#or things that were interpreted badly and are not actually problematic

[rollingwiththecheeses]

Every fan of every piece of media made by an actually problematic or just "problematic according to tumblr" author

[luci4theminorannoyance]

heyyy!! you may or may not see this so i might send it again but i actually have a self aware idea that i kinda wanna write myself too but i wanna see how you make it:

self aware kreuger and keegan who’s like in love with us or something and we’re like a commentary youtuber who does videos on icebergs, deep dives into video games or controversial/problematic things

HELP ik this is confusing so here are some examples

(i love both of these youtubers to death btw go subscribe to them they make fire videos)

and call of duty happened to be what we were gonna be covering in our video and we were gonna talk about it’s history, the problematic parts of the fandom, cosplaying on social media, and what cod became today and all that jazz

again i might resend just incase you dont see it but you dont have to do this !! i also plan on writing my interpretation of this and stuff so watch out for that hehe x

i saw this as romantic and gn reader would be great but its up to you !!

a/n: woah this is a super cool idea!!! I am not truly equipped to do all of this but I’ll see if I can make it live up to such a cool concept 🥲

Keegan:

-Keegan had watched you for months, from the screen as you sat on the loading selection page, or while you deeply dived into little bits of characters or chats or simply played to take notes… it was cute, watching you work so hard on something

-luckily for him, you recorded it in the same room too and it gave him an awful lot of information on his ‘world’ or at least what he was to your point of view and how others viewed everything about his life, other people, and anything related

-it was hard to accept of course, but Keegan didn’t shatter under the weighing pressure that his world wasn’t fully real. As he had you now. And that was more then enough for him

-he’d voice specific lines about lore you would otherwise have to Google for hours, diving into files you couldn’t reach and finding out what you had been oh so stressed about the night before while going through nitty gritty details

-he felt his blood boil just a tiny bit every time he heard you replaying videos of less then correct interpretations of himself, or of some cosplayer making him a man he wasn’t. It was nice attention though, he couldn’t deny that.

-oh he couldn’t wait to tell you all about what you wanted to know, or to hear about you for once… he wanted to know so badly what your favorite color was or why you do videos, but he could wait a bit longer to tell you, hopefully

Krueger:

-LOVES hearing your voice when you film, when you talk, when you sigh over new drama to cover or giggle when you get some traction on a post, since it means the very world to him

-he’s slightly scared you’ll set down the game as soon as your done with the video on Call of Duty. He doesn’t want to be alone again, not after he’s come to the conclusion of his life not being real

-what if you set down the game and don’t come back? What if you give up on the video? What if it doesn’t do well so you don’t post about call of duty again and you forget all about him

-makes him scared and antsy to tell you, to signal you that he’s there. That he’s alive or at least as alive as pixels can be

-he wants to hold you and squeeze you and tell you all the things you spend time researching or chuckle with you and having you hear him properly

-at least he’s figured out some semblance of a quick way to get to the internet, and he plays your videos on repeat, time after time to hear your voice and to see your smile

[krchar]

ok people ok right so just a few seconds ago i noticed a thing in w.i.t.c.h. issue 20 - A Gust of Hate - the one where Shagon makes Will go crazy and she fights the girls

well... it is just some interesting details in this issue fuckin me up again

that is, in the area of witch repeatedly hinting at the topic of free will and rules and greater good etc and what is the role of kandrakar and oracle in that, going there much deeper and intentionalier than i thought in the past, see this awesome post by veilchanjaeger on this

ok, at the beginning kandrakar can sense will's madness is about to happen, and everyone wants to observe, like always, and let another nerissa happen - Yan Lin wants to do something, like always - she approaches Himoracle and he says no way loser

he becomes quite angry, huh? and very quickly - did they already talk about it? or is he angry cause he doesnt want to accept an inner voice that tells him that it is all bullshit? that is my interpretation haha. it is also interesting that he says "none of us can interfere in what others have decided" - is it like that they cannot change the decisions of the girls (cause it is fate), OR of the council who tells them to stay away OR some founders of kandrakar who made up the observation rules..?

well anyway, yan lin is just being yan lin of course, bless her

and as you may remember, she visits hay lin in a dream and gives her the good advice about oaks and reeds - it is a wonderful scene, i love that

then the will thing happens and thanks to this advice it goes better than it could have, although then of course nerissa tricks will into giving her the heart - but at least will did not murder her friends or so.. also even before that, yan lin for the first time really really doubts if the whole kandrakarian system makes sense and she literally says that oracle sucks for not helping will, like he did not help chykn and cassidy, and she also blames the former guardians for that..

when i try to figure what is actually the opinion of the writers (which doesn't have to be in harmony with what characters say, of course), i'd say that they agree with yan lin that the system sucks - but given the developments, i'd say they agree sort of with everyone - one of my favourite scenes is will's meeting with cassidy - cassidy says that now she gets that kandrakar makes difficult decisions because of a much greater chaos that a mortal cannot understand - which makes sense very much - but, you know, all people in kandrakar were, once, mortals

HOWEVER now i noticed an interesting detail really.. it could be an unthought through logical mistake.. but it could be a damn good easteregg

when nerissa gets the heart, and oracle knows shit's about to go down, he says this

which, if intentional, means, for sure, that he KNOWS what Yan Lin did and he did not stop her, AND that if he makes reference to her metaphor in relation to the council, he might be aware how problematic is this thing in kandrakar's functioning, the unconditional sticking to rules like an oak, which always ends badly - unless it is just a reference to i dont know people being strong in war, but that would be quite a disappointment for me tbh

the reason why he had not stopped yan lin, could be a) that he just decided to observe and not act even here - but considering that just two weeks (or so) before that he literally stole memories from guardians to stop them from doing sth he didnt want them to do, i am not sure that is the case. the other option is b) that he spoke to yan lin in accordance with the rules, but actually wanted her to do it, maybe like "i know destiny will take its turn and i cant do anything about it, its yan lin's fate, she's just going to do yan lin stuff"

BUT i actually think he did want her to do it, cause he many times appears to be happy, when the guardians act against their orders and things turn out for the better (and then he says it was their fate, kind of pilate attitude huh)

so that is the thing. yeah.

this comics still gets me and so it w/Will forever

thank you for reading my essay

[ryuichirou]

If you don't mind me just kinda talking to the void in your ask box, seeing so many people come here and talk about how much of a refuge it is to come to this blog and separate themselves from the anti rhetoric found literally everywhere else really got me thinking about how it really is such a huge breath of fresh air. It really is sad (and concerning) to see how common place the anti mindset has become in modern day fandom culture. I want to say I don't understand the mindset, but as an ex-anti myself, I actually do to an extent and it's really sad to think about one of the ways that leads so many people into this mindset.

If any of this makes any sense, in a way, it's essentially brainwashing. For a lot of people, young teens especially, you are essentially brainwashed into believing fiction actually does equal reality, brainwashed into believing that if you like these "problematic" tropes from fiction it says a lot about who you are as a person. And from how I interpret it, this thought process essentially preys on one's want to be liked by those around them and/or their fear of rejection. I know for me that's exactly what led me down that path, so many of my friends at the time all those years ago (like a decade ago at least) essentially told me shipping incest ships was like them shipping myself with my sibling. That was such a gross thought that for someone young and impressionable like I was then, it started worming the idea into my brain that enjoying ships like that really did mean I was a gross and horrible person. And the fact that I didn't want to lose those friends especially contributed to further brainwashing me to believe that mindset, because the worry always was that if you think otherwise, if you enjoy those "problematic" tropes, suddenly you're a disgusting person and you lose everyone you care about.

Joining these... Well, what's basically echo chambers of this thought process certainly didn't help, and absolutely contributed to furthering this brainwashing too. Because now that you start to believe that enjoying tropes that are "problematic" makes you a horrible person, you got this echo chamber confirming this is true, it's telling of who a person is, and you should be thankful that you don't like that stuff because it means you're not a predator or an abuser or whatever horrible thing you could call someone who hasn't even done anything as heinous as what real predators and abusers have done. And it's so concerning cause I think about how I'm lucky at the very least I was in these echo chambers with those who were my age or around my age at the time. But I so badly worry for those who are young teens in these echo chambers with full grown adults with the worst of intentions, cause for all the preaching of "problematic content is only consumed by groomers," a lot of these adult antis sure can be heinous hypocrites.

This basically turned into a whole essay at this point lol, but I think what I'm just getting at is that it's sad. It's sad seeing how predatory the anti mindset is, how anxiety and paranoia inducing the culture surrounding this mindset can become, and yet it's so widely common place in modern day fandom. It's been a few years since I've, for a lack of better terms, essentially had to be deprogrammed from this mindset myself, and even then sometimes I find myself reverting to old thoughts before having to remind myself "these characters are literally lines on a screen, they do not exist in the physical plane." So when I see people call your blog a form of refuge, I really gotta wholeheartedly agree on that. I truly do feel as though your blog, and other dark fiction fan content I will look for, helps keep me grounded. Your blog brings me back to the days before I fell deep into the anti mindset, to the days I was happily shipping anyone and anything together from Homestuck without a care of how old one character was compared to the other or how related the two characters were, and literally writing out these complex shipping charts on the school whiteboards during class periods when the classroom was empty except for me, my friends, and the teacher.

I guess this whole thing got out of hand omg, but ultimately TLDR; damn the anti mindset absolutely sucks ass, and as someone who used to be an anti I can understand on one side as to how one can end up falling deep into the rhetoric. Your blog is absolutely a breath of fresh air from all the anti bullshit I gotta sift through on a daily basis all because I want to enjoy fandom made content in the modern day, and it reminds me just how I may be considered a cringe weird little freak by most outsiders, but damn am I extremely happy to be a cringe weird little freak right now 💗💗

Posting this one separately, because it’s very big lol but also very important, and thank you from both of us for sharing your thoughts and your experience! Reading it was a wonderful way to start a day.

I am very grateful and happy that people consider our blog a space where they can talk about these things. Creating such a place was never our intention, but if our stubborn self-indulgence makes people feel good in any way in our current fandom climate, then… I don’t know, this is just the best thing to hear. That vibe you described, you know, shipping Homestuck characters, giving 0 fucks, oh my god SHIPPING CHARTS ON A SCHOOL WHITEBOARD… This feels like home lol And this is what a fandom experience should be all about. Talking to your friends, discussing stupid things, not taking anything too seriously and thoroughly enjoying yourself and the media you consume. I really want to cherish this feeling. 

It’s amazing that you left the anti mindset and don’t torture yourself anymore. You are completely right that this is brainwashing and one of the main reasons this phenomenon exists is because kids want to be liked and are scared of being rejected and ridiculed. It is natural, every generation has this thing that teens consider lame or bad and shit on it constantly. But when the moral aspect of it plays such a big role and when it makes people hate themselves for their interests and cope with it by attacking and harassing strangers on the internet, calling them slurs, doxxing them, suicide-encouraging them, or, hell, even implying that they wanna fuck their relatives for no fucking reason, it makes the whole thing dangerous.

I really hope more people either discover the joy of not taking media too seriously, but being passionate about it… or just, you know, dip from fandom spaces and do their own thing. The truth is that if this whole idea didn’t exist and weren’t so popular, the majority of people wouldn’t give a fuck about it, just like it had been before.

I am not a time-traveler, but for some reason I am sure that people who spend their teenage years agonising over not being able to ship themselves with a character after they reach a certain age, as if they’re not allowed to grow older or as if they can change it, or harassing artists for shipping characters together, won’t look back at this and feel any kind of warmth, nostalgia or satisfaction. It’s better to be cringe but to be passionate and earnest about things that you like than hurt others in order to make people like you. When you leave these groups of people, you’re usually left only with yourself and your feelings, and my guess is that looking back you just feel upset about your experience of being a fan of something instead of feeling like you’ve had a good time enjoying the thing you like.

Once again, thank you so much for this ask. And thank you for being here with us.

[heinzpilsner]

Tadadada! Here's the epilogue to my 'Overanalyzing beach Maiko' series.

Firstly, let's list some main conclusion theses:

1) Mai became interested in Zuko's problems after he directly mentioned his scar and his relationship with Ozai for the first time, so her final change of attitude does make some sense.

2) The basis for Zuko's irrational jealousy was Mai's annoyed facial expression after he criticized Ruon-Jian.

3) The context of Zuko's jealousy rampage actually leaves a loophole for not-possessive interpretation (yay).

4) Despite how badly Zuko screwed up, Mai somehow managed to screw up even more (yep, still sounds contr-intuitive).

5) Mai actually expresses herself all the time and her "childhood trauma" is a big bullshit.

6) Apart from his inner crisis, Zuko has to fix many problematic attitudes and personality settings before he'll become a decent romantic partner for anyone.

7) So does Mai.

Something like this.

And now, a bit of old good boring and inaccurate psychology lecture mistake correction.

I think that I misinterpreted Zuko's side of "bring me food" scene, actually. You see, I saw it as conscious submission in order to avoid conflict with Mai, but...

It actually looks more like Zuko genuinely didn't realize that Mai's demand was not okay. He wasn't exactly eager to please her*, but he also didn't see her attitude towards him as problematic.

(*Not catching Mai's "I'm hungry" initial hint is kind of an indicator of Zuko's cool-off towards her. I mean, acts of service is his typical way of showing affection, which makes his sudden cluelesness pretty notable.)

Basically, Mai and Zuko in this scene demonstrate opposite facets of locus of control problem. Simply put, they both believe that Zuko is responsible for something he really isn't - in this case, satisfying Mai's hunger.

Later, though, it's Zuko who believes Mai owes him something - namely, to give him affection and meet his emotional needs. In his head, he gives responsibility for his emotional well-being to Mai and scolds her when she "ignores her duty" by not being "passionate" enough.

(But while Mai doesn't owe Zuko anything formally, she made a mistake of severely underestimating Zuko's contribution into relationship and his real value for her. This resulted in her coldness and lack of gratitude in response to his affection, which is quite a big relationship screw-up.)

Okaaay, and with that part out of the way, it's time for my final personal reflections.

In general, I have no doubts I made lots of other mistakes during my analysis. I tried my best, but to dissect relationship conflicts correctly, you need to have good feeling of personal boundaries and empathy of your own. And... Well. It's not exactly my forte.

I compensate for some things with theoretical knowledge, but my mind is a mess, so... Yep.

I feel like I have to go and read more psychological theory after this.

Also, I kinda tried to do an entertainment out of this, and roasting format doesn't exactly mix good with being objective. So, yep. It seems I got some kind of useless Frankenstein monster in the end, lol.

And finally... Perhaps I had to make it clear much earlier, but...

I have nothing against Maiko shippers or Mai fans. Ta-da!

I'm sure they have a lot against me now though, pffft.

I realize what I wasn't exactly restrained in my roasting, so it's natural for you to dislike me. But my goal wasn't to tell you what your preferences are inadequate or something. I mean, I myself ship much more toxic problematic shit (and have a weak spot for all sorts of flawed characters). It isn't supposed to be about being rational. You like it, I don't, it's ok.

Dunno, maybe someone needed to hear this.

That's all, I guess. If you were reading this series - thanks for your attention. Despite everything, it was a rather interesting experience for me, and I hope you found something useful for yourself too.

I wonder what I should analyse next >:D

I ignore all notifications, but maybe I'll make an exception soon. Ta-da! What a cliffhanger.

[polinator]

I have come here for one reason. To shout into the void of the internet.

Y'all. Y'all. Y'ALL. Bless your hearts. I love the Bridgerton canon. Since I read TVWLM over 20 years ago... well, liked it since then. Loved it more when I read AOFAG (and yeah, I know some people hate it, but I do not). And I say this as a person who has written fan fiction in this fandom and made physical things celebrating this universe.... It isn't that serious.

These are historical romance novels that lean into comedy a lot of the time. Historical rom coms, if you will. I wish people would stop interpreting them in the most tragic way possible without taking into consideration the intention Julia Quinn had when writing them.

Are there issues with scenes in some of the books? Yes. Do I adore every tiny thing in them? No.

But, what do you think JQ intended? Do you think she intended for her romantic heroes to come off as abusive sometimes? No. (Well, unless you are talking about Turner. For Turner the answer is most definitely yes.) The office scene in TVWLM, the lake scene in AOFAG, the engagement ball scene in RMB, and so on... they were written to be read like physical comedy. Like a screwball comedy. Like I Love Lucy where Ricky spanks Lucy. Is that problematic when we look back at it in 20fucking24? Yes, of course. But was Lucille Ball trying to imply Ricky Ricardo was an abuser? No. It was meant to be funny.

People take Colin to task for thinking about hitting Eloise. Y'all must be fucking saints if you've never thought about hitting your sibling. The fact he only hit her once I find amazing. My sister and I fought all the damn time. The love in the Bridgerton household must have been like a huge bubble. My parents were/are the most amazing parents God had ever put on this earth.... and my sister and I still fought. Also, I've def thought about strangling a boyfriend or two. And a child or two. Did I do it? No. But I thought about it. And you've definitely thought about doing bodily harm to someone. Because it's a human thing. It doesn't mean you are actually going to do it. And it certainly doesn't mean you're an abuser. Good god girl get a grip.

Julia just didn't think about these things as deeply as some in the fandom think she did. Like 20+ years ago when the books were first released they were popular but not that popular. People were not all over it analyzing everything like they are now. (I mean, we were to try to figure out who LW was at the time, but not everything else.)

On the same lines, Edmund was not an abusive father at all. Again, what do you imagine JQ's intentions were when she said Colin was horsewhipped? Do you think she actually meant beaten? No, of course fucking not. Over and over in her canon she shows and tells you what a great father Edmund was. She has absolutely no problem telling you if someone's dad or guardian are trash. Let us count the ways (spoilers below and trigger warnings for real):

Simon's father- pretended he didn't exist because he stuttered, fuck him up so badly he was going to not have an heir just to spite the hateful son of a bitch.

Sophie's dad- didn't give her any attention, left her to be raised by servants, only called her his ward, left her fate in Araminta's hands

Phillip's dad- horrible shit who actually beat Phillip with a whip, his scars are detailed, how he is beaten is detailed, his father's anger is detailed, is a huge part of the book, Phillip is afraid to touch his kids because he doesn't want to be like his father.

Gareth's dad- shit of a human being who treats his youngest son like trash because he is not his biological son, cut him off completely, tried to ruin the estate so he would have a shit ton of debt when he actually died, betrothed him to a girl with intellectual disabilities without his consent and said if he didn't marry her he couldn't go to school

Lucy's uncle- the third to worst person in a JQ book, stole money from their estate, betrothed her to (a very lovely) gay man because he was being blackmailed for treason, said he didn't give a fuck about her, made her believe her father was the treasonous bastard so he could guilt her into marrying the man, threatened Lucy at knifepoint, said he was going to watch while Lucy's marriage was consummated and implied that if her new husband didn't do it he would let the man's father rape her to ensure it happened

And who could forget... Hugh's father- a psychopathic piece of filth so wretched it's hard to list all the horrible things he's done from memory, but just here's just a taste: beats his sons when they do anything he considers to be wrong including misremember some part of their family tree and he enjoys it, repeatedly hired sex workers to rape his gay son and then would encourage them to beat him and helped beat him with his cane when the son wouldn't have sex with them, raped his wife repeatedly (and their sons could hear it), is so obsessed with his lineage that when Hugh, one son, was accidentally crippled he paid men to follow poor Daniel (the guy who slipped and accidentally shot him) to the continent to murder him and didn't stop until his son told him he would kill himself if Daniel died, he bribed servants so he could keep tabs on Hugh because that title is super important, he then kicked Hugh on his painful, injured leg and drugged him so he could tie him to the bed so that he could lock a lady in the room and force their marriage for the sake of that damn title, and more I'm sure I can't remember. AND he did all this without a trace of remorse.

And probably other fathers I can't remember. What does Julia Quinn say about Edmund? He was the best of men and of fathers. Now, thinking about JQ and how she's written alllll these other fathers, do you think she really meant that Colin was actually horsewhipped? No. She probably thought spanking but make it Regency.

I love her books, but do you think she's deep diving into research? Probably not. I mean, she forgot that she wrote Colin's birthday was in January. At the beginning of 'Just Like Heaven' Colin and Penelope are married and in the middle of the story they aren't even engaged yet. She is not thinking about things that deeply.

They are supposed to be fun and romantic and sometimes humorous and the drama... they are not meant to be analyzed and dissected like you would 'Invisible Man.' They aren't supposed to be all moody and intense-- it's not Dickens. Emotional, yeah of course, they are romances, but not taken so seriously.

But you know, don't come for my Bridgerverse canon babies, or I will cut you because I do take my love for them seriously. (Well, not Turner, you can have Turner.)

@your3fundamentaltruths I am not coming at you about Turner... well maybe a little bit. But you and I and maybe like five other people know the Bridgerverse well enough to get the reference.

[crescenthoax]

Hi I’m that anon who sent you the GOT quote and I just wanna say to this beautiful bit 😭 “As for Floris and Aemond I know [my] Aemond is not everyone’s favourite but I don’t know… I feel like the lore about them I think every night before falling asleep is too deep and complex to even begin with. I adore them, even though he’s terrible and she deserves so much better, and yes, I see everyone pointing out that he’s not exactly mourning her but I think he is in his own way -and I will write about it. Just because.”

GIRLLL YOU DONT KNOW HOW MUCH /I/ LOVED THEM. They weren’t the main couple but I feel like all your side pairings are so much full of intrigue and drip with life. But yeaaahh um I loved them, I loved the whole “they prefer to look at each other than touch each other” thing and how less physical They were, I loved their opposite personalities, and I loved how they kept their relationship to themselves and away from prying eyes of not just the other characters like Annika but to the reader as well (unfortunately I’m a nosy bitch who wanted to see) They also reminded sooo much of Joanna and Tywin “Only Lady Joanna truly knows the man beneath the armor, and all his smiles belong to her and her alone.” LIKE.. ugh my heart.

I definitely overromanticized them to a problematic degree in my head 😭 I’m an optimist but I was so excited for the Christmas au bc I thought they’d get the happy ending they’d been robbed of by the Caswells in the main verse, I thought starting with them being broken up meant that their arc would be them getting back together so imagine my surprise and heartbreak when I read part 2 😭😭😭😭😭

I definitely feel more than a little silly for misinterpreting their relationship so much and hearing that they don’t actually “belong” together in that way, Idk. I don’t hate your Aemond but I do want to shake him and scream that he needs to get his act together and BECOME BETTER AND BECOME DESERVING of her because in my head, she was all he wanted. Idk. It’s stupid but I wanted them to be happy together so badly. I still really ship them even after alla dat which makes me a little bit of a 🤡 but I LOVE pain if I didn’t, I wouldn’t have made it this far into Aegon and Annika’s story.

I think so many of the readers associated the found family with all three of the couples just being siblings together so it’s easy to forget how much Aemond loves our girl Annika, if he’s disloyal to his wife which I think is sad and a little unfair but a valid reading. I’m also not ready to let go of this familial dynamic, it was definitely my favorite. I just hope for the best for all of the Targtowers and their remaining wives especially Aegon and Annika, but I know whatever you come up with, I’ll be happy with even if I’m sobbing on the floor.

Jeez that Tywin and Joanna’s comparison was truly something.

And, to be fair, I don’t think there’s such a thing as 'misinterpreting them.' I believe you can interpret their relationship however you want and also perceive the characters alone as you please. That's what's fun and magical about reading. As a writer, I would never say, 'no, actually…' when someone tells me their views on a character or a pairing—unless you're saying something absolutely out of context, like when someone said Annika enjoyed being with Jacaerys or that she didn’t love Floris. I want people to feel a genuine connection to the story and perhaps find themselves in the characters, to relate to them. I also love to see how what I’ve written is interpreted because it helps me a lot to see if people understand where I’m pointing. So, if you think they were in love (they were, I just think that if it were up to him he would’ve never taken a wife at all), then it’s okay. Aemond is a complicated dude driven by duty and greed, but yes, he loved her, and he’s in pain right now though he doesn’t let it show. Modern Aemond and Floris, however… I don't know I feel like modern Aemond would be so insufferable about women. Love him though.

On a side note, of course he loves and deeply cares about Annika too. I think I already talked about this, but he cares about her as an individual and also as an extension of his brother’s honour. That's why he’s mad and upset about the entire baby situation, perhaps even more than Aegon. I think Aegon feels guilty, and he’s sick with worry thinking about everything Aemond is pointing out. But I believe we can all agree that we are all going to miss this family so much. I even have to confess that I wrote that Christmas au because I was too depressed about the main fic and I missed Floris and the six of them and I wanted Helaena to be happy lol.

[yanderefairyangel]

How much of a pass can we give writers for writing one thing that wasn't intended to be something different (usually controversial) but it was interpreted that way by the audience/fandom?

Normally as much as needed, but in this era the answer is sadly none.

But I feel like most people don't even realize some of the things they say are problematic and not just because of the questionable morality of accusing someone to villify a mental disorder without actual proof nor actually listening to their real intentions but also because of the effect it has on the writing.

Not trying to bring this back but when the Fell twins were confirmed romance and thus leading people to try to prove they are siblings to Alear (because of course, that's the normal response to that ) they don't even realize that Alear being siblings with the Fell twins has ACTUAL bearing on the plot and would have consequence on the continuity of the text. However, independantly of their S support with Alear, it's kind of obvious IS wasn't intending to do anything too big with them : their plot relevance last the Fell Xenologue and that's it. The writing for their relationship with Alear and how they don't affect much the plot in general and their design or how the writers purposefully made them not siblings to their Alear in canon so that it would determine their relationship with our Alear, regardless of Sombron. And the thematic of the pair of sibling within our cast and how they foil each other. So their S support isn't really the cause of this narrative but more a result of this narrative which is that IS didn't knew what to do with them and made them romance to call it a day...(regardless this decision will result in IS denying the siblings allegations, as they always do).

In the case of Veyle and Seadall, you'd have to ask yourself what DID and ED brings to their writing seeing how 1/In Seadall's case, the diet thing just exist and isn't deeply explained 2/ In Veyle's case, it kind goes against her own character arc of finding herself and becoming whom she wants to be since the brainwash is likely a metaphor (used literaly here) for the psychological damage a parent inflict upon his children when he is being violent against them... I mainly say this based on Rafal and additonally her brainwash doesn't exist just to explain why "evul" but to create a parallel with Alear and their past self... to put it short those allegations are all bothersome in the sense that they show that they don't understand the writing and blame the writers that never intended that to happen in the first place.

In one case it makes Seadall looks like a lazy attempt to tackle a heavy topic when... it was clearly not the goal and in another it would make Veyle's narrative convoluted leading to a contradiction between what the story is showing and telling and whatever those people though the writers had in mind

The difference between the two and idk Bernadetta is that Bernie explicitely tell us herself that her "waky attics" are actually PTSD comming from the parental abuse that her father made her go through so there you can say that the handling of her trauma is badly done in 3H because of how the writing contractids herself

This doesn't exist in Veyle and Seadall's case because Seadall's situation is never treated as seriously and Veyle is never used to make slapstick jokes.

What's worse is when the fandom doesn't even realize that it really is just an intepretation on their part and get mads at other for trying to explain that to them while unfairly accusing the writers of something they never though someone would imagine

(note : me talking about the Fell twins/Alear situation as an example is not an invitation in flodding my ask box with arguments to whether or not they are close relatives)

[ranseur]

you don't come across as combative at all! and i'm glad i don't seem to either lol - poking at things together was def my goal. my point was meant to be that much like with the old fanfic disclaimers, there can be actual consequences (both online and not) and anxieties about language make sense in an increasingly surveilled world. getting "receipts" for everything has become such a common thing - like the simplest thing i can think of is what if you said (or worse, wrote) that you "want to kill that guy" out of frustration, which is a super common and normal thing to say - but now those words, attached to your name, can exist Forever and be Observed by people you don't even know. tl;dr i think this is a natural effect of eroding privacy

ah cool i'm glad we're on the same wavelength! self policing as a natural effect of eroding privacy- i hadn't thought of it that way but what you said makes a ton of sense. the idea that someone could be filming or cataloguing you is frightening, and the distance between online and irl consequences is less divided than I previously described for sure the fear of receipts would be a good reason why people triple guess themselves, and anticipate the most bad faith, uncharitable interpretation of their words. or avoid a piece of media/person/topic altogether, because they fear the proximity to something problematic reflects badly on them. and imho, this isn't a healthy way to interact with media/stuff if i am correctly expanding on what you're saying, i totally agree. i guess what i'm stuck on, is probably a slightly separate issue- of people using 'new' vocabulary to avoid these consequences from people, when words like 'unalive' were used to maintain communication with people but confuse machines. if people understand 'unalive' intuitively, then won't saying 'i'm going to unalive that guy' irl hold the same meaning to human spectators, who will use that as a receipt, same as if they said 'kill'? in a way that's not dissimilar to how we would learn dog whistles of certain political groups. that said i don't know what my point is haha, i'm speculating on what goes on in people's heads and i have zero credentials here

[baeddel]

Please. Please can you tell me what a baeddel is and why people (terfs?) used it in a derogatory manner on this website for a hot minute but now no one ever uses it at all

you asked for it, fucker

[2k words; philology and drama]

baeddel is an Old English word. i have no idea where it actually occurs in the Old English written corpus, but it occurs in a few placenames. its diminuitive form, baedling, is much better documented. it appears in the (untranslated) Canons of Theodore, a penitential handbook, a sort of guidebook for priests offering advice on what penances should be recommended for which sins. in a passage devoted to sexual transgressions it gives the penances suggested for a man who sleeps with a woman, a man who sleeps with another man, and then a man who sleeps with a baedling. so you have this construction of a baedling as something other than a man or a woman. and then it gives the penance for a baedling who sleeps with another baedling (a ludicrous one-year fast). then, by way of an explaination, Theodore delivers us one of the most enigmatic phrases in the Old English corpus: "for she is soft, like an adulturess."

the -ling suffix in baedling is masculine. but Theodore uses feminine pronouns and suffixes to describe baedlings. as we said, it's also used separately from male and female. but it's also used separately from their words for intersex and it never appears in this context. all of this means that you have this word that denotes a subject who is, as Christopher Monk put it, "of problematic gender." interested historians have typically interpreted it as referring to some category of homosexual male, such as Wayne R. Dines in his two-volume Encyclopedia of Homosexuality who discusses it in the context of an Old English glossary which works a bit like an Old English-Latin dictionary, giving Old English words and their Latin counterparts. the Latin words the Anglo-Saxon lexicographer chose to correspond with baedling were effeminatus and mollis, and Lang concludes that it refers to an "effeminate homosexual" (pg 60, Anglo Saxon). this same glossary gives as an Old English synonym the word waepenwifstere which literally means "woman with a penis," and which Dines gives the approximate translation (hold on tight) male wife.

R. D. Fulk, a philologist and medievalist, made a separate analysis of the term in his study on the Canons of Theodore 'Male Homoeroticism in the Old English Canons of Theodore', collected in Sex and Sexuality in Medieval England, 2004. he analysed it as a 'sexual category' (sexual as in sexuality), owing to the context of sexual transgressions in the Canons. he decides that it refers to a man who bottoms in sexual relationships with another man. i don't have the article on hand so i'm not sure what his reasoning was, but this seems obviously inadequate given what we know from the glossary described by Dines. Latin has a word for bottom, pathica, and the lexicographer did not use this in their translation, preferring words that emphasized the baedling's femininity like effeminatus, and doesn't address the sexual context at all. Dines, however, only reading this glossary, seems to decide that it refers to a type of male homosexual too hastily, considering the Canons explicitly treat them separately. both Dines and Fulk immediately reduce the baedling to a subcategory of homosexual when neither of the sources to hand actually do so themselves.

by now it should be obvious why, seven or so years ago, we interpreted it as an equivalent to trans woman. I mean come on - a woman with a penis! these days I tend to add a bit of a caution to this understanding, which is that trans woman is the translation of baedling which seems most adequate to us, just as baedling was the translation of effeminatus that seemed most adequate to our lexicographer. but the term cannot translate perfectly; its sense was derived from some minimal context; a legal context, a doctrinal context, and so forth... the way Anglo-Saxons understood sex/gender is complicated but it has been argued that they had a 'one sex model' and didn't regard men and women as biologically separate types, which is obviously quite different from the sexual model accepted today; in any case they didn't have access to the karyotype and so on. the basic categories they used to understand gender and sexuality were different from ours. in particular, Hirschfield et al. should be understood as a particularly revolutionary moment in the genealogy of transsexuality; the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft essentially invented the concept of the 'sex change', the 'transition', conceived as a biological passage from one sex to the other. even in other contexts where (forgive me) #girlslikeus changed their bodies in some way, like the castration of the priestesses of Cybele, or those belonging to the various historical societies which we believe used premarin for feminization [disputed; see this post], there is no record that they were ever considered men at any stage or had some kind of male biology that preceded their 'gender identity.' the concept of the trans woman requires the minimal context of the coercive assignment at birth and its subsequent (civil and bio-technological) rejection. i have never encountered evidence that this has ever been true in any previous society. nonetheless, these societies still had gendered relations, and essentially wherever we find these gendered relations we also find some subject which is omitted or for whom it has been necessary to note exceptions. what is of chief interest to us is not so much that there was such a subject here or there in history (and whatever propagandistic uses this fact might have), but understanding why these regularities exist.

a very parsimonious explanation is that gender is a biological reality, and there is some particular biological subject which a whole host of words have been conjured to denote. if this were the case then we would expect that, no matter what gender/sexual system we encounter in a given society, it will inevitably find some linguistic expression. if, like me, you find this idea revolting, then you should busy yourself trying to come up with an alternative explanation which is not just plausible, but more plausible. my best guesses are outside the scope of this answer...

anyway, all of this must be very interesting to the five or six people invested in the confluence of philology and gender studies. but why on earth did it become so widely used, in so many strange and unusual contexts, in the 2010s? we're very sorry, but yes, it's our fault. you see apart from all of this, there is also a little piece of information which goes along with the word baeddel, which is that it's the root of the Modern English word bad. by way of, no less, the word baedan, 'to defile'. how this defiled historical subject came to bear responsibility for everything bad to English-speakers doesn't seem to be known from linguistic evidence. however, it makes for a very pithy little remark on transmisogyny. my dear friend [REDACTED] made a playful little post making this point and, good Lord, had we only known...

it went like this. its such a funny little idea that we all start changing our urls to include the word baeddel. in those days it was common to make puns with your url (we always did halloween and christmas ones); i was baeddelaire, a play on the French poet Baudelaire. while we all still had these urls a series of events which everyone would like to forget happened, and we became Enemies of Everyone in the Whole World. because of the url thing people started to call us "the baeddels." then there was "a cult" called "the baeddels" and so forth. this cult had various infamies attatched to it and a constellation of indefensible political positions. ultimately we faced a metric fucking shit ton of harassment, including, for some of my friends, really serious and bad irl harassment that had long-term bad awful consequences relating to stable housing and physical safety and i basically never want to talk about that part of my life ever again. and i never have to, because i've come to realize that for most people, when they use the word baeddel, they don't know about that stuff. it doesn't mean that anymore.

so what does it mean? you'll see it in a few contexts. TERFs do use it, as you guessed. i am not quite sure what they really mean by it and how it differs from other TERF barbs. i think being a baeddel invovles being politically active or at least having a political consciousness, but in a way thats distinct from just any 'TRA' or trans activist. so perhaps 'militant' trans women, but perhaps also just any trans woman with any opinions at all. how this was transmitted from tumblr/west coast tranny drama to TERF vocabulary i have no idea. but you will also find - or, could have found a few years ago - i would say 'copycat' groups who didn't know us or what we believed but heard the rumours, and established their own (generously) organizations (usually facebook groups) dedicated to putting those principles into practice. they considered themselves trans lesbian separatists and did things like doxx and harass trans women who dated cafabs. if you don't know about this, yes, there really were such groups. they mostly collapsed and disappeared because they were evildoers who based their ideology on a caricature. i knew a black trans woman who was treated very badly by one of these groups, for predictable reasons. so long-time readers: if you see people talking about their bad experiences with 'baeddels', you can't necessarily relate it to the 2014 context and assume they're carrying around old baggage. there are other dreams in the nightmare.

the most common way you'll see it today, in my experience, is in this form: people will say that it was a "slur" for trans women. they might bring up that it's the root of the word bad, and they might even think that you shouldn't use the word bad because of it, or that you shouldn't use the word baeddel because it's a slur. all of this is a silly game of internet telephone and not worth addressing. except to say that it's by no means clear that baeddel, or baedling, were slurs, or even insulting at all. while Theodore doesn't provide us with a description of how we can have sex with a baedling without sinning, and it may be the case that any sexual relations with a baedling was considered sinful, sexuality-based transgressions were not taken all that seriously in those days. there was a period where homosexuality within the Church was almost sanctioned, and it wasn't until much later that homosexuality became so harshly proscribed, to the extent that it was thought to represent a threat to society, etc. and as i mentioned, there are places in England named after baedlings. there is a little parish near Kent which is called Badlesmere, Baeddel's Lake, which was recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Domesday Book (as having a lord, a handful of villagers and a few slaves; perhaps only one or two households). it's not unheard of, but i just don't know very many places called Faggot Town or some such. it's possible that baedlings had some role in Anglo-Saxon society which we are not aware of; it could even have been a prestigious one, as it was in other societies. there is just no evidence other than a couple of passing references in the literature and we'll probably never have a complete picture.

[scruffyplayssonic]

Are the ArchieSonic comics actually an 80's/90's syndicated cartoon? Episode 36: New love interest! They get together, yet she never shows up again 

Welcome back to my look at the ArchieSonic comic series, and how it shared a lot of the same story tropes as a typical ‘80s or ‘90s syndicated cartoon! Well, my last two looks at love interests in these comics were pretty cringey, let’s see how much worse things can get, shall we?

Episode 36: New love interest! They get together, yet she never shows up again 

For this one we need to turn to what is arguably the worst three-issue arc in the Knuckles the Echidna comics, The First Date, which ran from issues 26 - 28.

This story began with the Chaotix - or what was left of them, at least - discussing the recent departure of Charmy from the team. Long story, I’ll get more into that one later. But I will just say that I thought it was lame that Penders cut him from the team, probably because he had no idea what to do with him. Anyway, Espio revealed that he’d gotten a letter from Charmy announcing his betrothal. Vector was absolutely gobsmacked and appalled at this news, clearly not a fan of being tied down to a single partner.

Getting tired of listening to him brag about how great he is at attracting the ladies, Espio triple-dog dared him to successfully ask out anyone he could find.

Vector accepted the challenge but struggled to find anyone willing to overlook what an annoying and badly written character he was. :P He was sulking alone in a cafe when the waitress came over to ask him if he wanted anything, and… well, this happened…

But apparently he failed to ask this unnamed character out too, because in the following issue Mighty and Espio pointed out that he’d failed the challenge, and he brushed it off as nothing more than a temporary setback. 

Jesus Christ, what a repulsive attitude to have. But there must have been something about Vector that the unnamed swan lady found appealing, because at the end of the story in Knuckles #28, Vector brought her to Knuckles’ surprise birthday as his date!

…how?! What?! How?!

Now look, I’m an apologist for the ArchieSonic series’ early years, as I grew up reading them and thought a lot of this stuff was epic at the time. Heck, I even kind of like the first 21 or so issues of the Knuckles series - the political arc introducing Lien-Da and cyborg Dimitri are when I feel it took a turn for the worst. But I think these three issues are the worst of the Knuckles comics. The story is bad, the art is awful, and Vector is an extremely problematic character as written by Ken Penders. This interpretation of the character clashes violently with the Vector that we know today, although I can’t entirely fault Penders for that because in the ‘90s his only non-comic appearance had been in the Knuckles’ Chaotix game. So I get the need to come up with a personality for him, but I don’t get why this is what was decided on. It’s just plain creepy. The only redeeming factor of those three issues is the backup story where Mighty is reunited with Ray the Flying Squirrel.

While Vector’s unnamed date is the only case I can think of where a character actually hooked up with a new love interest who was never seen again, I’ll give an honourable mention to Li Moon.

Sonic and Tails first met her in Sonic #60, when they saved her village from the Iron King and Queen. The Iron Queen had set the nearby Mount Stormtop ablaze and let the fires rage for 100 days, causing a terrible drought for the people of Stormtop Village. Sonic and Tails took it upon themselves to save the day, putting out the fire and sending the Iron King and Queen packing with the help of Monkey Khan. Problem solved, right? For awhile, sure.

The two villains would later return after Eggman’s defeat in Sonic #200, taking control of his forces and renaming the Eggman Empire the Iron Dominion. After New Mobotropolis was captured by the Iron Queen, Sonic, Tails, Sally, and Monkey Khan fled back to Khan’s homeland in an attempt to break off the ties she had with the four clans making up her army. While they were there they stayed with Li Moon and her grandfather, and Tails seemed to develop a bit of a crush on Li Moon.

Sheesh, ninjas really know how to kill the mood.

Tail's crush never really went anywhere, and I don’t believe Li Moon was seen again in the comics after that arc.

Are there any other new love interests who appeared and then were never seen again that I missed? Let me know in the comments! My next blog post is probably going to be a beefy one, as the category is “Sidekick is kidnapped.” There’s plenty of material for that one in the comics!

[eveningspirit]

The Ark 1x06 Meta

Watching The Ark feels a little like reading a very badly written fanfic, that includes the trope you desperately crave for. You (me, I mean it feels that way for me) read it, you curse and enjoy it at the same time, and then you comment that you “loved the story, and thank you so much for writing it!” Because, for one, that trope is so rare, so even if it’s not executed too well, it at least exists in the fanfic realm. Secondly, that person wrote the fic in their spare time, right? And maybe they are fifteen or whatever, and just trying their best. Or maybe you’re simply polite.

The TV show creator, who earns real monie for their effort, should try better I guess…

I’ll spare you teh scrolling... ;)

I wasn’t really going to write about The Ark, but episode 1x06 was about the trope I like to read about in fic, and I have thoughts. I’m not saying the show is problematic. I mean, it is, obviously (what media isn’t these days? But that’s another matter. And this one is badly written on top of that), but I want to say something about my personal impression, not so much about general “problematic-ness”. Although it’s probably one and the same in this case. Just. It’s not a general post about problematic things being problematic.

It is personal, from the point of view of a writer. This episode dealt with one issue I struggled with a little, a few years back, while writing a fanfic. Should a person who’s chronically ill divulge information about their illness to their co-workers?

It’s a delicate issue, because in an environment where other people’s lives depend on one person’s ability to perform their duties, well… What should you do? Or what can you do, what would be an okay thing to do, if you’re a colleague of the ill person? Can you demand they tell you all about it? Hmm?...

I think not.

And yet, my first idea was similar to what they did on this show: that the character owes their colleagues an explanation. It took some thinking and re-evaluating my principles to fully understand that the right to privacy trumps other people’s curiosity, or even their concerns. That everyone in this setting is an adult, and they take responsibility for their actions – including responsibility for managing their illness. And their colleagues are supposed to trust them, as they would any adult, about any other thing.

That’s why The Ark reads like a badly written fanfic. There is drama, a lot of it, but there isn’t any psychological or emotional truth to what they portrayed.

James Brice suffers from some kind (fictional) of terminal condition. As he begins to experience symptoms, his colleague, Eva witnesses it and starts asking questions. He’s really rude about how he tells her to respect his “effing privacy”, then he tells her again, in a little more polite manner, to leave it well enough alone; it is none of her concern.

And then the narrative frames it as him keeping secrets, and keeping secrets is wrong, because it may endanger others. Well.

While his actions (keeping it a secret and sort of ignoring it while making decisions) are true to his character – impulsive, risk taking – it also paints him as irresponsible. On a superficial level, but then, I don’t suspect the show of going any deeper than superficial. After the near-miss he, of course, tells Eva the whole truth, and, again of course, asks her to keep this secret from the others. At least the scene cuts there, and she doesn’t promise him anything.

Granted, the show already had the characters have a few secrets (Sharon being a “clone” – read “mutant”; Sanji’s addiction) that were revealed to the whole crew almost right away. So I don’t suspect this will remain secret for long. However, I think they way they dealt with Sanji’s problem, especially, was written better than this. At least it was her decision to tell others.

I wanted to make a note about a little deeper interpretation of James’s irresponsibility – he may actually be in denial about his condition. That would be very human of him, and I could get behind that. It’s a flaw. Heck, irresponsibility is a flaw too, and I like my faves flawed. ;)

So no, I don’t really complain about James Brice and his characterization (at least how I interpret it, lol). I may complain about the science of it all (the symptoms of said condition are… um… doubtful, to say the least), but then, who cares! I will keep watching anyway, and even though I won’t “tell” the authors that they did a great job, I plan to keep enjoying what little of my fave trope I can get. ;)

[dramaruni]

Sometimes I feel like idiot for writing think-pieces about dramas that I haven’t finished yet because some of them age really badly. And I always wonder if I have to write clarifying posts and be like “this was written x episodes into the drama, and now I don’t feel the same anymore.” I know I shouldn’t be too hard on myself though because I’m not the only one making these mistakes and I think most people can guess these thoughts are subject to change once the ending is reached. I still felt compelled to write something about my comparison of Vincenzo and Itaewon Class because honestly, I can’t say I have the same thoughts of it as when I first wrote this post.

Vincenzo was just as disappointing as Itaewon Class when it came to the ending. I think they fail on different areas but there is still something about the revenge and where all the characters ended up after it, that was utterly unsatisfying in both dramas.

One thing Itaewon Class did right was, at least the women of the drama take part in the action. Both Soo Ah and Yi Seo got do something in terms of revenge. Even if Soo Ah’s development came too late in the drama and Yi Seo had exhibited very problematic behavior, I can’t fault the drama on the area of giving their female leads agency and taking part in revenge because in actuality the women do much more than Saeroyi does (we can talk about how the drama credits this legwork but at least they acknowledge who put in the work). Whereas Vincenzo failed hard in this area.

Chayoung got sidelined in the last two episodes in a way that is completely inexcusable. She has been sidelined and neglected throughout the entire drama; it just reached another level awful in the last two episodes. I can’t think of single reason she needed to get shot. We were never really worried she was going to die. It didn’t yield a love confession from Vincenzo. So even the angsty reasons for doing this are not present. The only thing it managed to do, was to effectively take her out of the action. And why did they did need her out of the revenge plans in the first place? Was it to keep her hands clean? Because she had already stated she was okay with the path they had chosen, so why even have that conversation if she isn’t going to be a part of it anyway? And considering it started because of the death of her father, and she wanted the revenge I don’t understand why she didn’t get participate even a little in the final act.

I think it’s because they strayed to far from the initial message and focus of the revenge that Chayoung needed to be removed. What my initial comparison of IC and Vincenzo said was that what Vincenzo did right was it highlighted capitalism and they were targeting the company and its structure in their revenge which I felt was true at the time. However I feel they totally lost that message in the last two episodes.

I was already worried when the last conversation between Vincenzo and Han Seok in jail took place. When Han Seok says, once he is released Vincenzo would have to fight the Monster Han Seok and not Chairman Han Seok, I felt this took the focus away from the general the idea behind Han Seok’s actions and thus the initial motivation for revenge.

This is further highlighted in the handling of the last trial against Babel. I thought it was too rushed and it just didn’t get enough screen time. This is what we have been working towards since the beginning of the drama and it all got solved in the span of 5 minutes. I know all their actions essential had let to this moment, but I just wished the victory had been more than just the tenants and Jipuragi sitting in front of the television to receive the good news.

The guillotine file was not used to its full potential either, I feel. Yes it was handed over to the "right" agency and they refused to work together with the prosecution to not include the corrupted members of the justice system. But they didn’t really show how they worked against the corruption with information in the file. They don’t show the true fallout of what that kind of file could do to the entire justice system. So essentially the latter part of the drama was just to take out Han Seok and Myunghee.

Throughout the entire run of Vincenzo, I’ve had complicated feelings about Jang Han Seok as a villain. I think in the beginning the biggest issue for me was the dual identity between Jun Woo and Han Seok. Both Jun Woo and Han Seok were exaggerated, with Jun Woo being overly cute and cheery, and Han Seok being overly manic and aggressive, so it was a bit jarring for me at least to watch. But once Han Seok's identity was out in the open and he scrapped the Jun Woo identity, he became easier to watch. I still wasn’t big a fan of the whole psychopathy angle they took. But considering that Choi Myunghee and even Han Seung Hyuk stood beside him as neurotypical people who were equally as bad, it could be argued they didn’t try to demonize mental illness. This, however, stops to ring true in the later stretch of the drama.

When Han Seok pointed out he wouldn’t be Chairman Han Seok anymore, I should have anticipated this. Because this was the person, they had targeted from the beginning but now they were going after a psychopath. Not because I think Han Seok should have lived, but the idea behind his actions as the chairman wasn’t that he was some crazy maniac that loved killing people. The idea was, at least as I interpreted it, that he was raised in a family where he wasn’t held accountable for his actions because of the money and power his family had. He wanted to keep the kind of power that allowed him to do no wrong and he had no reservations with the means and methods to maintain and expand this power.

The problem starts to arise when he lets go of Babel. I know he is supposed to be unhinged because of this loss, but to me he just changed too much as character in the last two episodes and a lot his actions didn’t make sense to me. Everything he did only served to hurt people and while he is known to retaliate, he is also known to only do it as long as it serves a purpose. But going after Chayoung and killing Han Seo didn’t serve any purpose to him. The only thing he would gain from that would be to anger Vincenzo and if he hadn’t already learned from killing Vincenzo’s mother, that is only going to come back and bite him.

He was working towards escaping the country, which I guess it would make sense he would try to escape actual prison life. But why did he need to go after Han Seo and Chayoung in the first place then? Revenge? Because he hadn’t actually finished this task when he decides it’s time to leave. So, if he was this quick and willing to abandon that plan, why even initiate it to begin with? It would just put him in an even more dangerous position, and he hadn’t even thought to bring enough bullets with him. So not only is a questionable plan to begin with, but he is ill-prepared for it as well. So what was the point even?

I think I’ll cut it of here, otherwise an already lengthy post will get even longer. So yeah, I think these are the main issues when it comes to my disappointment towards the drama. There are many more things to be said, but I think they can get their own post should I be frustrated enough to keep ranting about Vincenzo.

[inmyarmswrappedin]

ok now i need to hear more of your thoughts about the remakes and how they adapted even’s favorite films

Hi anon 🎬 Sure!

So, first off, the thing about Baz Luhrmann is that he makes unapologetic love story movies. His movies have elements of action and adventure, but they’re first and foremost love stories, and that makes him stand out from other big movie directors. His movies aren’t even romcoms, first because they don’t have happy endings (as Even notes in the video with Mikael) but also because the setting is never contemporary. Like even aside The Great Gatsby or Moulin Rouge, which are not set in the present day, Romeo + Juliet does ostensibly have 90s technology. But since the characters speak in Shakespearean verse, it gives the movie an atemporal feel. So this is a super tragic, super romantic movie that is actually super toxic for Even to model his life after, because Even is convinced that, in order for him and Isak to be in true love (for any love story to be valid), their story has to end badly. 

In Skam, Even provides the twist himself, by starting to make references (and model his life after) Pretty Woman when he starts to become manic. Pretty Woman is like, far from a non problematic movie lmao. But it does have an unlikely happy ending, and it’s through Isak’s understanding of how Even sees Romeo + Juliet and Pretty Woman, that he is able to ultimately reassure Even that their love story doesn’t have to end tragically.

So anyway, the fact that Even unabashedly loves this super romantic movie makes him mysterious and attractive and passionate, because it’s not a dude bro action or superhero movie. By loving this movie, Even is rejecting the macho persona Isak so badly wants to project.

I’ll start with the examples I like lol:

Only Lovers Left Alive: David identifies with this movie to the point that his cartoon persona is a vampire. Like Adam in the movie, he dresses in all black. He is convinced that he’s a monster who can’t live in society because he will be rejected. So it’s pretty clear how this movie is toxic for David. But I also think the movie is sooo telling of David’s actual desires. David likes to pretend that he can go it alone, that he doesn’t need anyone, that he wouldn’t take anyone with him in the case of a catastrophe. But... The movie is about Adam and Eve, the titular only lovers left alive. By loving this movie to the extent that he does, David is parading his major yearning for a forever partner. And like, of course he eventually asks Matteo to run away with him, but Matteo demonstrates how innately he understands David by telling him he does want a relationship with David, but he doesn’t want the toxicity of acting like they’re two monsters who’ve been cast aside from society. 

Dangerous Liaisons: I think Skam España took an interesting route by choosing to not have Cris verbally connect the dots (like Druck did). The thing is, Dangerous Liaisons is a tragic love story, yes, but a love story between Valmont and Tourvel, whereas Joana projects on the Marquise de Merteuil, who is all but the villain in the story. Tragic story aside, Romeo and Juliet do love each other, as do Adam and Eve. Joana’s idea of romance (and of herself by extension since she projects on Merteuil) doesn’t even allow for loving and being loved back in return, because no one in Dangerous Liaisons loves Merteuil, and Merteuil herself has become so twisted that she can’t even call her feelings for Valmont “love” (though that’s how Joana interprets them). And the thing is, Joana still finds beauty in the movie! She writes Cris a letter with the edges burned out because it reminds them both of the story. She wants to meet at a specific park because it reminds her of the movie. So it’s just so... beautiful, that Cris takes all of this and just gives Joana the Liaisons dangereuses book. Like, she is lowkey reminding Joana that the book is just a book, that Joana is a real person (within the Skam España story I mean lmao) and not a twisted awful villain, that she is loved, and that Dangerous Liaisons can be their thing (like “their” song, but a movie in this case) without having to be the horrible thing that will destroy them. I really like that the writers chose to imply all these things in their minutt for minutt scene, without saying them explicitly. 

Last Man on Earth: Honestly, like I don’t particularly have a big issue with Skam Italia making this Niccolò’s thing, other than it’s so... dude bro-y bland? Like one thing you can say about Romeo + Juliet, Only Lovers Left Alive and Dangerous Liaisons is that they are all such high key romantic (as in, emotions running high) movies, it’s what makes Even, David and Joana so mysterious and attractive and passionate. If I knew someone who told me he projects on Last Man on Earth I’d be like, “The Good Place is better” or “if you wanted to stan a SNL cast member, Andy Samberg was right there.” I mean, I do think Bessegato knew what the point of Even’s movie was, but Last Man on Earth is exactly the type of dude bro material I would expect from him, and would not expect from an Even. 

Polaris: Polaris is an undeveloped motif who seems interesting because of the dark and light aspects, and I claim my five pounds. Polaris is in no way toxic for Eliott, like all the others movies and show (even Last Man on Earth) were for the other characters. It’s just... cute. Cute like everything about Eliott is cute and nothing more. Eliott drawing himself as a raccoon is cute because he has a mask and is nocturnal! Whereas Lucas is small and defensive like a hedgehog! And Lucille is elegant and mean like a cat! Etc. This motif is never really developed or explored, it’s never given a twist, Eliott is in fact still obsessed with it 3 seasons later, just like he was obsessed with it before he met Lucas and it was Idriss he envisioned in the other role. There’s no growth, Eliott just never progresses beyond what Polaris represents for him. It sure is cute as fuck though, which is why the stans love it.

 ???:  Does Sander even have a movie? I heard he likes Baz Luhrmann and maybe even Romeo + Juliet, but this isn’t really explored. I don’t think even David Bowie’s life or sexuality or various musical personas (like you could do something with Ziggy Stardust or Aladdin Sane if you couldn’t think of a movie) are explored. Sander likes Bowie like he could like Iggy Pop or Freddie Mercury, queer music icons who for the most part are “safe” for straight men to stan without their sexuality getting called into question. I assume Robbesander stans think the lack of an Even’s movie motif is a sign of excellent writing, and proves Sander is a better Even because he doesn’t project on anything toxic or whatever the hell, just like Robbe is the best Isak because he was so good at letting Zoë and Senne have drama uninterrupted. 

[stickykeys633]

Let's take all characters out of teen wolf we like and let's all hop on the Scott McCall ship for a second. Didn't he do things that weren't right? Kissing Lydia, Calling Alison psychotic for setting boundaries, not breaking up with Kira before he got with Malia. He's misogynistic - and as a feminist I couldn't stan him, if I were that strict. Just saying every character in TW has their problems. There isn't only the racial issue, tho. If you go by a different standpoint I could write essays on the equally bad mistreatment of minoritoes in TW that deserve the same cancle culture their racsim debate has. And then they wouldn't be allowed to like anyone on TW anymore. Because they are all problematic. Just depends on which radical side you are on. Or you can just go and accept that they aren't perfect and deal with it on your own. But I know, trolls and all. *sigh *

I think that’s the part that’s most infuriating. Just as Stereks aren’t a monolith, neither are Posey stans/antis. 

The vast majority of Posey/Scott stans just really love Posey/Scott. And sure, some of them might get a little bitter when someone criticizes their fave, but they usually ignore it and talk a little trash, and then go on about their lives. I don’t have a problem with these and in fact am friends with a good number of them. 

It’s the ones that have something to prove. The ones that dictate exactly how something should be interpreted and then try to control every single aspect of that fandom interaction so badly that they’re willing to use a buzzword to do it. 

You realize the race stuff only came after incorrectly labeling us as pedophiles and fetishists? Racism is HOT right now and they they can use it to try and link to other fandoms who are going through actual racism issue. 

Stereks aren’t Kylo Ren fans, Stereks want whoever John Boyega and Oscar Isaac play to smoosh faces. 

Because guess what? STEREKS AREN’T CONCERNED WHICH GUY GETS TO BE WITH THE WHITE GIRL!

Bottom line is Stereks have one thing in common and that’s Sterek. If I don’t like Scott, it has nothing to do with me being a Sterek, it has to do with him being a badly written character played by a mediocre actor. And even then, I still liked him. He’s currently on my “I’m having feelings about the dude who portrayed you” DNW list, same way Derek was back when Hoechlin couldn’t keep his foot out of his mouth, but that’ll change and we’ll all be one happy family. Antis need to get over it.  No one cares about their drama. 

How about you focus this attention on the POC characterSSSSSS in the show who deserve more representation, oop?

[a-crimson-lion]

I Need To Stop Reading Into Things…😂

Yet again for @kiricookie .

[Check out this post first.]

So… we’re here again. Lord forgive me, I’m back on my bulls***.

Okay, jokes aside, I really should stop doing these things, but I am a stubborn individual. Plus, I wanna see how our notes compare, and try to have more civil discussions on the internet than I see on average. I’d reblog, but again, your post is already long as is (not incredibly long, but still), and I’d rather not occupy dashboard space more than I need to.

Alright, I think I’ve said my piece. Let’s talk about your post…

Oof. Starting right in the heart of the issue, really.

I am aware that Izuku is… incredibly likeable. I am aware that some of his issues, while perceived by some as noble, are heavily problematic and probably need to get sorted out before the boy gets a close audience with death. I am also aware that some of his habits are less than courteous in some circumstances, though like you said, Izuku has the benefit of having no malicious intent when it comes to these actions, even if they can come off as annoying.

Now, regarding Katsuki’s snail pace development… I get what you’re trying to say, but that doesn’t make it come off as any less frustrating...

As much as I want to believe that Katsuki’s upbringing in society is what’s stunted his growth so badly, I wish the narrative was more willing to show it. All we’ve gotten of Katsuki’s past are flashbacks from Izuku, remarks during the visit to the Bakugo household, and the “raised with violence” line from the Remedial Course arc. Now this understandably paints a pretty terrible picture, but uh… what has Katsuki done to try to fix it? How has Katsuki tried to demonstrate that his upbringing wasn’t justified? Why is he imitating the behaviors he supposedly despises, that supposedly keep him held back, instead of trying to find a workaround? I’ve only seen a few growth/redemption arcs of antagonistic characters, but even if the arcs took long, there was always an ultimate reason for doing so. And Katsuki doesn’t have that. At least, not yet.

It’s been implicitly established that Katsuki’s growth will be the mother of all slowburns. I’ve mentioned it in this old post of mine, but this is doing Katsuki no favors, at least for me. Now don’t get me wrong, I love myself a flawed character, but there’s only so much I can stomach before a flawed character becomes less “flawed” and more “asshole.” I personally believe that his true growth doesn’t get started until “Deku vs. Kacchan 2” (Episode 61), but if we really wanna consider that “Bakugo’s Start Line” (Episode 8) is his… well, start line, then that only makes it worse. Because again, his character arc is, as we’ve established, slow. But the fact that it’s slow enough for several other character arcs to transpire (Shoto, Tenya), as well as slow enough to allow “background characters” some significant development and return to relevancy (Eijiro, Hitoshi), I start wanting to stop holding my breath for his arc’s supposedly inevitable conclusion. Now I know you personally consider the suspense a positive, but it’s the opposite for me. I’d chalk it up to impatience, but again, MULTIPLE character arcs have transpired, and a few have been far more believably gradual compared to Katsuki’s.

While it is impressive that Katsuki was willing to pour out his feelings to Izuku, I’d like to argue that it wasn’t as… well, sentimental. Remember that society and Izuku’s peers before UA regarded him as the lowest of the low. The weakest, the most worthless. “The pebble in the path.” Considering that Katsuki lost the Training Exercise AND technically got outsmarted by Izuku, who was considered this until VERY RECENTLY, I’d imagine that’d be one hell of a blow to his ego. It is still significant that he’s willing to talk to Izuku about this, but it’s not exactly because he’s humbling himself. It’s because he’s begrudgingly admitting that he’s not the best, and it’s been well established that he HATES not being the absolute best. And I don’t know about you, but suddenly getting your high expectations crushed after years of nothing but “positive reinforcement” should not be made as big of a deal as it is here. I’m not saying to get over it, because you’ll never get over it, you have to live with it and learn from it, but don’t make it seem like it’s the end of the world and a half like Katsuki did in that scene. Plus, didn’t he essentially reaffirm that he was going to do what he planned to do from the start of his tenure at UA? I mean, good on him for his dedication, but you’d think the guy would want to take a step back and actually try to learn from others if they were so impressive.

Now, the DC Superhero franchise falls in and out from my radar at times, but I don’t think Katsuki and Batman are a good comparison for the point you're trying to make. Yes they both use violence, and yes they’re both intimidating, but for entirely different reasons. Batman uses fear tactics because he finds them efficient; I don’t know what they’re doing with his character nowadays, but from what I can gather in his earlier incarnations, Batman’s not out for blood. Vengeace, sure, but he doesn’t waste time getting there beating the snot out of his enemies. He takes care of them, sends them off, and keeps on trucking. Before they tried making him even more edgy, he didn’t kill and he kept away from firearms because he was well aware of any issues he had. He may not be a goodie two-shoes like most heroes, but he does show definitive empathy in some of his earlier incarnations. Remember, Batman was the kid who lost his parents to injustice. That was his entire reason for taking up the cowl, for becoming more than Bruce Wayne. In the Justice League Unlimited Episode “Epilogue,” he has the option to kill Ace, a teen villain with dangerously growing psychic powers. He doesn’t do that. He takes the seat next to Ace as she begins to die. He offers his support as Ace has to confront the terrifying realization that she is dying. He’s helping another scared kid, because he knows what it’s like.

That’s heroism. That’s Batman.

Katsuki’s motivations and actions aren’t as sympathetic. Him lashing out isn’t for anything strategical; early on in the series and even after his “Start Line,” up until the Endeavor Agency Arc, I believe, Katsuki’s sole motivations are victory and bloodlust. Even if it seems like he’s growing more chivalrous with his resolve, he backslides so many times back into the angry loudmouth trope its hard to want to keep hope, because if he can backslide multiple times before, what’s to stop him from backsliding again? It ruins the suspense for some people. And people are intimidated by Katsuki, but that’s because he’s borderline unhinged. I’d be scared s***less too if a pyrokinetic powerhouse was gunning on me with his eyes glowing like the fires of Hell as he radiated killing intent (an exaggeration, but still). I have yet to see Katsuki use this intimidation “tactic” of his beyond the fact that he appears to be enjoying it, either.

Alright, enough of that, let’s analyze that penultimate question: why hate Katsuki? If you asked me early on, I would say that yes, I don’t like him because he hurts Izuku. But as I’ve continued looking throughout the series, I now say that I don’t like him because, contrary to what he says, virtually everything is handed to him. Most of the time, its people mistaking his battle thirst as chivalrous determination, whether it be against a villain or just a standard opponent. He never tries to make himself any more “likeable,” and while Class 1-A is quick to call him out for this in the USJ Arc, by the Sports Festival they’re all flocking to him, and I have yet to understand any proper reasoning for this. It’s less like Katsuki proving there’s more to him than meets the eye and earning the respect of his peers, and more so that people latch on to the abstract concept of Katsuki’s coolness and strength, and he just begrudgingly tolerates them from there.

I mean, Eijiro was wholeheartedly against Katsuki’s actions during the Battle Trial, yet by the USJ the difference is night and day, and it doesn’t help that he’s interpreting Katsuki’s desire to beat up villains as “faith in his classmates.” Shoto was abused by Endeavor, so the fact that he can’t at least draw some comparisons between Katsuki and his sperm donor is slightly concerning, and while I want to chalk it up to his stunted social skills, I feel like Hori and/or his editors trying to shove in a friendship to increase their overall likeability (especially Katsuki’s) is more likely. Don’t even get me started on the hoops they jump through in the Joint Training Arc. Not even gonna touch that…

Okay, finally made it to the last paragraph. So, here’s something about me you may or may not like: I don’t like people dying, good or bad. Unless their actions are comparable to that of Satan, or at least close, then they shouldn’t get the axe. Why?

Because a dead person can’t change… and a dead person can’t suffer.

Believe me, even though I’ve fallen off the bandwagon a long time ago, I want Katsuki to change for the better. And he can’t do that if he’s dead. The manga’s most recent arc has been hella frustrating because of that, and no spoilers, but the two deaths that did occur did not leave me in high spirits. Hawks, Shigaraki, you both are on thin f***ing ice I swear. So no, lucky for you, I do NOT want to see Katsuki dead just because he happens to be an ass. What I wanna see is proper repercussions that go beyond being a villain hostage and having everyone else’s potential trauma downplayed for the sake of giving Katsuki more sympathy points.

Also, I’m well aware Katsuki’s death would absolutely ruin Izuku. I am also well aware that it is one of the few concrete facts I hate with nearly every fiber of my body. Not because of what it says about Izuku…

...but because I am sick and tired of Katsuki continuing to be the arrogant s*** he is, whether it be his genuine feelings or merely a front. I am sick of the fact that for as smart and aware that someone like him is, he still insists on trying to act like a badass when there is no need or overall expectation to do so. I am sick that he continues to decide to put himself and others in jeopardy, all for the purpose of maintaining his ego. I am sick that he gets all this support, all this help, and yet his development is still worse than a snail’s pace, and the narrative continues to keep letting him off with love taps and leaving him unfairly unprepared for the kill shot.

...maybe Katsuki deserves to get better. But is this really the best way to do it? Really?

Thanks for listening. Hope you got something from all of that.

-Crimson Lion (24 August 2020)