#But the evil of this entire post is why i need to get off social media for a long time and take my tumblr activities to WRITING and readin

[yourbleedingh3art]

When hes ignoring u but u wanna send him ur mutuals bender schedule

[ilikekidsshows]

hey I figure that you’re probably tired of talking about the Sentimonster nonsense but I genuinely still can’t stand that it’s an actual thing. The wildest thing about it is that I JOINED the fandom because of the Sentimonster theory, actually got excited for it and looked forward to hints, not believing the skeptics or the salters bc it didn’t seem like such a big deal—that is until I saw with my own eyes how SO MANY FANS said with their whole chest that, in “Ephemeral” Adrien HAD to be a Sentimonster or there was no other “sympathetic explanation” for why he didn’t de-akumatize himself or fight off Gabriel.

Seeing the victim blaming in real time was such a punch in the gut—and then they just kept on coming!! It finally hit me how damaging the entire thing because for the show as a whole. If even regular fans that weren’t even known for salting could so willingly disregard and ignore genuine abuse coping mechanisms in favor of magical BS… it was such a dark time. Abuse Apologism and victim blaming in a whole package

Sometimes, when I write about Miraculous, I pretend I'm writing about a show that only had three seasons. That's what the "zagulous fandom" tag is for; it's for posts that are about the parts of Miraculous that had Zag's executive control keeping Astruc in check. I also kinda accepted long ago that my blog's kind of a support blog for people who are against the Sentihuman concept.

When I first heard of the expanded Sentimonster theory, the one that went "all the rich kids are Sentimonsters", I instantly went: "You do realize how making victims of child abuse nonhumans with questionable rights minimizes their victimhood and excuses their abusers, right?" people told me I was making stuff up and whoopsie doo, the writers did exactly that.

Neither Gabriel nor Tomoe faced any consequences for abusing Adrien and Kagami because, after all, since they're Sentimonsters, the real abuse was that they didn't have their Amoks so giving them their Amoks resolves all their problems. The only abusive parent who gets acknowledged as such is Félix's dad, who is dead by the time we hear about any of this, because we can't have abusive parents face consequences for their actions because that might upset people or whatever excuses Astruc's giving for Gabriel's vindication now.

This also minimises all the affects of the abuse on the kids, since they can be handwaved away with: "They were just programmed that way." Kagami's bad social skills aren't because her mother isolated her, it's because she forgot to program Kagami with those skills. Félix's villainous behavior isn't because his mother is overly permissive with him, he was just programmed that way (by the eeeeevil Colt). Adrien isn't a people pleaser because he's repeating his abuse coping mechanisms with his overly controlling girlfriend to keep her happy the same way he did to his overly controlling father, he was just programmed to be the perfect doting son and boyfriend.

You'll notice how neatly this ties into the crew denying that Chloé was abused in any way ever by her clearly abusive mother. Chloé wasn't made into a Sentimonster, so we can't have her bad coping with her abuse be excused by "Sentimonster programming", so now the writers are just gaslighting the audience and saying: "Chloé wasn't mistreated by her parents which caused her to act to out to get attention (which she literally stated to be her motive in season 3), in fact, she's the one who's been terrorizing her poor, innocent father and he needs to be protected from this naturally occuring evil hellspawn."

All child abuse in this show gets excused.

Of course, now the writers have an added reason to make sure Adrien's abuse gets excused in particular: because they made Marinette benefit from it. As I said, Adrien is repeating abuse coping mechanisms learned from dealing with his father to keep Marinette happy. He's always prioritizing her feelings and never brings up his own problems, and this is good for Marinette, because she can just enjoy having a perfect boyfriend who caters to her every need and doesn't have problems of his own or with the ways she treats him (for all she knows). She's even maintaining this status quo by lying about Gabriel to Adrien, so Adrien won't get upset (and have emotional needs that she would need to help him with). Either we have to excuse Adrien's abuse, or we have to admit Marinette is benefitting from the fact that Adrien was abused, and even taking advantage with the way she makes no effort to improve their communication on her end, preferring to spy on Adrien and lie to him instead of just talking to him like an equal.

The show writers are also allergic to following through on their creative decisions, is what I think. They put all these different victims of child abuse and neglect in the show, and then dehumanized these children in different ways so that they wouldn't actually need to say anything about that abuse they wrote in and they can instead pretend it was never there. This is why I also think that, no matter how much the show's defenders insist the story isn't over yet, we will never be getting a proper resolution to the Sentinonsense.

[mysteriouslybluepirate]

So overall I don't like the OFMD Reddit. I've tried to create a post about why narratively I felt S2 didn't work ignoring the Izzy stuff, one only about the Izzy stuff(since there are very few Izzy-focused fans on there), then another talking about Olu/Jim/(Archie/Zheng) talking about why I was disappointed in it. If it's a negative post, moderators won't approve the post to go live. Which I don't love. But okay, if you want a positive echo chamber to offset Tumblr and Twitter about this season, sure.

I still check it out of curiosity when I stumble across this GEM.

We've had quite a bit of time to debate this. Almost two years, and this was posted 11/15/23. Yes, the OP was very kind (I agree that Ed thought that Stede was cool cause he beat Izzy, and was a new pirate on the scene. Then once he realizes how dumb the crew is the plan springs up into place), and I'm not hating on them specifically. Just that some social media places are just still at this point.

I blame a large section of the fanbase for not EVER reading any Izzy POV meta. Who are now scrambling to go back to rewatch S1 knowing what we know about Izzy now.

If you want to see all the responses, ranging from those I agree with to those that are just wild, let me know, I might put the link in the comments my favorites range from. 'Blackbeard wanted to but Ed didn't' to the usual Izzy is a superhuman being. To 'ALL THIS WAS JUST TO KEEP IZZY ON THE SHIP'?

Do they not see how INTERESTING the dynamic between Ed and Izzy is? That their relationship is giving and pulling at just the right times? Izzy trying to maintain their shield and Ed desperately trying to find a life where he doesn't hate himself? Both of them DON'T REALLY WANT THIS-Ed being openly suicidal to Izzy keeping his head down and working- living day by day- each NOT talking about their issues.

That hiding behind the Blackbeard name is the only way they'll survive? That killing Stede Bonnet could genuinely give Ed the out he craves. Izzy could then Captain a ship full of a crew that (theoretically) already fears and respects him?

[Not that Izzy would be good at it, or even want to be away from Ed, but you get my point. This was a *change in their lives* that is VERY tempting to two men who have been in survival mode for YEARS-

Also, it's very obvious Jenkins didn't plan Izzy's character out, so Izzy wanting to captain to me can just be written off as Jenkins not knowing the character yet, since he NEVER PAYS THE SCENE -WHERE IZZY IS FLATTERED AT POTENTIALLY BEING GIVEN TITLE CAPTIN-OFF (cough cough Izzy could have been the captain/first mate S2ep8)...moving on]

If Lucius didn't stumble in, Ed would have killed Stede here. He was aiming for a fatal spot in his neck and actively swinging down, I couldn't find a gif and had to take a photo on my phone, but you get my point.

Ed then realizes that not only was he willing to kill a guy who, overall, had been very kind to him, but then gets the Kraken as a reminder that he HAS killed. That he's spent his entire life killing to put himself into a better spot. Slowly rising up the ranks, and it's never been enough to keep him happy. Be it his dad, or fuck, even killing this rich dude and stealing his identity.

~BUT NO~

Izzy is SO EVIL guys, Ed doesn't want to kill Stede! He just has to pretend to be violent in front of Izzy so Izzy doesn't mutiny or leave him!! Doesn't that TOTALLY make sense? Ed's struggling since he never wanted to kill Stede, and he's struggling with the 'order' Izzy gave him!!

[Ignoring how Ed wanted to help him retire in the first place, how Izzy nudges Ed to follow the fisherman thing, and how Ed wanted Izzy to *stay* in the first place.]

The reddit is FILLED with takes like this, btw. Sorry if it seems like straw-manning, but I can find the posts if you need them.

[seeingteacupsindragons]

Perhaps some of you remember that time I wrote up an entire essay for the TVTropes forums to get William cemented as a Magnificent Bastard because you literally have to get fictional characters vetted by people who care an absurd amount about this to add them to the trope page.

I am now back on my bullshit, and just got Albert confirmed (Louis is in the works, but the voting looks good for him so far). I did his write up today and it should be up later this week? I enjoy the short version as well.

And now:

The Work

Moriarty the Patriot is a (very loose) retelling of the Sherlock Holmes stories combined with James Bond set in the late 1800s, focused on Professor James Moriarty and exploring his motivations.

The Character

This post is to open a discussion specifically on Albert James Moriarty, older brother of Professor Moriarty (who we already confirmed) and one the Professor's Co-Dragons. Albert is the original "Moriarty" family member biologically who took the other two in as children, and is the leader of MI6 for most of the series.

Why Is He a Bastard

I mean, he kills his own younger biological brother and his mother by hand and then arranged for the entire rest of his family and servants to die in their sleep in a fire. So like. Is that enough?

He also took two orphan kids in, then basically said, "Hey, in exchange for getting your little brother heart surgery he needed to live, help me murder like so many people. Kthx."

He tends to come off colder than either of his brothers, which is sort of impressive since they're all murderers.

I like Albert, but he's certainly a bastard.

But Not That Bad?

Much like his brothers, Albert is trying in a very fucked up way to improve society by murdering people he thinks are making society worse. He is...trying to help in a Pay Evil unto Evil sort of way.

Honestly, Albert is the Moriarty brother who gets the least amount of sympathy from fans, although this shifted a fair amount after it was revealed he has severely untreated OCD, which is a massive contributing factor to his need to eliminate the hypocrisies of all these abusive nobles who keep going to Christian churches. But it's not like most people with OCD are murderers, so there's a limit to how far this Freudian Excuse is going to take him.

Is He Charming/Magnificent

Albert is, according to an official Japanese fan poll, the second most popular character in the series (second to the protagonist of the series, who won by a landslide). This seems to track from the interactions I've had with people. So people are charmed by him.

Albert is also in the series pretty much assigned to "socialization" on behalf of everyone else. He doesn't seem to really like it very much, but he gets along with people rather well. According to his official character profile, he's still getting asked out and courted even after losing his title and going to prison for the murders, so apparently people are really into him.

He also has a similar flair for the dramatic to his younger brother. This is absolutely a man who is going to revel in elaborate schemes and acting a part. While he often asks his brother to arrange details and plans, he always shows up to convince people that he's just so worried about his kidnapped brother, please help him, and oh, gasp, people have died, how tragic.

But Is He Brilliant?

This, I think, is a key factor in Albert's case here: Most of William's subordinates are very subordinate to him. It's made clear that William expects all of his crew to be able to think and plan for themselves and make their own decisions, but the series doesn't always take time to show that off for everyone. Albert does get that time.

Albert often sees opportunities before he engages William for a plan to make it work. Manipulating Mycroft Holmes into getting MI6 created so he could lead it was Albert's idea, and he executed the plan (and he leads MI6 when it's not doing Lord of Crime business), even if William came up with many of the details to help him out. Albert is the one who sees the potential in Adam Whitley and brings the topic up to William.

Also, Albert was the first person to bring William's dreams of killing nobles and creating a brighter world into fruition and set it into a tangible, real path. He and William are frequently tagged as the only two who originated the entire plan.

Albert is a brilliant opportunist and an excellent man to have making sure everything goes off without a hitch, even if the details of getting things done aren't really his forte.

He's brilliant.

What About His Competition?

Most of the nemeses in the series are focused on William, and Albert is his subordinate. Basically none of Sherlock or Milverton's attention ever splashes Albert's way. The person he really engages with in a competitive dance with is...Mycroft Holmes. And while Albert doesn't exactly win, neither does he lose to Mycroft. They come to a couple of agreements and passes to work together and watch to make sure the other isn't getting in their way.

Verdict:

Yes.

[shattered-sparks]

Hey, anon who asked if I could go off about the current Moon situation here. Sorry I'm late, the ADHD struck and I completely forgot I sent that ask lol.

Anywho! I saw a post about how Moon's behavior in the episode where BloodMoon dies (y'know, where he confronts Sun after the barrel goes off?) was "guilt tripping" and "unnecessarily pressuring" and I just. *Yells of frustration*

He was so obviously just trying to comfort his brother who was clearly shook up! He could see that his brother was distressed and had been declining for some time now and wanted to let him know that he was there if need be. If anything, a little pressuring was warranted considering that Sun was clearly not ok and, y'know, just fucking killed someone.

Oh! And that's another thing! Moon at the time of the episode doesn't fucking know that! He doesn't know that Sun's true reason for being shaken was because he just committed a murder. What in the fuck would he be "guilt tripping" Sun for?

The post also brought up a bunch of other points, but I genuinely don't know where they came from or what episodes they were getting the behavior examples from because I honestly don't see any of it, at least not to the extent the poster did.

It frustrates me because the moment they did point out was one of Moon's best brotherly moments in the show, and they're trying to use it against him.

These characters are not black and white, good versus evil, they're people, with nuance, who won't always react in the best manner, and who won't always be the best people. I'm not saying Moon is perfect or free of fault, boyo definitely has some issues and stuff he needs to work on, but this villainization shit is really getting on my nerves.

Why don't we focus on the actual antagonist (key word: antagonist, not villain (though he very much would fit that definition too, saying he was a villain would undermine the statement I made not 2 seconds ago)) of this story, eh? You know, the person who planted a fucking bomb in Lunar's head? To get an overpowered star so he could do only god knows what with it? Seems to make a lot more sense to go after him than one of the protagonists.

Oof, sorry that was so long TvT. I really wanted to get that off of my chest but I'm too scared to make a public post. Thank you for listening!

(P.S, none of the anger or frustration in this is directed at you. You are very much not who I'm upset with and I appreciate you giving me a place to talk about it. /g)

First off I actually enjoy that you took the time to make this so long and detailed. Cannot express that enough. More people need to take time out of their days to see the full points being written, not just the TLDR. secondly, completely agree with your statements here. I'm been holding my tongue on the whole Moon villization thing for a while but recent stuff just broke that dam. They often blame Moon for Sun's own wrong doings and try and say that Moon is at fault when he's not. The whole garbage chocolate situation perfectly showed what I mean when the fandom likes to make Moon out to be the worst character. (Yes I did see their response to my own post, I will not get into it but I still do not agree with how they see Moon but they can keep their opinion and I'll keep mine) Thirdly, I've seen people say the same thing as you and I am glad I could be that voice for you guys too scared or anxious to get your thoughts out there. This fandom needs to work on respecting opinions, you're allowed to share your thoughts, no matter if people agree or disagree. Don't let others push you around <3 1 thing I've recently had in mind about this whole thing is I don't think a lot of people truly understand when Moon means he doesn't understand how to comfort. He's not a very social person and to expect him and Sun to know what to do despite these very obvious traits is missing the entire point of it all. The Sun and Moon channel is, although not 100% correct, shows a lot about mental health and the effects it has on people. Basically all the character have depression, from Moon who openly hates himself to Sun constantly doubting himself. Another big one that comes to mind is ADHD and Autism represiation in the show (Although this is more so headcannon) with how Lunar and Moon struggle with social cues and their tones being flat while Sun and Monty have a lot of energy and is easily distracted. In the end I think the fandom just needs to take more time in seeing the full characters, not just 1 trait. Hell like you said, all the characters are in a grey area, even the main bad guy Eclipse. I could make a whole argument that he's in just as much pain as Sun and Moon is. Does that make his actions okay? Hell no, but these characters have a lot more depth then what most people see

[karuvapatta]

ok. ok. here goes:

the reason why I want Izzy Hands to get a redemption arc / happy ending is because I think it would be good for both him *and* Ed. hear me out.

Izzy’s easy. He wants the peace, safety, and stability of their life under the Blackbeard flag; but he needs to learn to put Ed’s well-being ahead of his own self-interest. A fairly simple character arch.

Ed’s slightly more complicated.

Smarter people than me have already pointed out that Ed always adjusts his behaviour to fit the expectations of whoever he’s talking to. He has a conflicted relationship with his Blackbeard identity - tired of it, willing to abandon it, and yet fiercely protective of “the brand” and the way it is misinterpreted and exaggerated by others. His most prized possession - the piece of red silk - is a reminder of his own mother telling him he isn’t adequate, isn’t worthy of certain things. And when he tries to reach for these things, this other sort of life - he is constantly shot down. First by the captured captain, then the aristocrats at the party and then, finally, by Stede himself.

Ed’s post-breakup spiral seems to be going well enough - but why would he expect it to last? How long until the crew begin to mock him, until Izzy abandons him too? I don’t think it’s fair to say that Ed felt physically threatened by Izzy, but he certainly didn’t want to be rejected and abandoned again. So he built up this new persona, new mask to hide behind, finally letting go of his hopes of this other life he could have. Where he could be happy, and enjoy fine things.

My point is: Ed made that choice. He chose to jump off the slippery slope. I think it’s doing his character a disservice to pretend that he was forced into becoming the Kraken, or that he is descending into madness.

One could argue that Ed should just stop caring about what people think about him, and live his best life. Stede had no problem doing just that - he is told that he’s inadequate, too soft, not a proper pirate, but he doesn’t compromise his own identity in response. No, he stands his ground and creates his own brand of piracy, following his own values and beliefs. But Stede is validated for his choices! During the climactic trial, he finally gets what he never had - social acceptance. His crew (his chosen family) embraces his identity, even though it doesn’t conform to any norms, and it’s a beautiful moment.

...of course he then has to confront how his choices affect those around him, but that’s a different matter entirely...

So. If Stede got accepted, why shouldn’t Ed get the same? I am personally glad they didn’t run away to China together, and hope their story doesn’t end with them all alone, no matter how seemingly happy they may be. Ed deserves a chosen family too, and he deserves to believe that he won’t get abandoned/rejected by them eventually.

...he also needs to make amends for the atrocities he committed. But I digress.

The point is: Izzy is important to Ed. Aside from Stede, that’s who he’s closest to within the show. During episode 3? 4? they spend the whole time throwing out bids for attention, that somehow pass unnoticed. They both lash out against the other - Izzy throws a fit and threatens to resign, Ed fucks with him by withholding crucial information, dismissing his fears and showing off. “See? You should have trusted me.” But it’s not a triumphant moment for Ed, is it? He made a fatal mistake - and Izzy’s the one who points it out. It’s a really nice bit, because it shows how great they used to be when they were a team. It would be nice if they got to be that again.

If Izzy dies as his pathetic evil self, Ed will never get closure on that relationship. He won’t get acceptance from someone who is this important to him. He won’t get an apology until Izzy learns the error of his ways. And while you could argue that Ed shouldn’t need any of these things, well - he isn’t wrong to want them.

[brakingpoint]

It's also been weird to me to see sects of fandom demonize McLaren for dropping Ricciardo for underperforming, then demonizing AT them for taking him back 'just for PR' as if that makes any sense. Then criticise Red Bull for dropping an underperforming driver 'too soon' (??? honey welcome to business and sport??), and then criticise Red Bull for not dropping the driver they brought into replace him as older experience for an untested rookie.

The fandom removes the concept of drivers own agency, but also it straight cannot make up its mind. It's a new breed of crazy sports fans mixed with modern social media moral grandstanders.

i do think, to be fair, that a lot of the specific examples in this ask are coming from different sides of the fandom (like i don't think the people lambasting mclaren for dropping ricciardo are usually the same fans begging for lawson to replace him full time at AT, yknow?) but i do find when you look at specific driver or team fandoms there's a degree of hypocrisy going on. like, i'd say there's probably more of an overlap between daniel fans who were furious with mclaren for dropping him for underperforming, and daniel fans who are entirely in favour of red bull dropping checo for underperforming. this discourse was not meant to turn into ricciardo wank but apparently that's where we are this afternoon. whoops

anyway, of course some level of hypocrisy in sports opinions is justifiable and entirely expected, in part because Sports Fans Are Biased And That Is The Nature Of Being A Sports Fan, and also because sometimes the circumstances are different enough to warrant a different opinion on the morals of a given sacking (for example i personally think that "firing a driver who frequently struggles to reach Q3 in a championship winning car", or "firing a driver who, over 2 years in a theoretically competitive midfield car, failed time and time again to consistently extract the same results from it as his teammate", is quite different to "firing a rookie 10 races into the season because he is having unremarkable - but not terrible, with the car's awful performance taken into account - results compared to his teammate with 2 years' experience in that team")

BUT i think it can come off the wrong way when fans are openly biased (in terms of rooting for a driver to get sacked so your fave can get a seat) and act like performance-related sackings are inflicted by cruel and uncaring teams for Vague Evil Reasons Involving Lots Of Conspiracies And Sabotage. which is why i think - to bring this massive tangent back from "complaining about a subsection of daniel fans" and back to the point i was making in my original post lmfao - both the Athletes' Mental Health issue and the Teams Are Allowed To Fire Drivers Who Are Not Doing Well issue need to be allowed to coexist in this fandom with considerably more nuance

[doonarose]

I am exhausted... Three fairly busy days of work. Three very busy and stressful nights of science outreach where I was running everything and once again failed to delegate. Really average engagement as well, which meant I was scrambling each night to get enough tickets sold and whatever, but it mostly turned out in the end. It did mean that I was working 8-3 and 5-10 every day with the middle two hours break dedicated to nipping home, walking and feeding the dogs, getting changed and heading back out. And then running between two venues trying to manage shitty science speakers and MCs and volunteers. Mostly a success though.

Two major things soured it. Last night, our last night, at the venue we've used for two years running and that has, on the whole of things, been great. Between managed The Rest of It, and my dean (evil incarnate and a walking talking karen) being the average MC (we had a best science joke comp and she was reading them out and she opened with 'I'm not a joke person' and then gave off the vibe 'if you laugh at this you're the worst' but then also got annoyed that no one was laughing)... anyway, between all that, one of the wait staff pulled me to side and gave me the heads up that the chef wanted a private word with me... because one of our speakers had announced the event to his entire 50 students class (great!) and gone on to say they should eat before they come because the venue's food was over priced and awful (wtf?).

So then I went and talked to the chef between speakers and he was pretty reasonable and I'm on his side, but also, like, his instinct was to go and fight my speaker which... I was against, but like... great... and he wanted an apology (which, also, fair) and I think I handled it (and am still handling it) well enough but... why?

And the other fun thing was at the second venue on the second night, I was there for setup and then went back across for the last half hour, and paid off the bar tab. This is for the speakers, the MC, and the one or two volunteers who help with setup and taking tickets. We are capped at $200 a night. I went to pay it and it was almost $400 and had ten main meals on it. Worked out a bunch of PhD students just decided they also qualified... like one who kept asking to volunteer and sitting with my actual volunteer but who did nothing. And then at least three others who just came to the events... The tickets were $8 and to access the tab you had to say you were a volunteer so either these PhD students are astronomically stupid or they're just thieves (from either me or a not-for-profit). So now I'm chasing that up and there's gonna be about $100 I need to do some creative accounting with and there is still one student who sees intent on just not owning up to her mistake? Like at least the other three have said it was some sort of mistake and agreed to pay me back. But like, wtf is wrong with people.

Also this kind of high social energy activity means I don't fall asleep until 2am and then have nasty real-feeling dreams of things going even more wrong and then wake up and repeat. This after a weekend down with family and... it's like week 10 of semester and I am just spent.

Also I have almost-finished porn I would like to get posted.

But I'm still doing pick-up assessment today and have class tomorrow at 9am and for some dumb reason I'm taking my lab group to the art gallery tonight because it's free. I'm just... tired.

[transformatives]

Queer Transformation in the Online Supernatural Fan-Community

The whiteboard at the front of the dusty classroom read out “PTSD” in big black letters. My class was on the mental health unit of seventh grade health, a topic which caused some to snicker but which made me and my group of newly queer, feminist, staunchly liberal friends nod in approval. The teacher, a coach with thinning hair, asked if anybody knew anything about PTSD. My friend, a fellow nerd, raised her hand and quickly went into a spiel about a book she read about the blossoming love between two male characters that was tragically cut short by one of the characters being drafted into the Vietnam War. With a start, I remembered what we had been discussing recently and with a sick jolt it hit me: my friend was talking about Supernatural fanfiction in front of our entire class. 

Supernatural is an action-adventure drama series that debuted in 2005 and ran for 15 years. It follows two brothers, Dean and Sam Winchester, as they trek across the U.S.A. in search of supernatural monsters to hunt, and it later evolved into something resembling bible fanfiction as the main cast was expanded to include angels, demons, and other biblical entities. Though it was originally written to appeal to a mostly conservative, middle american, male audience, it was quickly picked up by a younger, female, queer, and internet-savvy audience that would go on to create incredibly heartfelt transformative works about queerness, homophobia, and mental health. However, the journey there is a complicated one.

In 1973, film theorist Laura Mulvey coined the term “male gaze” as a form of media creation that “portrays women as objects and nothing more”. I believe that Laura Mulvey would agree that Supernatural falls directly into the space of the male gaze. Its depictions of women relegated them to a few limiting roles, likely due to the male dominated writer’s room and intended audience. These roles included: the deceased mother, the blushing virgin, the deceased girlfriend, the hooker with a heart of gold, the evil demon, the deceased almost-girlfriend, etc etc (are we seeing a pattern here?). While there were a few standout female characters, such as the nerdy hacker lesbian Charlie or the charmingly midwestern Donna, the general rule of Supernatural was that if there was a female character, she was more likely than not going to die a brutal and sometimes sexually charged death. This writing is problematic in itself, but it gets really interesting once you factor in the fans. 

Despite the fact that Supernatural had a mostly female fanbase and a solid amount of queer fans, reactions to female characters were complicated, especially in the beginning. One infamous poem from 2009 blog “Just Go Demon-Ho” lists reason why the demon love interest Ruby needed to be written off, including such inspiring lines as “Just leave now b*tch, we will stand up and cheer”. While access to the early internet allowed for fans to discuss their love of their favorite show, it also provided a breeding ground for fans to spread hatred and misogyny online. In this is the double-bladed sword: once anonymized, the internet allows for people to show their true colors, and this can often be very ugly. While people might feel the pressure to tone down such strong opinions in real life settings, people will often post without thought online under the pretense that “nobody will care anyway”, although this is not true. Perhaps there was also the perception that since these characters weren’t real, then the audience’s misogyny wasn’t hurting anybody, even if these comments could be internalized by other fans. 

Such behavior makes me wonder which came first: the audience’s internalized misogyny or the show’s external misogyny. I believe that they went hand in hand. Hegemony is defined by sociologist James Lull as “the power or dominance that one social group holds over others” (Gender, Race, and Class in Media 6th Edition, Page 41). As opposed to other forms of oppression, hegemony functions by convincing one social group that they are not being oppressed, and that their oppression is actually a result of nature or how things should be. In a way, since the female characters of Supernatural were not portrayed as actual human beings, the audience could not perceive any new female character as such, unless they were firmly out of the range of “potential love interest”. Fan perception of female characters was so harmed by this internet echo chamber of misogyny that it was very difficult to break out of the hegemony of “girl=bad, man=good”. Paradoxically, there was still a desire for these fans to see Dean and Sam in complex romantic relationships, but in the words of writer Anna Campbell from Medium, “...in general it’s hard to write a compelling heterosexual romance, after all, if all your women are objects more than agents.” Enter Castiel, angel of the Lord. 

Season 4 of Supernatural begins with Dean being raised from hell by the angel Castiel, who declares that “God commanded it”. Castiel then showed up repeatedly throughout the season, eventually becoming part of the main cast. Fans went wild. Here was a male character with an interesting backstory and relationship with one of the main characters, unlike previous love interests that were only caricatures of real women. It is doubtless that the fanbases’ misogyny also played a part in the popularity of a gay relationship, but the result is fascinating. In internet fan communities, a practice known as “shipping” is common, where fans take two characters that they think would look good together and create fanworks about them being in a relationship. This can manifest as simply blogging about them, or in transformative works (defined as “A new work based on an old one work [the new work] is transformative if it uses the source work in completely new or unexpected ways”) like art, fanfiction, and videos. And on the internet, gay relationships reign supreme. 

When someone unaware of online fan-culture is exposed to this fact, it can be confusing. But when all of the factors are considered, it really is not that surprising. From its inception, the internet has been a place where people can find groups of people with similar ideals as them that they might not find in real life. For many queer people, especially queer teenagers, the internet was where they first learned about LGBTQ+ identities and communities. Combine this with the fact that a lot of mainstream media is made with the male gaze and many female characters fall flat, and you get a female, queer community online that is simultaneously displeased with the disappointments of heterosexual pairings and the lack of queer representation in mainstream media. When more attention in films and tv shows is given to complex, fulfilling male relationships than is given to heterosexual pairings, then why wouldn’t people want to explore what is given to them? 

Queer readings of mainstream texts allow for the audience to glean more from the narrative, coming away with their own rich interpretations. As queer studies scholar Alexander Doty writes, “Queer readings aren’t ‘alternative’ readings. They result from the recognition and articulation of the complex range of queerness that has been in popular culture texts and their audiences all along.” By creating fanworks that investigate certain untapped aspects of characters (such as the popular interpretation that Dean Winchester is bisexual due to his innuendos, posturing, repression, and overcompensating masculinity), fans explore these aspects within themselves. Transformative fiction is not just “stealing” the ideas of the published work, but instead ways of furthering one’s understanding of it. The internet is a place where creators do not have to concern themselves with the pressures of a corporation worried about profitability, which often pushes media to fall into the male gaze. Rather, individuals can create works through the female gaze, which Laura Mulvey writes as, “Characters viewed through the lens of the female gaze are not caricatures. The beauty of the female gaze is that it aims to empathize rather than objectify, to show emotion and intimacy while also showing respect. This is a refreshing idea compared to the control, dominance, and superficialities of the male gaze.” Fanfiction, though often derided by popular culture, is a statement of rebellion. 

And now we return to seventh grade health class, with the warm afternoon sun shining through the window onto the face of my friend. I am mildly mortified that she is speaking about Supernatural fanfiction (disguised as it may be) in front of our entire class. I wonder to myself: How could someone relate something as serious as PTSD to a show so terrible and misogynistic as Supernatural, and then proudly declare it? Well, I would never. Meanwhile, she is thinking about her favorite show, about how much it means to her despite its flaws. She is thinking about how she and other fans have taken something that is often discriminatory to the very people they are, and how despite what others may think, they’ve transformed it into something that embraces queerness, neurodivergence, and mental health. Gay transformative works can be liberating to the queer community, but it must be acknowledged that the abundance of male/male romances are largely in response to a lack of properly written female characters. People can make lemonade out of lemons, but that doesn’t stop the fact that corporations are squeezing lemon juice into our eyes. Still, in a world where the powers that be dictate the reign of toxic masculinity, it is the rebellious joy of the creative fan to see that and then transform it into any of the beautifully diverse narratives it asks to become.

[thevagabondexpress]

why is it, you think, that I understand neurodivergence so well and in jungian psychology I get all the little ‘functions’ (can’t remember their real name) behind the myers briggs types. but when it comes to this shadow stuff? I’ve got no way of placing it and don’t know how to make head or tail of it most of the time. I’ve heard it said ro be the last function in your stack (Si for me as an ENFP) or the secondary four functions that aren’t your main four (the opposite introvert/extrovert orientations) but like. I’m not sure that explains it, from your post I kinda feel like it’s anything that we mask and suppress. Like neurodivergence, which means for some of us our shadow could be our entire self pretty much. And I’m conscious of not basing entire theories of real life psychology on fivtional characters but there really needs to be a way to integrate jung’s stuff with neurodiversify, even though I’ve not really seen anyone do jt. I’ve got more thoughts but I’m gonna leave it at this for now, what do you think?

okay. so. i do have thoughts here. first off, jung is about as much philosophy as he is actual psychology. secondly, the fact that there is no one single definition of the shadow i think is a good definition for the shadow in and of itself. it's nebulous. it defies the neat boxes of mbti and enneagram and the dsm-5. i've heard a number of interpretations of the shadow, everything from the evil, antisocial side of the self to your "last function in the stack."

personally, i define the shadow as your mental early warning system. the shadow prompts your ego to act on the needs, wants, emotions, desires that you've been processing subconsciously while you do other things. the shadow tells you, "we're angry," prompting us to choose between yelling at that guy and walking away from him. the shadow tells us, "we feel like shit," prompting us to make a choice between a shower and bed or grabbing another can of red bull to keep chugging. the shadow tells us, "we're hungry," so we go downstairs, decide on rotini for lunch, the shadow goes "ah, shit," when we discover we don't have rotini, and the persona is what doesn't say that out loud. the shadow is also the impatient, bad-ideas thing, it wants the easiest laziest now solution (yell at the guy, grab another can of red bull, sulk) to whatever it's prompting you about and it's up to the other parts of you to make a decision, do we answer the prompt from the shadow with its presented elementary schooler decision or do we choose something different.

as for neurodivergence, i think it's fair to treat the archetypes a bit like the old medieval concept of humors and the way they can become unbalanced. if dsm diagnoses like autism and sociopathy are "you've got tuberculosis," then the archetypes are "too much yellow bile." cluster b disorders are when your persona's a little bit skewed. executive + social function disorders like autism, adhd, pda, depression, anxiety are when your ego is a little bit skewed. and then fear-based, mood-based and hallucinatory disorders like depression, anxiety, ptsd, shizophrenia, etc, are when it's your shadow that's out of sorts: your early warning system overreacts or underreacts or invents.

personally i like this model. while the proper psychiatric definitions are important and empowering in their own way (saying "i have disorder, disorder, disorder, and possibly disorder" gives me something targetably specific that i can do something about), the three archetypes model i find better in practice for the lay day-to-day non-scientific setting. when, instead of, "i have disorder, disorder, disorder, and possibly disorder," i say, "my ego's a bit wrecked and my shadow's a bit wrecked," it helps me de-clinicize and re-romanticize my existence without losing track of the ability to define where i'm not like the machine expects me to be. i don't feel pitiable, or like a patient, or a statistic. the official diagnostic criteria helps me when i sit down with the psychiatrist, when i research the solutions and the issues. but in the day to day, when i need to do laundry/do homework/make lunch/etc and i don't wanna? when i think "disorder, disorder, and disorder are impacting executive function" i get a very i know this and it helps how? feeling from it. when i think, "ego's a bit fucked, shadow's a bit fucked," the snarky exhaustedness with which if remind myself of that leads me to an actual solution: i put jessica jones on the television and body double with her as we both drag ourselves through the shit we didn't want to do today.

[waitmyturtles]

I can’t believe I’m writing something not related to Moonlight Chicken (✨Alan x Gaipa/Gaipa x Alan✨), but here we go, before the big MC finale: I managed to finish the totally wonderful 10 Years Ticket, my first Thai lakorn, out of a continued devotion to rummaging the rabbitholes of actors/actresses that tore my heart apart in previous dramas. In this case, in the aftermath of my ravaging affair with Bad Buddy, I had to catch up on Nanon’s and Ohm’s latest works. Dirty Laundry was an easy bucket. Ohm’s 10 Years Ticket was a hell of a something else entirely. 

I understood that, going in to 10YT, lakorns are generally assumed to be soapy, and I had to admit that I was concerned about entering this tunnel -- especially because I have a history of being seriously disappointed by subpar cishet roles for my otherwise dear QL actors (AHEM MACHIDA KEITA, the man needs better scripts; Akaso Eiji is faring so much better). As well, I’m not even all that familiar with Ohm’s other BLs and non-QL dramas, as He’s Coming to Me is on my list of essential BLs to watch, and I’ll get to it soon (SOTUS first). 

So anyway, I came into this apprehensive, especially considering how LONG the series is, at 16 episodes, and I knew there was violence, which I generally avoid. But I should have given GMMTV more credit. It was UTTERLY bingeable, a VERY DEEP study into long-term intergenerational family and community trauma, and I found it totally compelling as someone who’s trained in the social services. And, I am a huge fan now of director Fon Kanittha, who, VERY IMPORTANTLY, will be directing Milk and Love’s GL, 23.5 (EEEEEEEE). So I was glad to check off not just an Ohm box, but Fon’s as well.

AND! Because I’m still so new to Thai dramas, I’ve never seen a QL/drama with Off before (lord help me as I contemplate jumping into OffGun). And 10YT had a wonderful stable of GMMTV actors in Tu Tontawan, View Benyapa (who was fantasssstic), Pluem Purim (who was also great), and Foei Patara (so evil, so good!). 

The casting was superb -- especially for the insanely difficult subject matter.

I don’t know if I want to spend that much time on the plot, but I’ll do my best to explain what plot points matter to why I thought the show was a success. The show centers on Ohm’s character, Phukao, whose half-brother, Mai (Pluem) is shot and killed when Phukao is a very young child. Phukao and Mai’s family are close with a number of other families in their community. Mai is a drug runner, and his girlfriend -- the older sister of one of the other friendly families -- takes the rap for the shooting and is sent to prison, causing almost permanent friction between the families. Later in the show, the girlfriend’s younger sister (Kongkwan, played by Tu), is reunited with Phukao; they were friends as young children, but separated after the shooting, and Phukao had a long-standing grudge against Kongkwan, until he realizes his feelings for her as an older teenager.

I’m going to add trigger warning tags to my review, because as part of the layering of intercommunity and intergenerational trauma of this show, I don’t think I’ve ever seen depicted in a drama a young child witnessing as much as young Phukao witnessed, including post-mortem scenes and episodes of abject family violence. So it honestly was not surprising to me that Ohm/Phukao and Tu/Kongkwan did not ACTUALLY have, quantifiably, a tremendous amount of screen or speaking time.

I peeped on the 10YT tag a few complaints that Phukao and Kongkwan were actually a pretty tame and not exciting couple, but I have to hand it to Fon, because -- I think she rendered these two teenage characters quite accurately. If I were studying Phukao’s and Kongkwan’s childhood stories in a social services course, I’d be amazed that the kids could even talk, considering what they experienced and witnessed by way of violence and loss. 

In other big, macro words: this show was led VERY deeply by the criss-crossed storytelling of ALL of the stories of the families of the community that was destroyed by Mai’s shooting death. The domestic hell of Phukao’s family after the shooting. Phukao terrorizing Kongkwan’s family in retaliation. Off’s character, Plu, caring for his grandparents by entering the drug running trade and lying about going to college. View’s character, Zo, growing up without a mother. A queer storyline at the parental generation. Parents abandoning their kids, then showing up again. A mafia family storyline with corrupt police mixed in. And throughout all of this, a major theme of movie storytelling bringing all of these individuals along on their life growth paths.

It’s a lot of shit, terrible adult-level trauma that children and teenagers had to face, oftentimes alone, oftentimes with parents that were barely keeping it together themselves. People die in the show, parents die in the show. Kids are left to process alone. It’s just a LOT.

And maybe one or two parts were rushed. BUT: I truly think Fon balanced the script beautifully, and I give her major credit for that. To tell a story of FOUR FAMILIES and their interconnected trauma -- and to bring the story together to unite and reunite a group of childhood friends who commit to holding each other down -- it was no wonder this series needed 16 episodes, but it didn’t drag. It paced beautifully, the storytelling was varied, and everything was done honestly, especially the very empathic queer storyline, which I won’t give away, but I’ll just say this: ASIA, we need more elder queer stories, because you do them SO WELL when it happens. It was beautifully and heartachingly done.

What was refreshing for me to watch in 10YT, as I’ve been quickly educating myself on the history of Thai BLs, was to see multiple generations of actors in a storyline. I’m (COUGH) entering my early middle-aged years, and while I love our darling actors/actresses in their 20s, I do need to watch shows with cohorts more around my age as well. 10YT gave me a drama where each episode was led by a different family or entity, and that generational variation lent major authenticity to a show that would have otherwise been lost if it had turned into a teeny-bop vehicle for Ohm and Tu.

For the screentime that Ohm and Tu *did* have -- they were FABULOUS. Ohm was GREAT, Y’ALL. Mans got such chops. Gah. My heart. His poor character got sent through the trauma ringer. Tu mostly cried for her parts, but she played a tough cookie in Kongkwan, and -- not to spoil this, but I gotta say it -- she did pursuer VERY well. Get it, gurl. Off was fantastic, and I can’t wait to catch up with him in Midnight Motel. But for my money, View absolutely ATE her role, and I want to see her have a major role in some amazing all-star drama/QL at some point.

Was 10YT as SMART, and sharp, and critical of intergenerational trauma as Bad Buddy? No, they’re incomparable, because the stories were vastly different. 10YT laid out a reality that parents can actually fail. They can really, truly fail. And even while they fail.... children may feel an unspeakable, inherent urge to still love those parents. And maybe those parents can try to redeem themselves, in some way. 

I’m realizing that what I’m loving about this modern crop of directors from GMMTV -- Aof, Jojo, and now Fon -- is that they do complicated characters VERY authentically. You, as a viewer, are almost not allowed to wallow in dualistic interpretations when trying to understand these characters. No good and bad here, unless it’s screamingly obvious. And I think that’s a really compelling ask for Asian directors to make of what is a majority Asian audience in Thailand, where filial piety towards families is the major name of the culture game.

I hope this could be considered a decent review, because I didn’t dive too much into the plot, as it really would take a huge amount of time to unwind it all, and I apologize that most of this review is just generalist meditation. But let me just say that if you have the stomach to watch a drama that depicts an Asian perspective on community interconnectivity and the trauma that those relationships bring -- then watch this show. Much of the ways in which the families HANDLED the drama in this drama reminded me of my childhood (without all the criminal and family violence, thank goodness). If you’re in an Ohm rabbithole, I’d say this is a must watch, because he was brilliant in an utterly wonderful script.

[eroticcannibal]

I’ll just get this out of the way: I believe in transandrophobia or whatever people want to call it, I believe in listening to trans mens experiences.

BUT. I cannot stand most of the big people on here who discuss it for reasons similar to the recent post you made about how privileged women still experience violence.

I once saw a thread of trans men all saying that cis white women who fear violence and being kidnapped murdered, shouldn’t fear that, and that any cis white woman who is scared of misogynistic violence has just been brainwashed by mainstream true crime and crime shows, and a couple people said “lol they don’t want you why are you scared”.

I am a white cis girl (I’m also a trans guy but that’s not super relevant rn lol). I fully know my privilege and frequently have discussions along the subject of white privilege with friends of color. I don’t shy away from the topic.

but I have almost been kidnapped twice in the short 18 years I’ve been on this planet. One of my earliest memories is that experience in a shopping mall. Every cis girl I know, white or not, has had real life experience at least once with this kind of thing.

and when I saw that thread, it made me feel ill. To me it feels like so many other trans guys on here decided that the “being a man doesn’t make you bad” doesn’t apply to any other privileged group because they didn’t want to be seen as deniers of other forms of privilege. I also saw an entire thread where a shit ton of trans guys were literally saying that, because white cis women are the physical “vessels of the white race”, then apparently we are not at risk of domestic violence because cis white men need us to keep their dream of a white supremacist world alive. and many people responded with righteous outrage just to be dismissed as “well they are just trying to defend white women”.

the fucking rampant misogyny in these spaces is so fucking hard to deal with, and they complain all day about how people ignore issues men have, then turn around and act like one form of privilege means your other experiences of oppression don’t matter.

so long story short thank you for those posts I’ve been so ducking exhausted lately trying to find a balance between discussing transandrophobia with other transmascs, and protecting my mental health from all the misogyny in those spaces. it’s so fucking tiring.

U get it. U get it. And yeah this sickening attitude towards women is rampant in spaces that support the idea of transandrophobia (and honestly I think this most recent wave of "progressive" misogyny is squarely on trans men who believe in transadrophobia, and insay that as one of them) I wasn't sure if I was gonna call out that group specifically myself but since u bring it up!

Also I think we saw the same post cus that sounds like one of a few that set me off lol

Like im not even shocked at ur experiences there. I have experienced and seen some SHIT while playing the role of a white cis woman. And it was all normal. The women who raised me to always be on guard did that for a reason. The distrust of men among white women isnt from brainwashing, its from knowing half your friends were molested by their male relatives and seeing their mothers get beat every evening.

But also that other example you discuss... now I've not seen it in these spaces specifically but I have seen *some* people dismissing violence against white women due to something something white supremacy and just. Its truly sickening. Its evil. (And shows a fundamental misunderstanding of white supremacy, female subjugation is an intrinsic part of it).

And yeah like you say. Any time someone brings attention to any of this shit its "how dare you defend WHITE women". As if they arent still women.

And especially when the social space i occupy still overlaps with the experiences considered that of white women, when I'm facing these justified fears of violence (again) in my day to day life.... yeah. Its fucking exhausting. When the spaces that claim to support my experiences as a man dismiss my experiences and fears because those are the experiences and fears of icky white women. (When they arent even mutually exclusive categories, and even people like me and the most cis of cis women have more in common than difference)

[ssawboness]

🥩 STOOP KID // SSAWBONESS 🥩

💾 he/him, wasian jew, trans guy. autism + bpd, may entirely disappear from socmed for extended periods of time. i don't read dnis.

🖇 i enjoy fiction for what it is: fiction. it is not my responsibility for what happens with it, and not only am i able to healthily separate it from real situations but i do not condone ANYTHING that happens in dark fiction irl. this being said, i will most likely be reblogging 'dodgy' content or anything that may ick out the average english fandom-goer (guro, 'problematic pairings', etc). my account is fub free (free to follow/unfollow/block) at your discretion. customize your online experience as you see fit. i am not responsible for your behavior nor do i enjoy conflict any more than the next guy does.

⛓ current active fandom(s)/interests: SAW FRANCHISE, resident evil, homestuck, tf2, criminal behavior and analysis, psychology, character analysis. i love spyscout so fuckingnmuch pleaaaseeeeeuu ee. i enjoy scout ships a normal amount please send me good fics/art

⚙️ artist, rusty animator, writer, and aspiring psychologist. talk to me about psychology and communism.

⚔️ most of my other fandom-centric socials are ssawboness, zorndog, or some variation of those. my commission information can be found here.

⏱ my pms are always open. mutuals can dm me for my discord if we're close-ish. i also offer beta reading to anyone who wants a second opinion on anything

TAG GUIDE:

#stoop.txt - original-ish posts or quote reblogs. #stoop asks is self-explanatory.

#stoop faves - posts that I circle back to every now and then

#team bastille / #stoop ocs - team bastille is an original blu team that i wrote, and #stoop ocs is a more umbrella termed way of referring to any ocs that i post here; bastille is directly mentioned due to how significant it is to my current interests

#others art - other people's artwork.

i do not have a dni list because those are stupid and embarrassing and i will personally judge you with my holy sword if need be. antis and anyone who supports censorship get the fuck off my blog!!!!. you're still proship if you don't harass people over fiction btw. i love mspec gays and lesbians mwah mwah mwah

i don't trigger warn, and i have anything i need tagged muted. however, if you post about jjba AT ALL or are a jojo-centric blog, do not follow me unless i follow first. do not interact with my work. i will block you on sight. this is for my safety, and i am not comfortable elaborating as to why.

anything else should be self explanatory. please dm me or send me asks i promise i don't bite please please please pl

[radsplain]

All you radfems constantly shitting on trans people like you have nothing better to do in your life. Like. Have you ever even taken a minute to try to realize what it feels like to feel like your own body is wrong and awful and disgusting and you can’t stand another minute trapped in it? To starve yourself until you’re underweight just because that way you look less curvy and your breasts are smaller and you’re less feminine? To feel like you want to take a knife and cut off the parts of your body that you can’t stand to look at? Using drugs to cope with dysphoria and make your brain finally shut up? Feeling so completely isolated because no one in your life understand what it’s like to feel this way? Not being sure about any of the decisions because despite any surgery and hormone therapy in the world, you will still never be a *real* person of the other sex? As if the waiting lists aren’t months to years long anyway. You all talk like you can bring a child to a clinic and they’ll get hormones the next day. When in reality even for adults the process consists of visiting multiple mental health professionals, multiple doctors, it can all take years before you even get to start taking them? And also how it feels like having to hide your feelings from everybody because even your own family would be disgusted by you? You all act like trans people are just straight white males whose entire transition process consists of makeup and dresses and wigs and out of a desire to harass women. And yeah, those people exist. But not everyone is like that. The majority, who actually has a life outside of Twitter, isn’t like that. Not everyone is quite literally willingly letting their bodies be mutilated just to achieve what, flashing your genitals to a kid in a public bathroom? Real life is not like that at all. You’re so uneducated and naive on this topic yet talk like you’ know everything. Trans women are evil predators and trans men are poor victims of the manipulation and propaganda. Literally just read one actual trans person’s description of their life. And honestly fuck those tiktok kids inventing new genders because they want attention because you know that’s not what I’m talking about so don’t even try to use it as a talking point. There’s a fucking difference between dying your hair blue and wearing horrible “alt” clothes and going by she/they just because all your friends are doing so, and someone who has spent their entire life wishing they were born as a different sex and already showing it as a child but no one bothered to ever pay attention because kids are just quirky and weird like that. And never paying any attention to it in the rest of childhood and adolescence either, because why deal with a problem when you can easily ignore it? And yet I’ll most likely still never get to actually go through the medical or social process of transition due to societal pressure and the shitty place I live in. And I’m just one of the people with this experience that you keep mocking either due to your willful ignorance or complete lack of empathy, and I honestly don’t know which one is worse.

I mean this in the most genuine possible way, but please seek out therapy. It probably felt good to get all that out, but spilling out all of your anxieties onto random people is not going to help you with everything you listed here. This entire message literally proves my point about the gender cult and why people, especially TIFs, decide to transition. You're not "trans" (no one is, but that's a whole other post). Y'all literally just need therapy. REAL therapy, not that "gender-affirming" bs. So much of this message, especially the parts about feeling wrong and disgusting in your body and wanting to starve yourself until you're underweight to look "less feminine" is such a red flag. I'm not a doctor or psychologist, but babe you're not struggling with "gender dysphoria." You have massive body image and mental health issues that haven't been addressed and are being wrapped up in this ideology of being "trans."

I'm not going to respond to every single point you made here, but this massive tangent feels like it was more for you to let out your frustrations than for me. And that's fine, but just know nothing you said here has swayed my opinion. If anything, it's strengthened it. I do have empathy for what you're going through and I truly do wish you healing and happiness, but venting to random strangers on the internet like this really isn't going to help you.

[rat-rosemary]

rat, with all politeness, i dont think q needs therapy. I think something happened behind the scenes between the two (Dream and Q), and Dream upset Q over something that may not be entirely QSMP related--QSMP/USMP may have been the straw to break the camels back. Strong disclaimer, I dont think Dream is abusive/evil, this is just my real life example to illustrate why someone ghosts. It is an extreme--- I cut contact/went no contact with an abusive parent--they took to social media for a year straight with massive posts about how much they loved me, how they dont understand why I did that, how theyre very sorry and support me in everything. They refused to take "i do not want to speak with you, unless you can respect my boundaries" as an answer. Constantly they overstepped. Id tell them "here is why im mad" and they would turn around and say "i dont get why theyre mad?! I apologized?" Or "those reasons arent enough!" Many times other people contacted me on their behalf with claims they were dying/sick. They were not. Some of my parents friends would stalk me/insist I must be mentally unwell.

I dont think Dream is remotely doing that. I think hes a normal, if flawed, guy. However, I empathize heavily with Q. People don't get no-contact. They think its about cruelty. Its about "no matter how much we communicate you continue to not hear me/disrespect me. For my own health, i would like to stop this relationship." Its a last resort for when you tried everything.

I dont know what happened between them, but Im squicked by Dreams refusal to accept Quackity does not want to talk. Its my own personal bias/experience and it bothers me people assume Q's crazy/cruel, because Ive been there. I feel Dreams pain, but I think he might have missed the bigger issue at some point.

But its all speculation. I just ask politely dont label that action crazy. Youre welcome to not reply, i just noticed youre very much trying to see all sides.

Yes, if Quackity didn't want to talk to Dream anymore I think that's fine

But the thing is, he didn't have to talk to Dream to help manage this situation! He could just have made a tweet saying "hey guys, this is not okay, back off" and it would have been fine!

That's why Dream has been so insisting with this whole thing. Because he and his loved ones are in very serious danger, bad enough to get the police AND the fbi involved and Quackity could have helped to make it better by just making a quick comment or a single tweet telling his fans to stop

I absolutely agree that people don't get how hard it is to go non-contact with someone, and I'm sorry you had to deal with that, but Quackity didn't need to be in contact with Dream to do something

Because the people he needed to talk to are his own fans, who he is in contact with

(Also, I'm kind of saying it sounds like Quackity needs therapy because from everything we have been presented with, it sound more like there was something bothering him that he refused to communicate to his friends and it grew until this happen. But hey, I don't know because he refuses to give his side of the story!)

[snailsnfriends]

okay same ece teacher anon as before, wanted to send a second ask on the topic that was less related to my other point so i figured i’d separate them

i have genuinely spent a lot of time thinking about cocomelon and its pros and cons. i quite literally wrote an entire paper on it for my film theory class. because it was absolutely a show carefully made and consulted with child psychologists over, with the intent to make it engaging to children. i think the conclusion I have come to, though, is that it is genuinely a good thing in small doses, and clearly not in hour long episodes.

in each of the songs, there is a teaching goal of sorts. and because this is content intended for toddlers, things like “bath time routines are fun” and “vegetables are yummy” are the lessons they are learning. i know cocomelon is marketed towards 4 and 5 year olds as well, but in my experience, those kids have outgrown it and are far less interested because they perceive it as “for babies.”

people often cite how engaging the content is for kids as a negative thing and some times literally refer to it as “addicting,” but having something be engaging is actually an inherently neutral quality. a kid needs to be engaged in the content to learn anything from it, and this perceived “too” engaging quality is really just parents not teaching their children social emotional skills. the evidence they cite for their point is that children scream and cry when their screen time is taken away from them and beg to watch more. as someone who works with a room full of two year olds, that behavior is literally just a sign of a child 1. having interests and 2. not having the skills to cope with not getting what they want at all times. it’s not that cocomelon is so engaging there’s no way for a child to enjoy it and overcome its pull — we show short videos to our children sometimes, and the one or two kids who might cry over it being turned off are the same kids who cry when they have to leave a toy to go potty or come back inside from the playground, and so it’s our job to help them through those transitions.

i think the main problem is that children’s content used to be 30 minute episodes your child could watch on the tv while you cooked dinner and listened with them through the open door and the child could come talk to you during commercial breaks, and now it’s hour long YouTube videos they watch on their iPads in their bedrooms. the issue springs a lot from the format change, which springs from how hard it is to get a good kids tv show on the air long term when compared to the much easier method of posting YouTube videos. sure, there is plenty of really bad content out there and oh my god toy unboxing videos are so awful. but it’s difficult for any kids content to thrive in an environment where it’s supposed to be the child’s babysitter and there are no real life adults involved at all.

so i don’t think cocomelon is the root of all evils, but it’s understandable why it’s the face of issues with children’s content these days. i can put on the shape song video for my children and be comfortable knowing i’ve added something to their eduction — 2 year olds learn very well from songs and i am not a lyricist — but i would never say that those hour long videos parents park their kids in front of are educational, because that isn’t how 2 year olds learn. commercial breaks are a thing of the past for a lot of kids now, but i would say they were actually really important for learning through tv! because kids can’t pay attention and learn effectively for long chunks of time. they can’t be actively thinking and engaged non stop for an hour, but they can for little bits of time with breaks in between.

anyways sorry for sending you two very long asks oh my god this god way long than i expected lol oops

don't be sorry!! this is a fun conversation to have; I'm interested in child development and hope to pursue it in the future. and I think the problem with cocomelon is exactly what you cited: parents put on complications that are hours and hours long and by that point you might as well be lobotomizing your child. commercials, though not so great because advertising to literal babies isn't great, do have their upsides as you stated. they allow kids to get up, move, talk to parents, and digest what they're watching. even outside of youtube, I don't think it's great for children to just sit in front of any screen for hours, whether they're watching something like sesame street or cocomelon. I think there is something to be said about the frame rate of cocomelon, though, which is faster than most children's shows. I also think it's so hated because it's not particularly engaging for adults. ofc no children's show is obligated to entertain parents too, but if given an option I'd pick most shows on cable television over cocomelon. regardless, I think the true issue is parents using technology in any form as a babysitter and not a tool is a real problem.