#(also this is not anti lottie to be clear. i'm all for her making a bad choice i just hate that they didn't DO THE WORK for it)

[wistfulwatcher]

i've been trying to stay positive about yjs all season because i desperately wanted to keep loving it but after last night's ep i just cannot pretend it's well-written anymore. that was the most nothing, poorly-paced episode i think we've gotten, at least for an ep that should be a CRUCIAL turning point. there was virtually zero exploration of the worst choice the teens make in 96 (the ritual discussion should have been a fucking bottle episode, tbh, with all that should have gone into it), and too much time spent recapping what we already knew in 21 (without it actually meaning anything/changing the characters when they learned). oof. just truly disappointing tbh.

[discoursecatharsis]

I've noticed this pattern with antis in fandom where, in their attempt to distance themselves from anything and everything "problematic" in their fandoms, they refuse to acknowledge when they DO enjoy something problematic. Therefore, they don't recognize the problematic elements of the ship, character, media, etc. They'll also heavily downplay or deny any problematic. aspects of their favorite fandom thing.

I just saw an example of this and it is blowing my mind right now and I need to share this with y'all.

It involves the comments on this video.

Some context for Princess and the Frog: the blonde girl is Charlotte, also called Lottie. She's the main character Tiana's best friend. Charlotte's goal was always to marry a prince, and she almost marries (who she believes to be) Prince Naveen, but once she sees that Naveen and Tiana are in love, she tries to help them turn back human so they can be together.

At the end of the movie, Tiana and Naveen get married, and this scene plays after. Charlotte dances with Naveen's kid brother, and says "I've waited this long" in response to him saying that he's 6 and a half years old.

Now Charlotte's line here, if you look at the context clues of her story line, implies that she's saying "I've waited this long for a prince to marry, so I can wait longer for Naveen's younger brother to grow up." It's just a joke. Albeit, a joke that many will find to be very uncomfortable and inappropriate, but a joke nonetheless. I highly doubt Charlotte is actually going to "wait for" this child to grow up to marry him. She's making a joke at her expense, about her desperation of her dream to marry a prince.

BUT FOR SOME REASON.... many of the comments are like "she means that she's been waiting to DANCE with a prince."

I'm completely and utterly serious y'all. Here are some of the comments along those lines, with thousands of thumbs up each.

If you've seen this movie, you'll realize that these comments make absolutely no sense for more than one reason.

1) Charlotte danced with Prince Naveen (or at least with the villain disguised as him) earlier in the movie. She danced with a prince already. Why would that still be her dream if she already accomplished that?

2) Lottie speaks multiple times (during her childhood and in present day as a young adult) about her dream of "marrying a prince." Not dancing with a prince. Not meeting one. No, she wants to MARRY A PRINCE AND BE A PRINCESS.

This video has some clips of her saying this, at the time stamps 0:20, 2:52, 4:08, and 5:21.

Charlotte does give up her dream of marrying Naveen specifically for Tiana, because she see that he makes Tiana happy. But with how she jumps in like a wide receiver to catch the bouquet at Naveen and Tiana's wedding, it's clear she still has her dream of marrying *A* prince, just not Naveen.

But back to the comments on that video.

The comments seem to be downplaying the actual implication of her line. It's almost like they're desperately trying to ignore what she actually meant and make it more wholesome because they don't want to admit that their favorite movie has an uncomfy and inappropriate joke.

It's disturbing that this is yet another example where people in fandom (who are fantis or have been influenced by that fanti mindset) are downplaying a scene (or a ship, trope, etc) that is ACTUALLY problematic because they personally like the movie or the character and they don't want to admit that it has some issues. Instead of just admitting "yeah that scene/line was kinda fucked up and gross," they are jumping through HOOPS to make it seem more innocent than it was. And this is completely blowing my mind and is honestly concerning.

If you want to personally interpret it in a different way, in a way to make it more palatable to you, be my guest. That's what fandom and fanon is all about and I do that a lot too. But to see so many people outright deny the actual implications of this line is... bizarre af. It's one thing to be like "hmm yeah I don't like that, so I'm going to personally interpret this ship/trope/scene differently so it's more comfortable to me." It's another thing entirely to be in complete denial and ignore the actual context of the character and their story.

Also, so many of the other comments on the video aren't even commenting on the actual scene or on what Charlotte said. They're just generic comments on how much they love Charlotte as a character or how they miss this 2D animation. It's like they're trying reallyyyyyy hard to ignore the joke that's being made.

On the grander scheme, this is concerning because these people are refusing to acknowledge something that's inappropriate at best and predatory at worse (an adult "waiting" for a child to grow up) because they don't want to be caught enjoying/supporting something "bad."

All their talk about normalizing and normalization, but they're the ones kinda normalizing bad things by downplaying them or being in denial of it when it's in THEIR favorite media. And that is very concerning and a big issue.

[wistfulwatcher]

i've sat with the episode for two days now, and i'm still just genuinely so disappointed and bewildered by lottie's suggestion that they sacrifice one of the survivors. as presented, lottie's reasoning for the need to offer one of them to the wilderness is because they're all struggling as adults. just struggling, not facing any real and true dangers like the threat of starvation they were facing in the wilderness. she wants one of them to die - the very thing she wanted to prevent natalie from doing A WEEK AGO! - so that the other 5 survivors' lives get a little happier.

sacrificing one of them so they can all eat in the wilderness makes sense. it's an ugly and brutal choice, but it's understandable. lottie's plan is not. and the thing is, they did have an opportunity in this episode to justify lottie's 2021 suggestion, and they just...didn't. because, presumably, the reason for lottie making the suggestion in 2021 falls under the reason the ritual began in 1997. but we didn't get to see that ritual discussion.

understanding their motivation for the sacrifice is crucial. it's been crucial for the past two seasons, it's been what we were building to, and it's the bedrock of their new religion. we know they needed to eat, and that the sacrifice was a practical one. but how did they decide that one life was worth more than another? that a group of lives were more valuable than one? philosophy nerd misty was in that room; did she explain the different schools of thought? did they decide that the overall health of the group was more important than a single life? did they decide that the group as an entity needed to survive? and what does "survive" mean? physical satiation? emotional stability, making a choice they could all live with? did they discuss their possible future selves? the idea of happiness, since that's essentially what lottie is pitching in 2021?

lottie's whole pitch is that they need to do this - LITERALLY DIE - to survive, so that is exactly what they needed to define in the ritual discussion for this episode to make sense. and they didn't.