woman, a man, either, or other?" It wasn't perfect, Hart says, but asking open-ended questions that are inclusive of gender nonconforming people made Hart comfortable enough to see her again.

"Even if you aren't sure of certain words... you can make it clear you aren't going to be judgmental and you understand there's a wide array of experiences," says Hart.

4. Uplift bisexual people of color

Roberts recommends following prominent bi+ people of color on social media such as singer and actor Janelle Monáe, NFL player Ryan Russell, writer and transgender rights activist Raquel Willis, and politician Andrea Jenkins to become familiar with their lives. The next step is to share their stories with your friends and family.

At last year's Academy Awards, actor Rami Malek won Best Actor for his portrayal of British singer Freddie Mercury. Malek described Mercury as gay during his acceptance speech but Mercury was actually bisexual. Willis called out the bi erasure in a tweet.

Of the four people Roberts listed, two (Willis and Jenkins) are transgender. Just like one can be asexual and bi, one can also be transgender and bi. In 2015, the National Center for Transgender Equality surveyed 27,715 transgender people from every state and D.C., U.S. territories, and U.S. military bases abroad and 14 percent of respondents described their sexual orientation as bisexual.

To ensure you're not erasing transgender bi+ people's identities, always use inclusive language like "siblings" instead of "brothers and sisters," says Roberts, when addressing people as if they're family. This guarantees you're not assuming every bi+ person (or anyone generally) identifies as either male or female.

Taking into account the role intersectionality plays in the lives of bi+ people is important — especially when you're looking to amplify their voices.

16 notes · View notes

ziracona · 4 years ago

Note

If it's ok to ask, do you have any crackships or just ships that are unpopular but have potential

Huh, somehow ‘crackships’ isn’t a word I’ve heard in forever--what a blast from the past. I don’t think I’ve ever had any for dbd. Uhhh, I probably have rarepairs though--I’m not sure they’re /un/popular, as in like, unliked, but I have some that just don’t get much attention. I like Claudette x Quentin / Medics^2 quite a bit. MegSie / SusieMeg is a great ship with almost unlimited potential. I like Quentin with Nancy a lot too, but on second thought I guess that one’s actually kind of popular. I ship Quentin with like, four people, and all of them except QuenDette/Medics^2 is decently popular at least (Nancy, Joey, David). Which is unfair because Medics^2 is god tier. I will die on that hill. Uhhhhhh, let me think. I would have considered Vigojomo / Philip x Vigo a rare ship before two weeks ago, but like, a genuinely /weird/ number of people picked that as favorite Philip ship when they took my quiz--like way more than could possibly be my friends or mutuals. So. Maybe there’s something I don’t know??? That if it still is a rare pair. It’s also god-tier. Mmmmm. I like Laurie-David, which I think is a rarepair. Or at least medium rare (I feel like I’m talking about steaks rip).

I will never ship a Dwight ship more than I ship Parkfield, but I do feel like Dwight x Adiris has some real potential and kinda dig it, or the three of them as a polyamorous relationship? I also like Parkfield with Adam or Claudette as a trio. And don’t really ever see those. There’s almost unlimited potential here. I think David-Laurie-Kate also has potential as a trio. And Kate-Joey has potential, as does Kate-Joey-Quentin. I like Ace with Tapp, either of them with Jane. Mostly I just feel like a lot of people have potential with a lot of other people, and this fandom really limits itself by not realizing multishipping is the ideal human experience. Like, come on fam. We’re well past considering romance as the peak form of any connection as a species. It’s seethrough that some of you see that as ‘winning’ or being most special, so you ship your faves and only your exact faves. It’s so much better if you consider people as having wild potential to be happy and well in many different combinations, and none of them are zero-sum games. They’re just...different routes. That can all be meaningful and inclusive and full of love, for whoever ends up friend or romantic partner or wherever, so long as they’re important in other characters’ life. God bless multishippers. I see some of you out there and I want you to know I love you.

Uhhhh, also I like people if they have an established relationship, being allowed to keep it and still enjoyed as a character? Like, I like Nancy-Quentin a lot. Because it’s a good ship. I ship Quentin with other people too, and I have no issue with other people who do. Same with Nancy and Jonathan. Or with Felix and his gf. He’s in a committed relationship, and I like him with his future wife he wants to raise a kid with. I don’t mind people who ship him with someone else. But I do get really side-eyes-harshly when I see characters like that where fans are only capable of being interested in that character if it is in the context of making them sexually available to someone else in the realm. Which isn’t the same thing as just like, shipping them w someone there. But like, if that’s the only way you can enjoy the character and it’s necessary for you to break off an existing connection & throw them into a sexual relationship with someone else in order for them to be in a relationship and thus existing in a context you consider worth caring about/makes them worth caring about? I am judging you very harshly. -- and I guess that’s rare? Nancy-Quentin is decently popular, but I basically never see people reflecting on Nancy and Jonathan, or developing Felix’s long term girlfriend into a full character and exploring that loss and pain? So since those all interest me, maybe that counts?

As far as like, unpopular goes? I think the only ship I’ve ever been into people were like ‘ew’ at was Ace x Adam. Which I still think could be very full of potential, and I’m really mad that that one got shot down over age when Ace x Felix has become a very popular ship, and that’s basically the same age difference. The hypocrisy. >.> (This isn’t a reflection on Felix - Ace as a ship, this is a statement of dislike against the unequal treatment & implicit racism to it.) That’s the only one I can think of offhand though. They’re phenomenal as friends, but they could be cute as romantic partners I think (Ace and Adam). Just all depends on how their lives flow in that timestream. That’s about all I can think of though.

#ask #anonymous #dead by daylight #Anonymous

6 notes · View notes

theaceandaroadvocacyproject · 5 years ago

Text

TAAAP’s Response to an Open Letter

We welcome productive conversations between TAAAP and the communities we serve. We value honest critiques and will always strive to correct mistakes we make, and commit to doing good work. However, we do not engage in dishonest dialogue with those who refuse to address our actual stated and acted values, in favor of propping up a false and directly contradictory representation of our positions. We have written this response to address claims that concerns around our December Pride Chats topic were ignored, dismissed, or misunderstood. This will be our final response to Coyote on this matter.

Our first email responding to Coyote’s concerns was sent on November 30, and our last correspondence was sent on December 18. We made it clear that it was our last correspondence with:

“The topic has been decided and it will not be edited further. Like everyone, you will be free to share your thoughts during the December Pride Chats, as long as you follow the guidelines. Since we do not plan on changing the topic from what it is now, we will not be continuing this conversation through email. We have also expressed the core tenets of our stance through previous emails and see no need in reiterating those points, as that would simply be tiresome for all parties involved. We suggest rereading our previous emails for answers already given to your questions on this matter.” - 5th and final email

As the claims in Coyote’s Open Letter make it clear that our emails were either ignored or disregarded, we have chosen to take the route of responding to specific points in Coyote’s Open Letter with quotes from our emails, and adding clarification and emphasis when needed. We also only include quotes from emails sent by us, as we are not interested in publicizing Coyote’s emails without its consent. The block quotes from Coyote are from Coyote’s Open Letter, which was publicly posted on its blog.

Quotations from Coyote are labelled with an alphabet letter & indented with “blockquote” formatting. Quotations from our previous emails to Coyote, as well as the topic announcement from our website, are only italicized.

A) Because that’s the context from which the term “SAM” itself emerged. That itself is the birthplace of the phrase. You do not “use” “the SAM” any more than a bullseye “uses” an arrow.

In the first sentence, Coyote links to a post claiming this as the origin of the SAM (content warning for aphobia). The post speaks of the Split Attraction Model as a pre-existing concept and does not attempt to coin “SAM” in any way. Due to the difficulty of finding historical posts on Tumblr and forums, no one in the community has offered an earlier post that actually coins the term. Therefore, it cannot be determined what context the SAM actually emerged from. As of that post that is referenced, it was a pre-existing concept. It is a stretch to definitively claim this post as the “source” of the SAM.

We addressed that here:

“Several of us at TAAAP read through and adjusted the wording of this announcement prior to sharing it on the Discord server with the knowledge that while it is possible that the SAM may have been created by exclusionists, its exact origin is unknown and so it has been reclaimed and popularized by the ace and aro communities.” - 1st email

We also addressed this in the blog post of our Official Topic Announcement on our website, which was posted on December 19th before the Open Letter was posted:

“If a term may violate our guidelines, due to being rooted in exclusionist or other harmful ideology, do not assume that everyone is aware of its harmful origins or that they espouse those ideas. Many terms have been reclaimed, used without bad intention, or simply used without knowledge of other people using them in harmful ways.” - Official Topic Announcement on TAAAP Website, emphasis added

B) But you already know that, or so you say. You are comfortable with treating those issues as over and done with, and having personally acclimated yourself to the language, you believe no other issues with the phrase itself remain.

In nearly every email we sent, we described those issues as ongoing.

“While it may not always have a coherent or consistent meaning in these communities, it is still something that is widely referenced and that many people have at least a vague conceptualization of.” - 4th email, emphasis added

“Also, due to the prevalence and often-presumed universality of the SAM, we believe it is important to name it so as to specifically encourage conversation about it. We believe it will be worthwhile for discussion to include it, so that both positive and negative viewpoints of it can be shared, and alternatives can be offered. Many people are on distinctly one side of discussion about the SAM, and some do not even know of the existence of the other side, so engaging in discussion with people who hold different views can be useful in how individuals move forward with their own identities and participation in their communities. “ - 4th email

“The full sentence is ‘We also will require that all participants in the conversation respect others' personal choices and feelings surrounding any particular attraction and orientation model or lack thereof, including people who object to there being a binary of SAM and non-SAM.’ (Emphasis added) While some people do treat SAM and non-SAM as a binary, this is not a view we are interested in spreading.” - 4th email, quotes our prompt, emphasis was present in this email

Regarding the accusation of TAAAP members being personally acclimated to the language, we refer to this:

“These kinds of criticisms are necessary for communities to address issues within themselves, especially when those issues are so common. One motivation behind choosing this topic is to address the far too common issues with the SAM, and offer room to discuss diverse and inclusive perspectives, as many people, including members of TAAAP, have been harmed by those who use the SAM to identity police. Not discussing these topics at all, as we have previously stated, can leave people of the dominant perspective ignorant of other perspectives, allowing divisions to grow without any chances to understand and correct the issue. That being said, and as is written in the month’s topic, we also require respect for how people self identify, including seeing one’s own aromanticism as a subset of their asexuality, and using the SAM. “ -5th and last email, emphasis added

C) You have expressed an investment in opposing identity essentialism, which means the only part that’s missing for you is how one person’s own personal use of a term could be unfair to anybody else.

I will illustrate this with an example.

Hypothetically, say someone in the aro community decided to give a name to a completely legitimate type of aro identity or experience — nothing wrong with that. Hypothetically, say in order to express that identity, they start calling themselves a “pure aro.” Say the identity becomes a popular one, and say there’s also some aros who speak up with objections. Now imagine those aros get told, “That’s okay, you don’t have to use the purity model.”

That would be messed up.

This hypothetical is something I’m assuming we’re on the same page about. If you can recognize that this “pure aro” construct would be a problem, regardless of what “pure aro” was chosen to represent, then you can understand how the language we choose for ourselves — even to represent completely legitimate things — can in fact be unfair to other people. In the same way that it would be wrong to refer to certain aros as “pure aros” or “impure aros,” it is wrong to refer to completely legitimate things as “SAM” or “non-SAM.”

We agree that the language of “pure aro” is inherently bad, in part because it implies an “impure aro” and in part because it assigns a morality to a specific identity, which can also be true with “split” and “non-split”, although to a lesser extent. “Pure” invokes religious oppression and purity culture, with the opposite of “pure” generally being “sinful”. This degree of connotation does not exist for “split”. We say this not to dismiss the real harm people experience in relation to the SAM, but to highlight the false equivalence in the hypothetical.

In fact, we did at one point address someone in the Pride Chats who used the term “complete aro” by pointing out the potential harm that does to other aro-spectrum people who are just as completely aro as someone who experiences no romantic attraction at all.

We do agree that another issue with the SAM is its perceived universality, which forces labels onto people without their consent. We stated our view of this issue here:

“[S]ome people do understand themselves through use of the SAM - [it does] not work for all, and when that isn’t understood is when identity policing, exclusion, and invalidation can occur. We are open to discussions of the harm done by universalizing identity models in the Pride Chats.” - 5th and final email, some words removed to account for privacy concerns and to avoid quoting Coyote.

Many terms used by LGBTQIA+ individuals were originally coined and used by their oppressors or were slurs. Some terms are sometimes used in harmful and exclusionary ways, and have different meanings for the different individuals that use them. Writing off a term or idea as completely bad and assigning moral value to it is harmful to those who are not aware of its history, have reclaimed it, or find positive aspects of the term with which to identify. We believe it is possible to recognize the harm that occurs from certain community practices while also not attacking people who do not intend to perpetuate that harm. Rather, we should focus on the harmful actions. We do not condone broad condemnation of all who identify with a term, simply because others weaponize or have weaponized that terminology to cause harm. People who have adopted widespread terminology to describe phenomena or identities should not be judged because others weaponize or weaponized that terminology, or for forgiving a potentially negative interpretation/aspect/connotation of said terminology for the comfort they find in using the positive aspects of it to describe themselves.

D) [...] it is wrong to refer to completely legitimate things as “SAM” or “non-SAM.”

This states that people are wrong to use the terms SAM and non-SAM. As shown by our message above, in multiple other messages, and in our Pride Chat guidelines, this is identity policing; it is not allowed in the chats and will not be espoused by TAAAP’s members. It’s not simply the experiences that are legitimate, but also identifying with the SAM or as non-SAM. This is not an acceptance of the SAM, or of a supposed binary of SAM and non-SAM, as a universal model that everyone must or should identify with, but rather an acceptance of some people’s personal identification with the term SAM or non-SAM. We conveyed this idea through email here:

“Also, we do not want to imply that we think using the SAM is not legitimate, as it is a model that many people use and relate to, and do so using that specific term.” - 4th email

E) 1) It’s not split. The word “split,” like the word pure, inherently sets up a contrast. It’s framing these things as only partial, splintered fragments of what they’re normally supposed to be. Categorizing my experiences of attraction as “split” attraction is like referring to me as a “split person” just because I’m not a conjoined twin. I wasn’t split off from anyone. I’m just like this. This is my own whole and natural way of being. “Split” language talks down to me as a lesser fragment of something else. Why should that be recognized as anything less than condescending?

If someone were to talk down to anyone in this way, that would go against our Discord guidelines and they would be warned, “timed out” if they continued, and banned if they continued after the time out, per our rules. Dictating how people can identify, whether by imposing labels on others or by demonizing others for identifying with certain labels, is identity policing. Different identities and conceptualizations of identities resonate for different people, and there is nothing wrong with this. This is also related to the issue of universalization, which we addressed above with the block quote C from Coyote. To be absolutely clear, people with the same or similar experiences are allowed to use different labels and models, likewise, people with differing experiences may resonate with the same labels and models. Additionally, people are never required to identify in opposition to or in relation to any label or model.

This was addressed here:

“Everyone uses different methods, models, and terminology to understand their own orientations. Some of these may not be ones that you personally agree with or would use, but you must respect others’ right to use the model or method they want. Similarly, you can discuss what you don’t like about any given model, method, or term, but be careful to only apply it to yourself or use “I feel” statements so as not to say what methods others should or should not use. Focus on critiquing the models and not how people make use of them or identify with them. The only models, methods, or terms we do not support are those that are culturally appropriative or violate our guidelines in some other way.

F) It’s not “attraction,” either. Too often I’ve seen people deploying “SAM” or “using the SAM” to misrepresent multi-orientation labeling, which is conflating “attraction” with “orientation.”

Some people do identify with an orientation based on their attraction. The legitimacy of people who do base their orientation on attraction as well as the various other ways people do not, is recognized in our official topic announcement, the final version of which was sent to Coyote before posting it to our website.

“The topic will be models of attraction and orientation, including the SAM (Split-Attraction Model), as well as understandings and models of orientation that do not center attraction, and any other potential ways of understanding attraction and orientation. We at TAAAP support any person using any kind of model, or no model at all, to identify their attraction or orientation. We also will require that all participants in the conversation respect others' personal choices and feelings surrounding any particular attraction and orientation model or lack thereof, including people who object to there being a binary of SAM and non-SAM. This discussion will explore why people use the SAM, use something else entirely, or use none.” - 3rd email, emphasis added

There are also people who use the SAM to only identify their attractions, and do not use it for their orientation(s). More broadly, we do not agree that it is essentialist or harmful for someone to identify with their own orientation(s) based on their own attraction(s). The harms that are related to self-identifying have been covered above under Quote C.

G) Frankly? It’s not even a model. It doesn’t model anything. It’s just an extra sticker over multiple preexisting models and concepts, chained together by conflation and essentialism.

The SAM does refer to multiple ideas. Many orientation models and identity terms have a level of ambiguity to them, and this is not unique to the SAM. We addressed the ambiguous nature of the term here:

“We do not strictly define the terms given in the topic, as the ambiguity can allow for segments of discussion that we cannot predict. The terminology 'the SAM' is popularly used enough that many people have their own varied personal understandings of it, and we recognize that this lack of continuity in what it means can open extra avenues of discussion. We know that many people identify with it or refer to it when speaking of their identities, and that others do not identify with it nor wish to use it as a reference point, and we want to leave room for people of all perspectives to talk about it (whatever they believe 'it' is) without correcting them for talking about the ‘wrong' thing.” - 3rd email, emphasis added

H) All this is why I recently had to gently shepherd an aro out of your “opting out of romantic orientation” channel.

This is elaborated upon later:

I) The TSAMM encourages a conflation between “romantic orientation” and “distinguishing romantic from sexual,” and the popularity of that conflation has so thoroughly undermined conceptual space for folks like me that you can outright name a channel “opting out of romantic orientation” and you’ll get people in there talking about how much they definitely do identify with a romantic orientation. Even in space deliberately set aside for me, the TSAMM renders the distinction incoherent.

As mods, we should have noticed this when it happened and addressed it then. After reading through the exchange, it was clear that this person was questioning and trying to find what term(s) they felt comfortable identifying their orientation with. The channels for different identities are open to people who are questioning, as well as those of other identities who are willing to ask questions and listen respectfully. While in our Pride Chats, it is expected that questioning people are respected and given space to question without being “shepherded” away.

J) I deserve better than this. Everyone deserves better than this. We deserve to get to have these conversations without the TSAMM getting in the way.

“TAAAP specifically does not feel comfortable avoiding discussing the term Split-Attraction Model, as it is common community terminology and many identify with it in a positive sense. We feel that it would be a greater disservice to beat around the bush than to allow people to discuss it, although we do understand that our wording can better reflect how we encourage discussion about various other orientation models/terminology, and to reflect the fact that participants will be welcome to share criticisms of the term 'SAM' as well.” -1st email, emphasis added

In this first email, we clarified the wording of the December topic to make it clear that the SAM was only one part of the topic, and to encourage discussion of more models and terminology.

“The terminology 'the SAM' is popularly used enough that many people have their own varied personal understandings of it, and we recognize that this lack of continuity in what it means can open extra avenues of discussion. We know that many people identify with it or refer to it when speaking of their identities, and that others do not identify with it nor wish to use it as a reference point, and we want to leave room for people of all perspectives to talk about it (whatever they believe 'it' is) without correcting them for talking about the 'wrong' thing.” - 3rd email, emphasis added

“We chose to name the SAM because of its wide use as an orientation model in the ace and aro communities, and regardless of personal use or opinion, the term contextualizes our topic for those generally unfamiliar with orientation models and theories.” - 4th email , emphasis added

“Not discussing these topics at all, as we have previously stated, can leave people of the dominant perspective ignorant of other perspectives, allowing divisions to grow without any chances to understand and correct the issue. That being said, and as is written in the month’s topic, we also require respect for how people self identify, [including] using the SAM.” - 5th and final email, some words removed to account for privacy concerns and to avoid quoting Coyote.

We would like to refer everyone to our guidelines for the Pride Chats. These will be updated with expectations around identity policing using parts of our Official Topic Announcement.

Also, we feel it worthwhile to address the overall complications inherent in pushing certain terminology and attempting to erase other terminology. Demanding such specific, unambiguous language makes the conversation inaccessible to some neurodivergent people, some people who speak English as a secondary language, and some people with a more casual or limited understanding of this terminology and the nuances of this intra-community conversation. Ace and aro people already struggle to access knowledge about these identities, and this policing of nuanced terminology provides another barrier to aro and ace people who want to understand and express themselves.

When someone identifies with a term, or wants to discuss a term, in TAAAP’s Discord server or on TAAAP’s Dreamwidth page, a safe space, we require that no one identity polices, attacks, nor harasses this person under the assumption that they should “know better”. Discussion and critiques of terms can be brought forward without assigning a certain morality to the people who use them. Discussion and critique can happen without condemning a person.

To suggest an alternative term or to write the SAM out of discussions does not change that many people are exposed to that terminology, and it has impacted their personal identities. The comments on Coyote’s Open Letter are all part of the discussion we always intended to have, and still will have in our Pride Chats Discord and Dreamwidth. As a reminder, our December 2020 Pride Chats will take place on the 26th and 27th and the topic is “models of attraction and orientation, including the SAM (Split-Attraction Model), as well as understandings and models of orientation that do not center attraction, and any other potential ways of understanding attraction and orientation”.

#long post

6 notes · View notes

bionicdragonguardian1 · 5 years ago

Text

Ranma 2/4

Yup... I’m doing it... yes this how I plan, shut up

Part One: Chapters 1-12

Genderfluid Ranma Saotome

Bisexual Akane Tendo

BAMF!Akane if it kills me

More modern America take on LGBTQIA+ themes

Bisexual Ryoga Hibiki

Fuck the Kunos

Full Series AU because I am a fool who doesn’t know restraint

Magic Rules are a thing

I am actually going to keep a consistent timeline if it kills me

I have a PLAN

Very Minor changes to the actual plot cuz economics

Bad Parenting is addressed

Harassment is Addressed

I will make them acknowledge Physics/Medical because I’m an asshole

Pulling from both the Anime and the Manga

Still working through the Manga as I plot

Friendly reminder that Genma is crap

Friendly reminder that Nodoka is crazy

Poor Mousse

Soun Tendo TRIES really hard but grief fucking sucks

Nabiki is morally grey

Toxic Shampoo

Kasumi gets Character Development or so help me

polyship cuz surprises

I promise I do love this anime

I’m just stunned that so many people didn’t get a lot of character development

Actual fucking ENDING

I do actually hate Shampoo tho

I watch dubs

Ranma slowly starts using they/them pronouns vs switching

Ranma wears a bra, fuck you

Yes I’m using 2020 LGBT stuff BUT I will keep the tech as close to the 90s as I can (tho fair warning I was BORN in the 90s)

Toxic Masculinity addressed (yes I mean Ranma’s)

Ranma is awkward as hell

bc that’s what happens when you isolate a child, Genma!

Also, they spent closer to 1-2 months in China bc of how many things happen while they’re there

Homophobic/Transphobic Language

Ranma uses Ranko WAY more often cuz it makes sense

Tatewaki is actually not as stupid as he is in canon, but he’s worse

Kodachi… on the other hand... IS stupid

Canon Heights are used (hence the “actual magic” tag, it’s how Kuno explains it and is still wrong)

Ranma is a shitty liar, and trusts his friends (kinda)

I’ve never like Shampoo, I don't hide that

While reading the manga I’ve realized how often Ranma wears a hat in the early chapters

I love it

Laws Exist

Rule Enforcement

Adults aren’t useless

Demiromantic Ranma

Ace/Demisexual Ranma (I haven’t decided yet)

Demiromantic Akane

Pansexual Ryoga

YES Akane is Bisexual AND Demiromantic. It’s a thing!

Genma is a sonnova bitch and piece o shit

Diasuke x Hiroshi

Sayuri x Yuka

Polyamory discussions

Hiroshi x Yuka

Protective Ranma

Protective Akane

Protective Ryoga

Tendos adopt Ryoga bc they care

Cologne sucks, I didn’t realize that was justified until now

Minor Anime over Manga Arc Choices

People aren’t oblivious those around Ranma a lot pick up on the transformation thing (eventually)

Ryoga’s crush on Akane turns into something normal, I may be ~Aro but even I know that’s bad

The “Akane Can’t Cook” Joke was funny once or twice; NOT the whole series Akane learns to cook

WAY fucking sooner than she did in the Anime

Look, I get the stereotype but it’s NOT funny!

Manga Chapt6Pt3 cover gave me too many ideas for what I want to do to Ryoga & IDK how I feel (Tiny pigtailed girl Ryoga is just too cute that I want to drop him the niángnìquán)

I will use Wiki-Mandarin-Spellings for Jusenkyo Springs cuz I don’t understand a lick of Chinese

Certain Arcs will be skipped entirely because I HATED THEM (any time they showed up)!

YEET Tea Ceremony Arc(s), mainly cuz an outsider I didn’t get it like I’m sure I was supposed to

If I could just kill Happosai I would, but I can’t

Expect him to be VERY dead/gone post-Canon

Fair warning tho cuz I hate him more than I hate Shampoo or Cologne

Shampoo still sucks

I wish the scene w Hiro/Dai was in the Anime cuz it’s hilarious

Ranma’s hat is back! I love it!

Is… is Ranma ADHD or is that me projecting again?

God, these two are hopeless dorks

Was someone going to TELL me that Ranma’s classmates figured out the transformation BEFORE the Romeo thing or was I just supposed to sit there stunned when it happened?!?

Goddammit, I hate Romeo and Julliet

I don’t mean the ep, I mean the play/movie/etc cuz my school years have done it 1.6 million times that I just can’t stand it anymore

Gosunkugi… wtf is wrong with you?

STILL hate this play

I’m American, ok

this has been shoved down my throat since I was 8 so It never occured to me that Ranma not knowing Romeo & Julliet at all wouldn’t be weird

Ranma learns his lines (kinda)

Kuno is 600% the reason they go off script

...And Gosunkugi being creepy af

TBH where they go off script (like Akane’s sleep scene) I’ll probs redo purely cuz I know this play

Still hate this play

Lol, tape ain’t a thing, that’s hilarious

Ranma kissing Kuno, yes

Akane kissing Ranma, NO

It’s called FAKING it

You either get over it or learn to fake it

Is it wrong that it’s tempting to get rid of P-chan in chapt8?

Don’t answer that… I know it is

Akane you need to learn to trust Ranma

Like seriously… that’s the 1 thing that drove me batty

100% going for the Anime version of the Japanese Speong of Drowned Man cuz it’s funnier

(I’m still tempted to change Ryoga)

Since the Cookie thing came before any comment about Akane’s cooking (Anime) I just figured Ranma was like me and can’t eat a ton of processed sugar (yes, make you that sick) so... HEADCANON!!

But Ranma’s still awkward af talking about it

Yup, subbing out Sasuke for Gosunkugi

Ranma not realizing his dad was committing crimes NEEDS to be handled better

I see angst potential

Ukyo is def still cis-fem, that point at least works

Ukyo’s dad is NOT in the clear here

Friendly reminder that Genma TOLD Mr. Kuonji that Ranma had a fiancée

Jealous Ranma’s fun

Ranma… just cuz you’ve 6.5k fiancé doesn’t mean everyone does

I’m just saying, Ryoga only falls for Ranma

Is Ranma wearing a binder while cursed bad? I honestly don’t know…

Poor Ranma, I’d DIE!

Obvs changing the rules of the pill from “first person of the opp sex”

I’m thinking “first person you’d be attracted to” cuz it’s nice and inclusive and won’t make someone fall for someone they wouldn’t normally

I’m just tryin’ to avoid some gayboy from fallin’ for a girl or some straight girl fallin’ for a girl

I mean Ranma’s still gonna Insta Cologne

Rule gets stricter the longer the pill lasts

also incest needs to be excluded

Look, I am NOT condoning Mousse’s obsession

but Shampoo still sucks

Is me making Tsubasa mtf bad?

Someone tell me cuz I’m not sure

I think I accidentally made Ukyo transphobic… oops

Redemption? Hopefully, idk yet

Do you realize how much anti LGBT shit I have to work through?!?

Tsubasa’s issue is 600% that she’s a lesbian so Ranma being a guy (even sometimes) weirds her out which for the record is FINE since they haven’t been dating at all & Ranma didn’t tell her!

The ½ white ½ brown dog IS actually Ryoga’s?!?

I didn’t know I needed this!

Also she’s staying!

Is Sasuke an Anime character?!?! Idk how I feel about this…

Ranma is a little shit & I love it

My idea may’ve been wrong (and Ranma!) but I love the idea had that I’m tempted do it anyway

Alright, Ranma is def going too far… even I can admit that

I’m quite sad this arc wasn’t animated

I don’t know which one I want! Kuno sick vs sneezing cat?

I can’t pick!

They’re both perfect!

Yup, Shampoo is evil

Akane… tone down the weapons kay?

#ranma 1/2 #ranma saotome #ranma #ranma ½ #akane tendo #ryoga hibiki #fanfiction writing #fic plots #shampoo #mousse #cologne #can i kill Happosai?!?#PLEASE #kasumi tendo #nabiki tendo #soun tendo #genma saotome #nodoka saotome

11 notes · View notes

littlemisssquiggles · 6 years ago

Note

I saw your post about 'Shipping the Ace Ops' and ngl, I kinda ship Robyn Hill and Clover Ebi. I feel like they at least knew each other in the academy but their paths separated once they graduated, Clover joined the military while Robyn sought her own path, and now they have this dynamic where Clover is the Sheriff of Nottingham to Robyn's, well, Robin Hood.

Y'know what’s funny Ez? Great minds do think alike because I was just about to make a follow up post to my ‘Shipping the Aces’ with the same idea. I’m thinking of shipping Robyn with Clover now too. Only I was looking at it as, what if…Robin Hood was already in a long-term committed relationship with Sheriff Nottingham (soon to be engaged) ; however Nottingham didn’t know that Robin was secretly the leader of the Merry Men who the Sheriff has been trying to bring into custody?

Imagine…Clover considering himself the luckiest man on Remnant since he gets to be the partner of the charismatic, talented, lovely Robyn Hill—leader of the Happy Huntresses (*snorts*). But imagine…Robyn and Clover being forced to keep their relationship private due to all the politics surrounding Atlas and itsexploitation on Mantle, especially in the heat of the elections. Imagine how much flak Robyn might get in the public eyes if her supporters discovered that her boyfriend is one of Ironwood’s personal attack dogs—much less the leader of it. Imagine if…Robyn and Clover’s relationship is one where despite Clover being perfectly supportive of Robyn and her cause along with her running for Councilman, Robynn isn’t comfortable with them coming out about theirrelationship—at least not until after the Elections were over. So thingsbetween them are left private although it’s clear that Clover wants more.

Imagine…Clover also being unaware of Robyn’s double life. Like what if…the people of Atlas, including the military, merely see Robyn and her rallied supporters as nothing more than radical protestors when in actuality the Happy Huntresses led by Robyn are rogue thieves who fight back against exploitation of Mantle by taking back what should rightfully belong to their kingdom—stealing from the rich (SDC) to return it back to the poor it was stolen from in the first place (Mantle).

Imagine if… Robyn’s relationship with Clover started out just as you said. What if…they knew each other since Atlas Academy days? Perhaps they were even on the same huntsmen team once upon a time— Team CLVR because… obviously— and were even sweethearts since those days. But while Clover went on the join the military, Robyn wanted to dedicate her time to doing more for Mantle since it’s probably her hometown. Her hood, if you will.

Picture…Clover being head over heels in love with Robyn. Wanting to marry her even. Make a life for them both up in the Clouds especially after she becomes Councilman.

But that all goes to shit when the truth eventually comes out. The theme for this season of RWBY seems about trust in love. So we can either have a love story where Robyn and Clover were once together-together but ultimatelyfell apart due to their differing career paths but they soon reunite on thebattlefield with the rekindled love they shared for each other resurfacing andmaking them question their choices.

Or…we can have a love story where we have a couple who love each other more than anything but their differing paths inclusive of one of them leading a secret double life of lies and thievery, threatens to potentially destroy the love the couple built together over years of devotion and trust.

Like just picture Robyn and Clover caught at crossroad where Clover learns that Robyn is a criminal and he’s the one forced to bring her to justice.

Either one of these ideas can work although I quite like yours Ez. All in all, I dig it. Well I did say that I don’t ship Clover with anyone on his team since I believe his partner is not in the military. Robyn fits that bill just right. It’s official. I ship it now. But what would we call the ship for Robyn and Clover? Is it odd that I kind of wanna dub it ‘Cops & Robbers’?

That can work, right? Yay or nay?

~LittleMissSquiggles (2019)

#squiggles answers: rwby #rwby aceops #robyn hill #clover ebi #rwby theories #rwby volume 7 theories #ezroar #squiggles answers

11 notes · View notes

rainbowdoom32 · 6 years ago

Text

So I'm going to start identifying myself as aspec. Previously I identified as a bisexual aromantic but upon furthur consideration I might be asexual.

I'm posting about this b/c 1) it puts it out there and makes the lable feel more real and tangible

2) I know some of y'all IRL or on a personal enough basis that I feel you should know

3) A queers need more visibilty in gen

4) cause I want to talk abouy it

So Idk how to do a read more and am on mobile so if you dont want to hear about what being aspec means to me start scrolling now

So. In the aspec community (do we have a better word?) theres an overwhelming discourse about sexual and romantic repulsion. For those of you who dont know thats when the idea of sex , sexual content, sex itself, the idea of romance, romantic gestures, and/or romantic content acts as a squick for you it creates some spectrum of a revulsion in you to be confronted with one or more of these things. Its an overwhelming discourse for many reasons but the one I want to talk about is that it makes it obvious that your ace or aro if your repulsed by sex or romance. The process for discovering your aspec identity is easier in a way, specifically in a way it isnt for me.

See I dont experience sexual or romantic repulsion. I like romance stories and porn. I actively seek these things out. I'm not put off by discussions of others romantic or sexual lives (specific aspects may repulse me but in general I'm interested in these especially when coming from people I care about). So naturally as a teenager I never considered myself as aspec. i considered myself bisexual almost immediatly (there was a thing where I thought I was tricking myself into thinking I liked women to be included in the queer community. More on that later) it took two very short very middle school esque (one took place my sophmore year) relationships and an accidental internet encounter with the concept of aromantisim for me to realise that the reason this wasnt working for me was because I didnt really want it.

The more I thought of myself as aro the more things made sense. At the slumber parties as a kid I never had a crush to confess. Those two failed relationshios? Guy friends I'd gotten real close to and thought my new stronger friendship feelings must be what romantic attraction feels like. Also the real sticker, I dont get jealousy in romance at all. Like that one goes over my head. I dont understand why cheating is the worst thing someone can do in a relationship to the point that people who've been sucked into a cycle of abuse and have become convinced everything is their fault will snap when they discover they were cheated on. That is absolutly mind boggling for me.

The point of that is I never got that ew ick romance feeling. As a reult the road to discovering I was aromantic was long and and full of doubt. Doubt that went along the lines of "Maybe I just havent found the right person". Which also happens to be the exact thing my mum says to me everytime I try to explain that Im aromantic to her. Bisexuality she understands and accepts. This she doesnt. So even though I know intellectually theres no right person for me that niggling doubt remains andit haunts me.

Now im going to devolve a bit here and I know what this sounds like but im seriously not trying to be offensive just explain something

See I read a fanfic recently. I dont remeber how I found it but it was a Stony fic and the story and the set up were very romantic cliche. Basically Steve was Tony's booty call it evolves to friends with benefits Steve falls in love. Textbook stuff. But see theres a wrench because the author identifies as aromantic is with the definition we have aromantic. They write their identity onto Tony. Thats something we do in fanfic and in writing. But the problem I ran into is this: the author identifies as aromantic because they experience romantic repulsion(yes they told me this) so in the fic Tony is in love with Steve but experiences romantic repulsion. The idea of romance of romantic commitment makes him anxious and sick. This is how the author feels FWB allows them to experience intimacy without triggering their repulsion. Identifying as atomantic makes them feel not broken. This so good right? This is why we have labels

Except. When I read this part of the story it hurt me. Directly. See Tong Stark has Daddy Issues. Ehen the author wrote about Tony's romantic repulsion narritevly they tied it into Tony's not nice childhood. I dont know specifically why it wasnt part of thwir explanation when I told them their story hurt me. I didnt ask. But this narritive decision made what was essentially was an author expressing their experience as an aromantic in a story feel like a personal attack against my aromantic identity.

See when I read that what I read was "Tony Stark cant commit to an actual relationship with Steve Rogers because Howard Starks Grade A parenting fucked up his ability to recieve expressions of love and his ability to commit. Tony Stark is in romantic love with Steve Rogers but his childhood trauma prevents him from expresing it in the traditional manner this is what being aromantic is"

That hurt. Because it hit that little doubt in my head about not having met the "right person" and mixed it up with some childhood trauma made you a broken person. It also hit me while I felt safe. Romance stories are my escapism. Their like an extra element of fantasy in a story for me. I specifically seek out romantic stories as a comforting mechanism. Fanfics in particular because of their inclusivity. I was in my safe space, and I was whammed in a sore spot.

The problem is though the author has a right to that story and that label and to express themselves. We usually draw the line at self expression where it hurts other people but thats not what happened here. What happened here was definitial confusion. The author and I were using "aromantic" to describe two different but similar romantic orientations. In doing so we hurt each other ironically in the same way. We both said to each other "Your identity is wrong and toxic you hurt people and yourself by expressing it the way you do". (I left a comment saying how her story affected me)

When I say I'm aromantic I mean I experience no romantic feelings. None nada zilch. The idea that I might one day experience a type of romantic feeling is an aggression against me. The same way the idea that gay people can choose to be straight is an aggression against being gay.

But I can't invalidate someone else to protect myself. What do I do? I dont want to hurt myself and I dont want to hurt other people? Idk

And now to why I no longer identify as bisexual.

I'm a virgin. Because most peoples first time is with someone their in a romantic relationship with. And we'll I dont do that. Im also a socially anxious person. I have no idea how to instogate a sexual encounter and honeslty I wouldnt feel comftorable dping it with someone I couldnt trust or alternatively someone I'm friends with and would have to continue being juat friends with in post we had sex awkwardness. So ive never had an opportunity to have sex.

But I also havent sought them out. And I dont feel particularly driven to. These are reasons to think your asexual but I'm sure it's also the experience of many introverted and secually awkawrd people. And it's not like I couldnt have sex at some future point. Even now if an opportunity arose I might say yes, of only to confirm my asexuality.

The thing that has made me actually consider if I'm ace tho is a weird quirk of mine. I cant get off to prom videos. I use lit erotica. Why? Cause the idea that those are real live people puts me off. Porn stars and amateur porn makers know people get off watching their videos. Theyre okay with that. But I'm not. At all. Thats a big ol nope for me.

See I'm a ciswoman. Which means I have a clitoris. An organ whose only purpose is to provide pleasure. As everyone knows reciving pleasure via the clit requires no participation by a second person. The fact that my clitiros functions as intended and that I use it isnt sexual attraction.

Thats a new idea for me. But it's true isnt it? Sexual attraction is about other people. And sure I can appreciate other people's hotness. But just because I think a horse is pretty doesnt mean I want to fuck it. Remeber that thing about thinking I was faking bisexuality?? I was right. I wasnt sexually attracted to women. But what I hadnt bothered to consider because of heteronormativity was that I wasnt sexually attracted to men either.

Other fun fact in case you might be an ace person who's read this far (why? Also hi Katie and possibly Sadie but definelty Nishat. No im not implying any of you are ace) I dont have sex dreams. But I do have dreams in which I masturbate. So stick that jn your pipe and smoke it.

Anyways these are all experinces that I have that I feel neccessry to share to make it so the repulsion story isnt the only one out there. And also to start a discourse about how experiencing and not experiencing repulsion affect aspec experience. Thanks for reading!

#aro #ace #aromantic #aromantism #asexuality #aspec #lgbt #lgbtqa

4 notes · View notes

expshared · 6 years ago

Text

Fall 2017 had some of my favorite anime from the year as a whole—draws big ol' hearts around Girls’ Last Tour and Land of the Lustrous—so how did Fall 2018 compare?!? this is clickbait.

Starting with the leftovers from Summer, Golden Kamuy manages to be strong and intriguing despite being a project wholly mismanaged by studio Geno, who simply don’t have the staff give this show what it needs. I dream of a Golden Kamuy given to us by a Madhouse or a Bones. That said, I love Golden Kamuy very much, it is so unlike anything else in anime. Historical edutainment, cooking show, slapstick comedy, grotesque body horror...the sum of its parts is so strong that the horrible CGI bears almost don’t even matter. The season ends on such sequel bait that I’m just dying for more, oh god please.

You guys like sports anime???!? Run with the Wind sold me on its premise by virtue of taking place in college, which is just different enough to be interesting. I didn’t realize this one was a 2-cour, and when I did its glacial pace made a lot more sense. I do love a good underdog story, and no one in this club is looking to become an Olympian, that’s for sure. There’s something to be said about doing something just for the sport and community of it, and I like that a lot. Speaking of sports anime that are about coming together as a community and not so much about being The Best at This Sport Ever, Anima Yell was a delightful show about cute girls learning how to cheerlead!. It’s not inspired by any means, but it’s cute, fun, lively, and super enjoyable to watch. I was afraid there would be many opportunities for upskirts and raunchy gags, but Anima Yell is wholesome and just really invested in getting you to enjoy cheering on other people. GO FIGHT WIN! Tsurune is, unlike Anima Yell, just not fun to watch. It’s dreary, moody, and I ask myself wondering why anyone in this show has any friends at all. If this were my first sports anime, maybe I’d be more tolerant, but its biggest sin is that it’s just so boring. If it weren’t Kyoani, I’d have dropped it at episode 2.

Iroduku: The World in Colors was an incredibly pretty time travel story about opening yourself up to the world and the people in it after trauma. I felt it dragged a little in the middle, and some episodes felt just plain compulsory (gotta have an episode per club member!! unfortunately all club members are not equally interesting) but the last three episodes were clinchers. It came together to be quite a nice little package, if you don’t mind a little bit of melodrama. I wouldn’t necessarily go out of my way to recommend this one, but I would put it nicely on the shelf with comp titles like Angel Beats and After the Rain where it could hold its own.

The worst thing I watched this season was Girl in the Twilight, which was like a really bad episode of Black Mirror that just wouldn’t end. The plot involved some very convoluted alternate world hopping with cassette players of all things, but it also gave us Evil Amazon, Westworld: Japan, and a canon gay couple I Guess. While I wanted to like it for its sheer chuzpuh, unfortunately, everything about this show was Bad. Bad CGI. Bad character design. And worst of all: a Bad ending that never bothered to tie up any of its loose threads. Bangin’ OP though?

Oh my god you guys, watch Bloom Into You. I read a lot of GL manga and Bloom Into You is generally agreed upon as being one of the best: more of a character piece than a romance, uninterested in the noncommittal will-they-won’t-they agonizing of its peers, committed to saying something about the world and its characters more than just being fluff. As a manga reader, I had highish hopes—I’m quite fond of studio Troyca—and you know what, I actually felt I had a more enjoyable time watching this than I did reading it. I found it an incredibly sensitive and inclusive watch (ace, aro, bi, and lesbian characters??? In ONE SHOW??), and was, many times, struck by how true to LGBT experiences it was. A lot of GL manga either take place in a world where there are no bigots or in a world that erases the sexuality of women altogether (there’s a reason why “pure yuri” exists) or else exist in a “fanservice bubble”, but Bloom Into You is none of the above. GL anime are incredibly scarce and so few of them nail the actual, terrifying, honest-to-god experience of growing up and realizing you’re not experiencing romance or youth like other people are. I really, really hope the success of this show starts a trend of further adapting GL manga, because there are some excellent ones out there for the picking. My only complaint about this adaptation is that it ended too soon.

SSSS Gridman was the strongest directorial effort this season—a love letter to kaiju and the tokusatsu genre, a show about playing with toys and fantasy and escapism, bloated with so many references to mecha anime and old school Ultraman and a dozen other unrelated properties that the showrunners loved to buy toys of when they were kids. This is a show that rewards repeat viewings, as the first couple of episodes are hidden behind 5 layers of foreshadowing, red herrings, and referential Easter eggs. The bait and switch is delicious, and even though I felt like a lot of it went over my head because I am not in the know about all the extremely specific references this show was making, the journey is worth it. The scale feels huge, the reveals are all great, and the characters are engaging. Akane Shinjou is one of my favorite villains because she is also technically the protagonist, and also she is an emotionally messy kaiju fucker who lives in garbage and that’s delightful.

My favorite this season was a dark horse: the never-to-be-imitated-again Zombieland Saga. The incredibly vague descriptions and trailers that were put out before its release did not gear me up for the first episode. This was on purpose. The first episode had me so fucking floored I couldn’t believe I could still be surprised by anime. Even after a picked my jaw up off the floor and resigned myself to the fact that I’d been tricked into watching an idol anime, and I liked it, the show didn’t stop surprising me. It understood physical comedy in way that never got tired, but didn’t sacrifice any heart (hehe). I learned more about the idol industry than any other idol anime I’ve ever watched combined. There’s also something very tongue-in-cheek about having your idol anime--a genre done to death-- star zombies. It was a constantly surprising delight to watch, and I loved every episode more.

#chitchat paddywhack #animoose and mango #lost post /#boy i hope that read more is working

3 notes · View notes

tokyoghoulaspecs · 5 years ago

Note

Hi sorry, don’t want to come off as rude, but I’m not sure what all these ace flags are specific to? Pretty aeromantics are people who don’t feel “romantic” feelings towards someone. Wondering if you could explain the difference in aro flags?

Hello! There’s a lot of diversity in the community so there’s a lot to explain, but I’ll try to go over as much as I can! I know it can get pretty complicated, so feel free to ask for clarification or follow-up questions!

(If you want to learn more about aromanticism, I recommend aromanticism(dot)org which has a lot of resources, as well as searching the aromantic tag or tags of arospec identities here on tumblr!)

I also always tag the identities of the characters, so if you’re ever curious you could look at the tags and look up the orientation you see!

Asexual VS Aromantic

So firstly, I see you used “ace” up there in your ask, when your question was about aro flags. It’s a common mistake, but asexual is not an umbrella word for aromantic.

Asexuality refers to sexual attraction, and aromantic refers to romantic attraction.

Although it’s possible to be both, aromanticism and asexuality are more of a venn diagram kind of deal. There are asexuals that are not aromantic, and there are aromantics that are not asexual, and some people are both asexual and aromantic.

Instead of “asexual”, the word that does include both aros and aces is “aspec.” Aspec can refer to one or both of the a-spectrums. Which is why my url is “tokyo ghoul aspecs” and not “tokyo ghoul aces”. All aces are aspec. All aros are aspec. But not all aros are asexual, and not all aces are aromantic. (It does get confusing with all the “a” words, though)

“Pretty [sure] aromantics are people who don’t feel “romantic” feelings toward someone.”

That’s a common definition of aromanticism, and it’s not wrong! Aromantics are indeed people who don’t experience romantic attraction.

However, aromanticism is actually a spectrum! A more inclusive definition is “people who experience little to no romantic attraction.” Basically, some aros actually do experience “romantic feelings”! But how much and to what degree varies on the aromantic person, which brings us to your last question!

(If you’re a bit confused, I like to think of it in less technical terms, by this definition: “a person whose experience of romance is disconnected from normative societal expectations”. Although we aromantics may vary in how much romantic attraction we feel, none of us seem to experience it in the way most people tend to, or how society says we should.)

“Wondering if you could explain the difference in aro flags?”

I can’t do them all, as there’s a lot (flags keep being made, redesigned, new terms keep being coined, etc) and tumblr unfortunately only allows 10 images at a time.

But I can show you some of the arospec flags I’ve used on this blog!

Aromantic

Similar to nonbinary, aromantic can be used as a stand-alone identity, as well as an umbrella term for the whole aromantic spectrum.

The green in the flag was chosen because it’s the opposite of red, and red is commonly known as a romantic color.

Greyromantic and Alloaro

Greyromantic is commonly defined as experiencing “rare romantic attraction”. There is no limit on how few crushes you’ve had to be considered “rare”. If someone feels like they’ve had rare crushes compared to their friends or other people and finds comfort in the arospec label, then they can use it.

Greyromantic can also be used as an umbrella word for all arospec identities in the grey area of the aro spectrum.

Allo-aro (or aro-allo) is the shortened form of aromantic allosexual. They are aromantics that are not asexual. They experience little to no romantic attraction, but do experience regular sexual attraction.

Because of a mix of arophobia and sex-shaming, alloaros are often demonized, dehumanized, ignored, and erased, and so one way of gaining recognition and bringing together the community was @/arotaro creating this flag.

Demiromantic

Demiromantic is defined as “only experiencing romantic attraction after a bond is established.”

(If you’re thinking “but isn’t that everyone?” you might want to think about crushes again. The typical alloromantic (alloromantic = not aromantic) experience is romantic attraction at first sight. Some people prefer to wait to date until they have a bond with their crush, but they still felt romantic attraction before they began dating. For demiromantics, they do not experience any romantic attraction to a person until they have a bond, and bonding with someone is not a guarantee to experience romantic attraction to them.)

Once again, there is no time limit on this “bond.” For some demiromantics, it may be months and for others it may be years.

The flag is a bit controversial (there’s claims that the triangle is appropriation, although the design seems to have been going for a prism effect and any relation was likely unintentional) so there’s a few redesigns out there. The original triangle flag is still being used and is still most common, but some demiromantics have switched to using other flags.

The second flag there is a redesign by @/crimsxnflxwerz, which is my personal favorite. When I make demiromantic edits, I usually use both the triangle and this diamond one, so I included both here.

Lithromantic and Aroflux

Lithromantic is defined as “romantic attraction that fades upon reciprocation”. So lithromantics will get crushes on people, but if their crush is reciprocated then it will fade away.

Aroflux is defined as “fluctuating romantic attraction”. Again, the definition is loose and there is no time limit. For some it may fluctuate over months or years. For others it may fluctuate by the days.

Some fluctuate between experiencing romantic attraction and not experiencing it, and others fluctuate along different arospec identities.

Recipromantic

Recipromantic is only experiencing romantic attraction to someone you know is romantically interested in you first. The first flag is shared by recipromantics and recipsexuals, and the second is only for recipromantics.

Aroace

Aroaces are aromantic asexuals. For the longest time, aroace didn’t exactly have a flag. People would use either split the aromantic and asexual flags, or mash them together into this many striped flag you see on the right.

@/aroaesflags felt that their aromanticism and asexuality were not two separate things, but one whole identity, and they wanted a flag to properly represent that.

The orange and blue flag has taken off, and quite a lot of aroaces use it now, although some do use and prefer the green and purple flag, and there’s quite a few other redesigns out there.

Oriented Aroace & Angled Aroace

Oriented aroaces are aroaces who do not experience romantic or sexual attraction, but they experience a tertiary attraction that they feel affects their orientation and they want to label it alongside being aroace. For example, an oriented aroace lesbian is not romantically or sexually attracted to girls, but maybe she finds girls very pretty aesthetically and wants to be in a committed relationship with a girl instead of a boy.

There was a bit of gatekeeping with this term. I believe the coiner wanted it to only be used by aroaces who experience zero romantic or sexual attraction and tried to gatekeep it from aroaces in the grey areas on either/both a-spectrums. So Angled Aroace was coined by @/black-aros to be the term for those in the grey areas.

Quoiromantic and Nebularomantic

Quoiromantic is defined as someone who cannot differentiate romantic and platonic attraction, and is uncertain which they experience. It’s taken from the French word “quoi” which means “what”.

Nebularomantic is defined as someone who cannot differentiate romantic attraction from platonic attraction due to neurodivergency.

#asks #aspec 101 #long post #tumblr screwed up the formating ugh

0 notes