#ESPECIALLY when they ignore the specific ways black queerness is different

[pretty-roach]

queer is a beautiful word with a rich history of resistance. queer was taken back specifically to combat violence from homophobes. queer is fuckin punk. it lets me embrace black queerness and reject rigid boxes imposed by patriarchy and white supremacy. queer is intersectional, unspecific, deeply personal. So it's okay to not use label. But don't try and erase it from our history. Don't try to rebuild the societal boxes we broke out of. we're here, we're fuckin queer, get used to it

[the-catboy-minyan]

why so many people don't recognize that their antizionism is antisemitic, in my opinion:

(disclaimer: this is not an educational post, it will not have sources for claims, and is not meant to be read as the objective truth. it is solely my observation and opinions. civil debate and criticism is encouraged in both the notes and reblogs, I will do my best to answer those and correct my post if necessary. edits will be highlighted in pink, if this is a reblog, press the original post to see the most updated version. English is not my first Language, I might have used the wrong words for some terms.)

The Meaning Of Zionism:

this section is meant to highlight the difference between

firstly, they falsely believe the term Zionism means supporting genocide or Netanyahu's government, when most Jews don't use the term Zionism that way. Zionism has many different meanings and subgroups, as Jews love to argue (/j but Judaism encourages debate and personal interpretation), but all meanings are built on the original idea of "Jewish self determination in their indigenous land/creating and maintaining a Jewish country somewhere in the world" (yes, technically believing giving Israelis land somewhere else to be Israel is a form of Zionism, I've seen that take). the methods for creating and maintaining the lands differ, so is the belief of what land should be considered Israel, but all forms of Zionism rely on that core belief. while Zionists may support those things, that is not an integral part for Zionism, and many Zionists oppose those ideas and condemn them.

in addition, they falsely believe Zionism is in favor of illegal occupation and apartheid, which only specific subgroups of Zionists (extremely right-wing Zionists) are in favor of. Zionism is, again, mostly about an end goal (establishing and maintaining a Jewish state (which currently means in Eretz Israel)), and people will have different opinions on how to achieve it, including extremist and racist opinions. all movements have people who hold extremist beliefs, and are usually condemned by other members of their movement, Zionism is no exception.

they don't see Zionism as Jewish. I mean, there are more Christian Zionists than there are Jews in the world! of course it's not Jewish! lets ignore the fact the movement started by a Jewish man, was widely popular in Jewish communities and is what led to the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state.

now, let's for a moment ignore the misinterpretation of the term and assume that by saying Zionists, they refer only to people who support Netanyahu, illegal occupation in places like the west bank, war crimes committed by the IDF, etc. regardless of the Zionist's religion/ethnicity/race. (keep in mind that while that's their assumed intentions, their antizionism will still ultimately include self-identified Jewish Zionists who are strongly against these things)

Antizionist Activism and Beliefs:

have you heard accusations of antisemitism and the response "I'm not antisemitic, just antizionist"? this section will highlight the reasons why many antizionist actions or claims are seen as antisemitic by many Jews.

No Zionists Allowed: as in, excluding zionists from public, private, and online spaces. this tactic is used today to exclude many groups deemed problematic, "no [queer]phobes allowed", "no racists allowed", "no men misogynists allowed", etc. which is why on the surface, it doesn't seem antisemitic. yet this exclusion tactic is derivative from historical exclusion of ethnic groups, groups that were seen as evil/violent/sinners/subhuman were ostracised from society and denied access to public/private spaces. signs like "no blacks allowed", "no gays allowed", and, of course, "gentiles only".

Zionists Are Nazis: comparing any "evil" group to Nazis is common, they're so overly exposed to ww2 stories, especially ones that paint Nazi germany as pure evil cartoon villains, that they have no idea what the term Nazi actually means anymore. Nazism is based on race theory and antisemitism, it's the creator of the term antisemitism to make it sound more scientific instead of discriminatory, in Mein Kamph, Hitler wrote that almost every "issue" in the world is the fault of Jews. comparing the extremely antisemitic, supremacist, racist, homophobic, ableist, etc. ideology of Nazism to a Jewish movement for self determination is in fact antisemitic. (it is also wrong to throw the term Nazi around for any reason, but especially for a Jewish movement)

Zionists Control The Media/Government/etc: the belief that there's a secret organisation controlling the media is an old conspiracy theory, which comes from the genuine fear of your government feeding the people propaganda to sway their opinion in favor of the government to let it do what it wants. it's is good to believe the media is biased, as it's written by humans who are inherently biased, but to outright claim the entirety of media is untrustworthy when it's not hailed from a dictatorship is a harmful belief. this is what antivaxxers believed during the pandemic, what conspiracy theorists believed for centuries, and believe it or not, it's at least partially derived from the antisemitic belief of Jews controlling the banks and conspiracies like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Rid The World Of Zionists: again, there are many other activist groups that believe their enemy should be eradicated, that if they believe in or have done xyz, they deserve their rights to be taken away from them and to die. this is dehumanization, and an oppression tactic. the moment you say "this type of person doesn't deserve rights because they're evil", the moment people are gonna start getting falsely accused of falling into that type with the purpose of silencing them or getting their rights revoked. + the before point of political exclusion being derivative of ethnic/religious/racial exclusion. we've seen many people getting accused of being secretly Zionists for even mentioning the hostages.

Zionists Want Genocide/Are Bloodthirsty (a reminder that this is under the assumption that Zionists blindly support the current Israeli government and the IDF's war crimes): this is both straight up a variation of blood libel, and extremely hypocritical.

blood libel started as the antisemitic accusations that Jews kidnapped Christian children on Passover to creat Matzot, while no one beliefs are that extreme anymore, the underlying belief that Jews are violent and enjoy murder still exists, and was shifted to be about Israelis. the "it was self defense!" accusation that claims Israelis are just itching for their enemies to strike first to get the opportunity to respond violently and use self defense as an excuse, for example.

hypocritical as in, this goes hand in hand with the belief that Zionists should be killed. "Zionists support genocide so they should all die a violent and gruesome death" is a take I've seen MULTIPLE TIMES - and being said completely seriously, not in the comedic tumblr way of "my blorbo is cringe? wrong, killing you with hammers :3" - and is extra hypocritical when they very strongly oppose the idea of "Hamas are terrorists who committed atrocities therefore they should all die" (and ftr I don't claim they should support that).

there are people who believe that violence is necessary for an end goal, extreme violence even. that doesn't make them bloodthirsty or violent people, it makes them radicalized. there are some Zionists who believe the only way to maintain safety in Israel is to not only eradicate Hamas, but to eradicate Gaza, as they believe that all the people of Gaza are brainwashed to be violently against Israel and pro martyrdom (as in suicide attacks), and thus a threat to Israel's safety. there are some antizionists who believe the only way to free Palestine and bring safety to Gaza is to eradicate Zionists, as they believe that all Zionists are brainwashed to hate Palestinians and to be pro illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing, and are thus a threat to Palestine and their human rights. both of these beliefs are radical and false.

Zionist Blocklists: this is mostly an online problem, but Zionists have been doxxed IRL (and I don't mean individuals, massive lists of hundreds of alleged Zionists) for the same reasons those blocklists exists. people are gathering usernames of "Zionists" online to "warn other users" from interacting with them, with the disclaimer of "I'm not telling you to harass them, don't interact, just block". not only does it encourage to never hear the opposing side, thus pushing you further into an echo chamber of only voices that agree with you and never actually learning from the source what are the opinions you oppose, it ultimately creates a neat little list of people to harass because of the before mentioned dehumanizing belief that evil people deserve violence against them. suddenly sending death threats is easier than ever, and it's justified since these are allegedly evil people. you're not encouraged to double check if these people are actually Zionists, there's no explanation as to why they're on the list, you just have to trust the op.

Boycotting Zionist Companies: The Idea of boycotting companies or other organisations that support unethical causes is also, again, not new. People boycott companies that donated to anti-lgbtq organisations or that relied on slavery for their product creation. and yet the companies who are being boycotted are

Israeli companies, which are not necessarily supporting the Israeli government, it would be like boycotting every Chinese company because of the Uyghur genocide.

companies which helped Israel in some way, like McDonald's, which donated meals to Israeli soldiers during the start of the war (this is again a reminder that the majority of McDonald's income is real estate). there are arguments to be made to justify these type of boycotts, as they're similar to other justifications for different causes, yet unless these companies have directly funded the IDF's weaponry, the arguments for boycotting is flimsy at best.

companies which mentioned the hostages, like Paramount, which ran an Israeli ad for the release of the hostages. mentioning the hostages is not the same as condoning war crimes, it's recognizing there are innocent Israelis wrapped up in this conflict, just as supporting a free Palestine is not the same as supporting Hamas.

organisations that allowed Israel to participate, like Eurovision. there's just no reason to disallow a country to participate in a songs competition due to being in a war.

events that happen "while Israel is bombing Gaza". American events like the Oscars that happen on a set date and have nothing to do with Israel have no reason to be boycotted just for happening on the same day a war is happening.

Starbucks. why is Starbucks being boycotted? it had done nothing in support of Israel, literally fucking none, it's being boycotted for supporting Palestine wrong, once, on October. it doesn't operate in Israel, it never said anything publicly in support of Israel, there's literally 0 reason to boycott it????????????

anyways. while there are different reasons and justifications for every company or event, there's this silly little thing that happened in Nazi Germany that was boycotting Jewish business, in response to the "anti-nazi boycott". the Jewish boycotts were unsuccessful on paper, but ingrained the Nazi idea of Jews being inferior.

The Harm It Does For The Jewish Community:

The Overlap: the majority of Jews are Zionists, not in the sense of supporting genocide, but in the Jewish meaning(s) of believing a Jewish state should exist or is in some way beneficial for Jewish safety. by excluding and silencing Zionists, the antizionist crowd are excluding and silencing the majority of jewish people. a Jewish person who wants to integrate back into their circles has to refute their Zionism in fear of being seen as a genocide supporter, a Jewish person who refuses to hide their beliefs will be labeled evil and be ostracized. actual right-wing zionists would stay away from these spaces anyways for being leftist/centrist spaces, thus the exclusion is effective only on leftist Jews who dare believe Israel should exist.

"Zionism Isn't Judaism": is a claim many antizionists make, yet time and time again we see synagogues, Jewish schools, and Jewish neighborhood get targeted by antizionist protests. Jewish spaces are being attacked, even if you claim it is by a minority, these are still actions that are largely ignored by the antizionist crowd and aren't being condemned. you know, by the people who believe that silence is violence?

Can't Have A Single Positive Opinion About Israel: you have an Israeli relative that enlisted to the IDF? they should have refused servitude and gone to jail, you're a genocide supporter. You've done a birthright trip and it was nice? ew, everyone knows every inch of Israel is full of illegal settlements and apartheid, genocide supporter. you talked about the hostages? propaganda, genocide supporter. Israel passed a pro lgbtq law? pinkwashing propaganda, genocide supporter. you don't think Israel is an occupying terrorist force that oppresses their own citizens and deserves to be burned to the ground? genocide supporter, from the river to the sea!!!

Eretz Israel (not the State of Israel) is an integral part of Judaism. most of our holidays are about Israel in some way, some our traditions require Israel as a place, we bury our dead with soil from Israel, we vow to never forget Jerusalem during our weddings, we celebrate our agriculture and our miracles which happened there, our ancient holy cites are there, so are our ancestors (for ethnic Jews). many Jews are going to have at least a single positive or even a neutral opinion about Israel, and see it as a Jewish land.

The Israeli Identity: since people see Israel as an illegal settlement, apartheid, genocidal, terrorist state, etc, they also see Israelis as complicit in those crimes. every Israeli they meet is going to immediately be a criminal, Israelis are not a "real Jews" (that makes half the Jewish population fake), in the case Israel is dismantled and Israelis are forced to "go back to where they came from", will those countries accept them with open arms? or will the boycotts continue? what about Mizrahi Jews which hailed from the Arab world? do you think they'll even be allowed to live after their country's crimes against Palestine? will the Houtis let them when their flag has "death to Israel" on it (most Mizrahis are Yemeni)? if citizens are the same as their government, would that mean every Russian immigrant is an evil spy who wants to murder Ukrainians? just some questions to think about.

in conclusion: I'm tired. I've been writing for 3 hours. bye.

[comradekarin]

I saw your Beyonce/Taylor Swift post and What's wrong with "comparing two queens that are killing it". line? Isn't that what it comes down to with female artists? Why can't we just appreciate all female artists instead of the competitions?

I’m going to take this as you asking this question in good faith so here’s the short answer: No. There is nothing inherently wrong with that statement, and depending on the context, I agree with it. But here’s the long answer:

A lot of fandoms do take it upon themselves to start unnecessary, unprovoked beef between artists, especially female artists of color (i.e the Cardi and Nicki drama), consequently ruining the love a lot of people have for those artists. However, the Taylor and Beyoncè comparisons have a few problems I want to address that aren’t actually new when talking about female artists of color and their white counterparts. Firstly, the whole comparisons only started because of the uptick of insufferable swifties online discrediting all of the work, effort, and impact Beyoncé has had on people before and today (and Beyoncé fans are simply responding to these ridiculous claims). Secondly, swifties also have a strange tendency to compare her exclusively to objectively better black artists (Beyoncé, Prince, Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston, and more) by diminishing their work and influence in order to prop her up. Noticeable so, they never really do this with Taylor’s fellow white peers. It begs the question: Why do so many swifties feel the need to put Taylor on a pedestal by discrediting arguably more popular, influential black and queer artists? While I do agree with the notion that female artists should be celebrated and giving the props they deserve, we can no longer pretend that black artists like Beyoncé don’t have to give twice the effort, twice the dedication, twice the energy, and twice the style in order to be given their credit. Meanwhile, an artist like Taylor is rewarded and worshiped for her white mediocrity and performance activism, never really pressured to perform to the degree other black artists are expected to, or forced to show allyship when it really matters. So for her fans to degrade Beyoncé’s high quality vocals, performance, and production—which has been consistent and improving over the years—and be rightfully told off just to resort to the corny “let’s just celebrate all women” is, in my eyes, the epitome of white feminism.

Taylor’s fans have even admitted that she isn’t the best singer, only marketing herself as a good “songwriter”. Ok, so an artist that can’t sing that well, can’t dance, has easily replicable lyrics we could get from other Indie artists, and has a very specific demographic as her fans is someone to be considered a legend? How is this considered the standard but influential black legends’ work are downplayed and diminished? Why does it hurt swifties to see black women be given their credit? Why does Taylor have to be included in every conversation (I.e the Lizzo situation at the Grammy’s where Taylor Swift fans took Lizzo’s appreciation for Beyoncé as hatred for Taylor or Beyoncé’s success on the renaissance tour being overshadowed by the eras tour). And when called out on this, why do her stans resort back to the fake “just support all women” take?

It’s why I can’t really stand by that one post up here that states we shouldn’t debate over female artists because at the end of the day, “they’re all female artists subjected to the harsh lens of the patriarchy.” That statement ignores the intersectionality present in the topic of female artists’ treatment in the industry. It ignores how the expectations of white female artists more than often than not tend to be different for woc artists. I see the “let’s just all get along” saying as a way to deflect from the valid criticism and complaints people of color have for white artists like Taylor Swift. And considering how Taylor’s online brand is playing victim and being the poor innocent white girl whenever she is called out on something, the behavior her stans exhibit are nothing out of the ordinary.

In summary, I don’t think comparisons between female artists are needed. Especially female artists in entirely different genres of music and style. But I do know a lot white Taylor Swift fans love to play the racism card and then hide behind misogyny to cover their tracks. Once again, something Taylor herself does WELL.

[tainted-liquor]

racism and 'hiimayee'/'mayearies'

hi! so, I know Im not posting as frequently as I should be n I kinda fell off, BUT! theres a reason for that that I will be discussing today.

so, around maybe a month or so ago I was added to an insta gc with a handful of writers. Some being ash, maye, Dalia, a mutual friend named Ash, who we refer to as Lash, and a few others. Keep in mind, just so there is no misconception, the dominant population of this groupchat was both black and queer. I am not going to define who as its not relevant, and I would like to respect everyones privacy.

So, one day in the groupchat, we were all joking around when maye decided to call Dalia, aka @primaviva, a b--der h**per.

Now, for some who are confused lets go over the term 'b--der h**per' and its history.

This is a racial slur that aims to offend the Latino community, specifically Mexican immigrants. it is a callback to the border laws that prevent non-U.S. citizens from entering the United States without legal documentation, otherwise known as a passport or a 'green card' that will recognize you as a U.S. citizen. Throughout history, the government has made it harder and harder to apply for U.S. citizenship. Especially if the person attempting to migrate doesn't have the appropriate funds to finance this kind of migration. This is a form of systemic oppression to further segregate POC from White America, and this system has been critized in the past due to its nature and America even being stolen land.

As stated above, this slur is aimed at Mexican Immigrants. However, anyone of any culture can be an immigrant. When Maye knowingly said this to Dalia, not only was she using a derogatory term used to berate those who spent years trying to find a way towards a better life against her, but she was also grouping her in a category that is not her own. Dalia is NOT Mexican-American. She is puerto rican and dominican. So not only does this term not apply to her, it groups the entire Latino community in a giant umbrella of ignorance that erases her culture, and throws it under one title that is not her own.

To put this into perspective, lets use a hypothetical example.

Jen is Mexican-American. Her culture has deep roots that contributed to everyday history. While some components of her history may be similar to other Latino heritage, they are not the same and differ in many ways.

Gabriella is Puerto-Rican. She too has some similarites to other Latino/spanish speaking cultures, but there is an entirely different story to how her people came to be.

Grouping Jen and Gabriella together is ignorant. Doing this overlooks and dismisses their difference in history and boils their culture down to one small similarity; Spanish. You wouldn't call Gabriella a deragotory term that doesn't apply to her, because not only is it racist, but it also takes a massive eraser to her culture and roots. To put these two under the same roof and unite them under one thing is essentially telling them "you're all the same."

Cultural erasure is already a big problem in non-white communities. Anything that differs from European american history is already not talked about, but to do this is just a slap in the face.

And to put the icing on the cake, this was her apology. Which took her 3 tries...

#1, which was already an issue in itself...an emoji for racism is crazy.

#2, which still wasn't sufficient for racism...

And #3, in which she attempt to deflect the situation by saying we use "problematic language". Which, is only the n-word amongst each other. Because we're all black!

She even got defensive when Dalia assumed she was Latino due to how quickly the word was sent like it was normal. This was not a PROPER apology, regardless of how lengthy it was.

And to make matters worse, this isn't the first time she's been caught saying some racist/problematic shit.

This post is lengthy, and for that, I apologize. But I would like to address one last component of this post before I sign things off.

As you can see in one image, Maye cracked a joke about 'curry' when talking about Pakistani women's education activist Malala.

Let's take a moment to explain why this is problematic, and how cracking jokes about curry when on the topic of Pakistan is an issue.

Pakistan is a country in South Asia that neighbors India. This country has a beautiful and unique history of its own that very rarely is taught in classroom settings, just like I said earlier with any sort of history that is not European. One of the racial stereotypes of its South Asia is their 'abundance of curry', and all of their meals being some type of 'curry'

This is again an ignorant and narrow-minded ideology regarding the topic of race and its similarities to other countries that are similar in certain aspects. It pushes people into a marginalized box, and labels them as 'all the same'.

I ask that you do research before spreading a harmful narrative about peoples culture, and don't be ignorant. Thank you for taking time to read this post.

[ihopesocomic]

I don't know if you answered this in your analysis, but do you think Pride Law having homophobia and stuff like that is entirely a bad thing? I like when stories parallel real life, even the bad things. Pride law is literally a religion, which some prides might follow while others might not, or could be interpreted in different ways. And even with Nothing discovering that the truth was different, villains wanted to remain "conservative". Idk, I wanted to see a story like that lol

In my opinion, homophobia has no place in a story that claims to be LGBT-friendly. "LGBT-friendly" means it's a promise of escapism for queer consumers. It should not equate to "contains LGBT content". For the longest time, and still to this day, people who include LGBT content feel like it's "unrealistic" to portray queer characters without them being discriminated against for being queer. And that is stupid. It is. Especially when it has nothing to do with the plot. Same can be said about other kinds of discrimination as well, it's not limited to queer content. This isn't debatable, this isn't mock trial lol There's a multitude of ways to include discrimination without trying to bring real life issues into it. You just have to be a little bit creative.

Stories containing homophobia, especially religiously-motivated homophobia are not inherently bad. Stories like that have their uses in society. This is true of transphobia/queerphobia, no one's gonna deny anyone the right to tell their experiences with oppression. I personally have my own religion-based trauma that's going to be in another story.

Where the problem with MP lies is, with it having no explanation on what Pride Law is, how it's enforced, or how other prides treat it differently, it ended up having the message of "religion is why homophobia exists" when that is such a black and white statement.

Homophobia is not something that exists from religion. It's ignoring the fact that it's not only untrue of religions as a whole, it ignores that it's specific religious sub-groups within those religious groups that miconstrued or changed texts to suit an agenda, and even then that only happened because of influential people of a higher status. MP ALMOST had that message, only to promptly throw it out the window when the next pride Nothing encountered had a trans character, who only upheld Pride Law despite everything we know. So is Pride Law ONLY somehow homophobic and not transphobic? I have questions.

Because if you're going to advertise yourself as "realistic" then why would lions be homophobic? Lions don't care. And if you're going for a "mature" approach, why do you have such an oversimplified message about religion when its more complicated than how you're depicting it?

Intentionally or unintentionally, it paints such a broad stroke, and makes the message read as "all religion bad". And that's bad. - Cat

[wisteria-lodge]

I have a couple ideas for tv shows and movies to sort, if you can and have the time and energy. Just pick and choose, or whatever else you feel like.

Raya and The Last Dragon

Ms Marvel

Fate: Winx Club

Ghostbusters, both versions.

High School The Musical The Series

High School Musical 1, 2, and 3

Legend of Korra

Out in the Outback

Anne with an e

Moana

Frozen I and II

And is the tv show of Sherlock Holmes different than in the books?

I'm not sure which you sorted earlier, so if you sorted the show already, ignore me.

Also, take your time with this ask, if you do it at all. It's a lot and more than is fair to ask you , I just had some ideas that may be interesting to analyse so I wanted to give them to you. However, do not tire yourself out, overwork, be overwhelmed or stress. This are just ideas, not even suggestions or requests. Just do whatever you both want to and can, whenever you can and want to and IF you want to and can.

Thanks for creating your blog, it's awesome!

I am totally planning to sort Raya, Moana, and Frozen when I get there in my Disney Ladies sorting series... but I'm not totally sure when that would be.

I do think Doyle!Sherlock Holmes is a Badger Snake (I'm willing to entertain the possibility that he's a particularly chaotic rapid-fire bird, but I do think Snake is more likely.) Either way, he models a 'I play the game for the game's own sake' Bird primary over the top, and built himself a data-collecting Bird secondary, and possibly an Actor Bird as well, although a lot of that is Snake shifting.

Elementary!Sherlock Holmes actually is a Double Bird, and falls in queer-platonic love with Watson because she Helps With His Work. Honestly in order to make the show's premise work as well as it does you have to shift Holmes in a more Bird Primary direction, because Badger primary Holmes would would not have made the shift away from his beloved London nearly as easily. And Elementary!Holmes is much more of a I-Know-A-Guy Bird secondary than the others, which is charming.

Sherlock!Sherlock Holmes is a morally bored burnt Snake primary who starts to latch onto people like Watson and Mrs Hudson (Irene, Mycroft, and even Lestrade to a degree) and the moral choices he makes revolve around them. The nicer explanation is that he's SO used to working alone that he's bad at letting these guys in on his plans, which leads to a lot of miscommunication. The less-nice explanation is that he's still young, and still unBurning, and still pretty selfish. Sherlock's "Mind Palace" Bird secondary honestly seems consciously constructed to me, in the same way that Doyle!Holmes' bird secondary is. (He's also got sort of a mind palace in the books, although he calls it a "brain attic," which is adorable.) So I suspect there might be a Snake secondary underneath there for Sherlock as WELL... but I also couldn't say for sure. It'd be a whole lot easier if we actually knew *how* he faked his death. The later seasons especially really don't like to engage with the specifics of HOW Sherlock Holmes does anything, being entirely focused on WHY.

Underneath the cut, I'm putting a list of all the properties/characters people have asked me to sort, in case someone out there is maybe looking for inspiration. (The bolded items are the ones multiple people have asked about.)

Romeo & Juliet

Frozen

Othello

Umbrella Academy (S2)

Doctor Faustus

Wuthering Heights

Dawn Summers (BtVS)

Pride and Prejudice

This is How You Lose the Time War

Hannibal

Silence of the Lambs

Euphoria

One Piece 

Death Note

Star Trek: Discovery

Dragon Ball Z

Soul

10 Things I Hate About You

Queen’s Gambit

Batman Beyond

Danganronpa

Lord of the Rings

The Hobbit (films)

BBC Sherlock 

Gone With the Wind

Invisible City

Penumbra Podcast

WandaVision

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Angel the Series

Gilmore Girls

Macbeth 

The Originals

Bridge to Terabithia 

Percy Jackson Series

Orange is the New Black

White Collar

Peaky Blinders

Never Have I Ever

Shadowhunters

Anne With An E

Powerpuff Girls (OG)

Homestuck

Sense and Sensibility 

Vampire Chronicles

Temeraire Chronicles 

Book of Life

Dracula 

Katekyo Hitman Reborn

[dilfdoctordoom]

Absolutely just preaching to the choir at this point but like, I don't care I'm also going to complain LOL I cannot get over how it seems Gunn had a legit grudge against Gamora (and Mantis!!!) because the treatment of both of them feels so specifically targeted that you would think both characters broke into his house and kicked his dog or something. He's definitely not as dumb as the Snyder fans would have you believe, I know he reads the source material even if he ignores the majority of it, but I do not see how even if you ONLY read GotG 2008 that you'd come away with wanting to intentionally write the women like that, it's so unhinged.

I'd ask why the HELL Vol. 3 struggles so much with its WOC when he's shown to have the ability to Try and improve on this in his other work post Vol. 2 (Mind you i think The Suicide Squad also had issues with racism AND ableism- if it's supposed to be this commentary on the USA strong arming and trying to cover up their involvement with other countries, why is the film presenting it as a big joke that Bloodsport and Peacemaker are violently murdering these POC freedom fighters by accident? I know Gunn is a big horror nut and violence and an R rating blah blah blah but Maybe read the room. And don't get me started on everything with Polka Dot Man oh my god) but by now I think the Vol. 3 issues are because he just could NOT put himself mentally into the characters headspaces, like he literally couldn't relate to them At All so they just had to get these half assed resolutions at best or written out to never to return at worst. (other than Rocket, obviously, who even then ALSO suffers from the writing!! NO ONE TRULY WINS!!!)

I genuinely think the only reason the leading lady in Peacemaker (Leota, a black queer woman) didn't get treated like ass is because of Gunn's own comment that the character shares a name with his mother. Like, bruh. If the only way you can treat these characters with different backgrounds than you with the bare minimum of respect is because of vaguely nepotistic reasons or because you absolutely HAVE to relate to/project onto them, then idk what to even say 😵‍💫

This is a safe space to be mad about the treatment of women (& women of color specifically) in the Guardians franchise because god, it always just gets worse the more that I think about it.

(Random tangent: Like, you have Michelle Yeoh! The Michelle Yeoh! And she's just... cameo doesn't do anything doesn't ever appear again. My god if we're gonna force Gamora to be a Ravager at least bring her back).

There was some improvement in his DC work (though definitely not in his treatment of disabled characters lmao that's a consistent shitshow). Ratcatcher felt like a person, didn't get needlessly fridge like I'd assumed she would. Harcourt and Leota actually feel fledged out. Leota especially as that's a queer woman of color... and now it's just cause she has the same as his mother lmao.

Guardians 3 I think is the most disappointing movie in the entire MCU because I just fundamentally do not buy these resolutions for these characters. Peter's going back to Earth? Awesome, but he already did that. Rocket's fine with everyone leaving? Strange since for them, they were dead for five years.

What happened to Gamora and Mantis goes beyond Gunn's favoritism like he was so casual about killing Gamora... leading woman of color, and he talks constantly about how he just wanted to kill her, that's, uh, that's not great.

Mantis drives me crazy because you could not convince me that that man has read a single comic starring her. How do you adapt someone so horrifically? Comic Mantis isn't great, nor am I ever gonna claim she is, but she's still somehow better than the MCU depiction.

[sunnydice]

i would love if you expanded on your vent post sometime because i don't quite understand what you're saying when equating experiencing racism with black and white discourse surrounding c!wilbur either being completely bad and completely good and how people react to that. but it genuinely seems like an important topic to speak on if you ever feel like fully doing so

OK first of all :] ilike how this ask is phrased thank you for bein so niceys abt it. i will do my best to convey this as well as i can imstill pretty frazzled but ido wanna talk about it 👍

specifically i am talking abt the ppl who absolve him of everything or declaw him constantly. like again i do think cwil is a good dude he Is one of my faves. he is just kinda tunnel vision and selfish and in that persuit has done a lotta not great stuff tht gets deliberately ignored or pushed aside, but also the ppl v obsessed w making him some evil malicious one note abuser are like. weird ableist assholes lmao it can be two (✌️) bad things. but im not talking abt Them rn my point is uhm. ok so

i think the way cwilbur uhh ccwilbur that whole bursona thing is has a coat of Whiteness that intersects with things yk? have you heard the term white fave. it's stuff like that. and it especially shines when you compare it to like..how many swaths of ppl treat cquackity in Relation to him, or how many sootbur or oc type body hcs will turn one half of a ship into like..a emotionless brown man accessory to whoever they decided is the dainty pale one. or how ccwil gets truthed so much as "blahblahblah" instead of supporting openly queer or neurodivergent or female creators because it needs to be in a digestible palatable way it needs to be in the vehicle of a guy they are already willing to consume. does that make sense

like look at this ->

in this example uhh,,,ok to use tntduo specifically, yes cquackity Is violent and promiscuous he Is mean and snippy and scowls that's all true and canonical. but you just have to be a little aware of how you interact with things and how it comes across, especially if it's used as a vehicle for a white character. like...if you flanderize quackity and change his motives so he's just an accessory who's whole world revolves around wilbur, if he's turned into an abuser that the ever gentle wonderful poor wifey wilbur is so gracious to continue tolerating, if he's turned into like a sexual object for wilbur to be bossed around by at the cost of like. things tht are literally canonically triggering and awful fr cq. yyr like. racist llmao. and these things are Common as hell they are very common i block and block tags and i still cant get away from it.

white characters and ccs being treated with a different brush that poc characters and ccs is just v v v common and awful and well it sucks out here 👍 i do feel like the way he is talked abt can be loaded with it

[starfxkr]

So like I've had different opinions on this, my friend (boy) has told me I'm not a pick me but I feel like everyone sees me as one even tho I rlly don't ever try and show off in front of "the boys" or whatever. Like, I'm friends with mostly guys. I have maybe 2 friends that are women(we barely talk if ever), but I just click with guys more idk what it is but I do. Like I'll try with a girl and the conversation will flow for maybe a few minutes then idk what else to say. Maybe it's because I was friends with a lot of boys when I was little but idk I just don't click with girls really and apparently that's pick me behavior🧍🏾‍♀️. Be honest bc I'm about to lose my mind 😭(sorry if this is bothersome, if u don't wanna answer u can ignore this, no biggie!)

well ill start off by saying the term pick me gets thrown around so much and so easily that people forget its a term coined by black ppl to describe a specific set of behaviors where women are misogynistic, throw other women under the bus or put them in harms way to get "picked" by men and from what you described you aren't any of those

I think it would be good to interrogate why you feel you don't get along with other girls though, like why do the convos dry up, do you feel othered by women for some reason (could be your interests, could be queerness but im not saying that's what it is because I don't know you and you haven't indicated it, maybe you're gnc in some way like fashion or interests) , do you have an unconscious biases about female friendship that cause you to maybe be dismissive of the prospect of deep connections

like really think about it because sometimes (especially after growing up mainly friends with boys) girls with no female friendships just internalized some things about it being "easier" to be friends with boys

[rememberingtheunremembered]

Further Recom. + Notes: Humanizing sex work (SW) & the threat of the law

The Nordic Model, partial decriminalization…How it relegates sex workers to a space of precarity?

(Sweden, Norway, Iceland, N. Ireland, Canada) — selling sex is not illegal but buying sex or profiting from the SW of somebody else is… sometimes referred to as “ending demand” & “exit services” are set up to try and help get SW out of the industry — it is seen by many as a very progressive & feminist way of protecting SW

Issue: a worker could come forward with complaint but a client couldn’t (say especially if you want to report a child being used) + ^selling of sex itself is not a problem but all the parallel activities are criminalized, which leads SW living under the constant threat of police violence & the danger of black market

Whereas legalization would require a lot of licensing, maybe specific venues, and tends to lead a sort of brothel system… creates a two-tier system where if you don’t have the money to afford the licenses & fees or the the right ways, then that leads to criminalization or the pressure to work for some wealthy capitalist who has the money to own a brothel & pay for all their licensing in exchange for them to be under his thumb

^ impacts marginalized communities (trans, queer, LGBTQ+ communities, homeless, immigrants, racialized, disabled)

Although public health is often a concern when it comes to SW, it’s usually approached only in terms of risk of STD… there isn’t much discourse about police violence, deportations, evictions, and poverty, all of which are hazardous to health (less about the health of the workers themselves but more about the imagined health of the community)

Wider structural problems: main issue is the stigma, eviction, lack of healthy mental health care facilities, gynecologist

AGAINST DECRIMINALIZATION: not about morality!!!

There is an argument that if the money is the only consent (you wouldn’t do it otherwise), then all SW is rape… but could we say the same for the lack of “enthusiastic consent” as actors? Difference between sexual intimacy as job v sexual assault at workplace

SW don’t do “productive work,” so, they shouldn’t sell themselves since there is nothing valuable produced except for $$ — emotional aspect is also part of the service world, thinking of labor of only in terms of products & manufacturing is bs

concern of sending a bad message — it sends the message that women’s bodies are for sale to men (ignores all the women who pay for sex & all the men who pay for sex with other men, & all the people who pay SW for things that aren’t really sex)... even if a women chooses to do it… still doesn’t mean it’s a feminist cause, if you’re choosing to buy into this very patriarchal & misogynistic industry, you’re reinforcing the idea that women exist for male consumption (which isn’t just an abstract concern about optics but an idea that regularly gets women of all backgrounds harassed & even killed)

Post WWII in N. America, there were heightened concerns about the future of the nation that coalesced in concerns about the proper sexual development of teenagers

A strong nation = strong families guided by a monogamous, heterosexual, reproductive/procreative couple

Role of sex ed.:

Abstinence-only: often argues that sex before marriage is harmful & that having more than 1 sex partner is wrong & destructive

Abstinence-plus: highlights abstinence as the only sure way to avoid pregnancy/STIs (teaches about safe sex practices but rarely pleasures)

Importance of comprehensive sex ed.: teaches about safe sex practices, LGBTQ sex, casual sex (some curricula teach about pleasure but not all)

Florida’s “Don’t say gay bill,” legislation to outlaw the teachings of LGBTQ

The conservative pathologize, if not criminalize — sex & sexuality as a threat

^these political/religious narratives lead to laws criminalizing non-normative forms of sex — sex work

Riley Reyes, adult performer, chair of Adult Performer Advocacy Committee (a labor group by and for adult performers — APAC)

SWERF: sex work excluding radical feminist… entering popular usage & leftist spaces

In the book, “Prostitution Policy in the Nordic Region,” scholars May-Len Skilvrei & Charlotta Holmstrom say that there really isn’t such a thing as “the” Nordic Model… pimping is legal yet landlords & friends of SW are vulnerable to pimping charges since the law cannot distinguish between the third parties who are helping & the law parties who are hurting

Inconsistencies in law protection can be better understood from thinking of Nordic model as a philosophical approach than a legal one 

SESTA & FOSTA are federal bills in the US that have criminalized certain kinds of sexual speech on the internet — illegal to talk about sex or SW on online platform & they’ve made the platforms liable for that speech — say selling sex on YouTube, then YouTube could be criminalized… that is why craigslist shut down their personal ad section & why tumblr is no longer a place where sex exists

Book “Sex at the Margins,” anthropologist Laura Agustin — how “trafficking” & “rescued” are used synonymously — in actuality, you’ve been arrested, imprisoned, your wages have been confiscated, & you’ve been deported back to a country you didn’t even want to be in without trial or even charges… “anti-trafficking operations”

^ if the law wants to cut down on migrant SW & immigrant workers of all kinds, being exploited & endangered, decriminalize the human moment — no more detention centers, visas, language tests, income requirements…

Decriminalizing SW… sex trafficking would still be fully illegal, labor rights violations are labor rights violations, & people under SW would be able to report

Some do it for enjoyment, some do it for money (poverty or SW)... survival

LEGAL to buy & sell sex… but if you do it in a flat with someone else (brothel-keeping), illegal… outdoors (solicitation), illegal… advertise (depending on where you do it), might be illegal… help a SW book gigs because they can’t use a phone, if you borrow money from a SW, if you’re a driver or a bodyguard of a SW, then you’re profiting from someone else’s SW & technically that is pimping, which is illegal

ILLEGAL… working in a flat with someone else & having a security guard would be safer but it is against the law. If you’re working outdoors and want to talk to clients about prices and condom use before you get in a stranger’s car… must do it in a rush since if you’re spotted, you could be charged with solicitation or hit with a prostitute’s caution, which will show up on a background check

Is money taken away if police suspect (not prove) that it is based off of SW? Renters cannot rent to SW (illegal… eviction)? In Northern Ireland, you could face a potentially unlimited fine, eviction from home, be charged — all w/o trial for doing something that is completely legal.

Testimony on being arrested in the video (migrants being deported w/o trial, arrested w/o clothes)

There’s an unspoken assumption I think that arrest, imprisonment, or threatening somebody with those things is morally neutral… but they are forms of violence since the SWs are harmed by it.

Book: Playing the Whore, Melissa Grant

Note that since the 70s & earlier, many SW consistently identified the police, not clients, as the major source of violence in their lives.

“It doesn’t feel like that these laws are there to protect people since they clearly don’t, it just feels like they want to see SW disappear”

There’s distinction between “SW is violence” — no amount of SW is ever okay & some kind of criminalization is the only answer — v “the sex industry features violence & exploitation” — we can have a chat on ways to reduce it

Radical feminist Julie Bindel & many others argue that SW is bad in itself… a lot of SW acknowledge their exploitation, not wanting to do SW, & yet argue that decriminalization is the best way to reduce them… if you want to be an abolitionist, it is not enough to say Sex industry features violence but that SW is violence

How SW accommodates disabled communities

Oliver discusses the complicated patchwork of the demonizing, patronizing, and problematic American laws against world’s oldest profession with a rather humorous undertone. He refrains from moral policing sex work and argues that it is inarguably labor (LastWeekTonight). His critical and human-rights centered approach allows me to apply 

Oliver touches on the absurdism of the “legality” which is established based on camera presence, how consensual sex for money or goods off camera remains illegal (LastWeekTonight). 

Oliver critiques the wrongful premise of the impossibility of consent in practice and reduction of all sex workers to exploited “victims,” the cliché of sex work being synonymized with trafficking, police and white supremacists selling themselves as “the saviors,” and the hyper-surveillance and mass incarceration of sex workers (LastWeekTonight). 

Oliver recounts how the legal processes and policies harm those that they claim to protect — the irony of police sting operations in the United States since they are fundamentally arguing that police should be able to have sex for their jobs legally to stop other people from having sex for work. 

The threat of arrest for people of color, the provision of prohibition against loitering for the purpose of prostitution (a stop & frisk policy for sex workers — NYPD has interpreted completely legal activities like talking to pedestrians or dressing “provocatively” as the basis for an arrest... seized condoms and used that as evidence of prostitution or charged with the misdemeanor of possessing an instrument of crime/criminalizing condoms... unsafe sex), and how criminal record limits sex workers’ future for both people who want remain or leave the field — for example, a woman in Alaska has a record as a sex offender since was charged with trafficking herself because the law changed from “promoting prostitution” to “sex trafficking.” 

that just like with any other job, fundamentally the only way to make sure that people have a choice in the way they earn money is to make housing affordable, healthcare accessible, and to not burden marginalized people with a criminal record 

[barbiegirldream]

So let me see if I can wrap my head around this correctly. From the perspective of a Queer POC boob:

Ranboo can look at a bunch of threads of, essentially, a non issue of POC twt fans whining and pissing their pants because a closeted Queer person chose to actively help a community he was more familiar with than a community he would no absolutely NOTHING about (and would probably have some horrid ass takes like Tubbo/Phil did about the slap shit, eugh), but somehow feign ignorance and even JOKE about the rapant Queerphobia going on in his community, especially towards one of his supposed "close" friends- not even at least TRY to say to be kind towards him or others, even if you don't like him (Thank You Wilb, god bless) AND have the audacity to ignore the countless people sending him the thread, when it didn't even take HOURS for him to notice those threads by Pissbaby POC, and even address it not once- but THREE TIMES (Discord, Twitter, and Twitch).

But somehow. Someway, Dream's fans (I'm not even gonna dignify with Stans because at that point, this term is just derogatory for me) are the ones who bend over backwards for a white man who what? Isn't labeled? Doesn't even know where he falls on the spectrum, but still tries to at least acknowledge the hardships- no marter how minor- that his fans go through w/ the rampant Homophobia/Queerphobia going on in the world? Even taking pot shots at Chic-fil-A? A company who was outted for actively funding Anti-LGBT groups????

"BUT THE KKK/ISLAMPHOBIC EDIT-" At least that edit was years old and Dream- whether he made it or not- owned up to it and apologized to both groups one way or another.

"BUT THE DRUGS DRUGS TWEET-" Was made months ago and wasn't even making fun of Black People, let alone even targeting a specific Group to make fun of- but he still apologized for anyway.

I feel like I've been a huge fan of the wrong mf, I'll take the white prev. conservative Queer man who actually knows when shits fucked vs the White Queer man who actively was teetering the lines before activing his "Queer" trap card (not even an exaggeration either).

mhm I think what's different mainly is Dream had to put in the work. He was raised with no background in how to be supportive of the type of community he ended up fostering. That being poc, women, nd people, queer people, jewish and Islamic people. But he wants to be so he listens to his fans and he has an open line of communication with them. If you dm him a concern about something serious it's really likely you get a reply directly.

And Dream does respond to everything like literally everything he responds to. And if he thinks an apology is in order he gives one. He did address the edit for eight minutes and apologized for it directly. With the drugs drugs tweet he said he had no intentions of fostering harmful stereotypes so he deleted his tweet he got what people were worried about. Because he listens one thing Dream has always advocated for is the opportunity we as an online international community have to listen to one another and learn from one another.

But Ranboo doesn't want to put in the work. He thinks recognizing that he's white is enough to be anti racist it's not. He thinks being gay means he can't be homophobic it doesn't. Ranboo is 18 and I think he absolutely can grow and improve but it's a little upsetting to see he's so opposed to actual criticism he would let a friend and fellow cc be harassed by his own fans. Like someone tell Ranboo that Dream isn't responding to things because they're being spammed at him but because he wants to foster a better community and knows open communication is the best way to do it.

[shititbe]

Anyway, Peter Parker is Bi, and I Won’t Be Convinced Otherwise.

Firstly, we have to get our bases covered. What exactly is Bi-sexuality? What is sexuality? 

Sexuality is defined as a persons identity in relation to gender(s) they are attracted to. Why is this important? Peter’s sexuality has never been specifically stated in the comics, nor in any other form of media. It’s assumed that he is straight because of his popular relationship with Mary Jane Watson in the comics, and the movies. 

Now that we have a bases for what exactly sexuality is and how it’s defined, let’s go over Peter’s partners. 

Obviously Peter and Mary Jane are a piece of comic book history. They eventually get married, though sadly, during the events of Civil War II (I think, don’t quote me) Peter and Mary Jane sell their marriage to Mephisto in order to save Aunt May

They later had their memories of their marriage restored, they have yet to get back together and it’s been a few issues if I remember correctly. Next we have Peter’s first, and most unfortunate love, Gwen Stacy. 

They dated in high school where she later died. Of course, Peter has dated other people (namely, Black Cat, Betty Brant, Carol Danvers, Anna Maria, Cindy Moon, Lian Tang, and so on). Since we have his known history of heterosexuality out there, we need to move onto another important part of Peter’s Bi-sexuality. An important implication in any media, especially queer media though, and that is the homoerotic subtext. 

Homoerotic subtext is important part of queer culture, a lot of the time it’s used to portray a characters queerness without saying it out (see: Dorian Gray by Oscar Wild or Great Gatsby By Fitz). In current decade, homoerotic subtext is often used for queer baiting or creating more realistic male friendships. 

So what’s the difference between someone creating a health male friendship (or a character comfortable in their heterosexuality) and implying a character is queer? 

Here are some examples of a healthy male character, both with himself and his friendships.  

Clearly he’s just taking the shit, and messing around with Reed. He’s comfortable enough (or as I like to see it, so traumatized because good god this guy has been Spider-Man since he was 15 good god that’s awful. He probably doesn’t care anymore). Here are some examples of Peter a little more than just a straight man shooting the shit. 

This has three meanings. Two of which I will take, one of which is just deeply embarrassing. Despite Peter’s history with humiliating events, I don’t think he would get his own spunk in his eyes. Leaving the other two options, he has experience getting spunk of - some kind - in his eyes, and/or he’s taking the shit again. Which is very likely. 

Kissing a cop? For....no reason? A little not so hetero of you Peter. 

You can practically hear his disappointment in his voice. Also could be read as taking the shit, but why would you. 

Making out with The Thing? Gay. 

This one is the most important. Peter is clearly tired, annoyed by his teammates (see wolverine being wolverine in the corner). Shits on fire, its mid battle, and Peter has the audacity to mutter “I hate men” to himself. The only people I have every heard say this in that was are lgbt and straight women, and lgbt men. This kind of expression only comes from people who date, or deal with men in a completely different world than straight men. Straight men use this phrase as an endearment, “Oh have you seen Bill today, I hate that guy.” “Man Jerry can do so many push-ups, I hate that guy.” Very different language, and implications (I also, obviously don’t know how straight men speak). 

 Now that we’ve gone over our bases, and homoerotic subtext. How else could we gather that Peter Parker is Bi? There are many tropes in media - queer media - that allure to a characters queerness. Like homoerotic subtext, there are ways to tell an audience something without specifically saying it. 

This is a gay wedding Peter went to in the recent comics. I don’t know if any of you have been to a gay wedding recently, but Peters face (the first panel above the wedding) is the same exact face I made at my first gay wedding. It’s the face of excitement for not only the couple, but for yourself. The hope that maybe, you too can actually be in a same-sex relationship. 

I’m also going to allure to queer tropes as stated previously. Such as the real, and fictional trope of lgbt people sticking together. Thousands of years of belittlement and oppression will make groups of people not want to wonder out, and subconsciously look for others like them. 

Johnny Storm (and Wade Wilson since he comes in later but I couldn’t find a picture of the confirmation) is cannon Bi-sexual (Pan-sexual). 

Their friendship is deeply homoerotic as most queer friendships in media and real life are. Johnny flirts with Peter on many occasions (saying his ideal women is a female version of Peter, inviting him over to watch is sex tape, and so on) and of course oh my god they were roommates. 

Some other popular queer tropes are: Found Family, Soulmates, and Enemies to lovers. Because it’s superhero related, this includes the Identity Porn tag as well.  

Peter Parker and Wade Wilson have a famous Love/Hate relationship. I mean, how could you expect anything less when your first meeting with this known mercenary is him throwing your civilian persona out the window of a car. Now, Wade still doesn’t know Peter is Spider-Man in the current run of comics, but that doesn’t make anything about them any less gay. 

For the Found Family Trope: 

Because it’s Peter and Wade, their whole development can be read as Enemies to Friends to Lovers, so I wont bother backing that up because, uh, it speaks for itself. One panel really does to add that cause though 

I’m not going to explain what a free-pass list is.

The Soulmates part I know I have to back up. 

For SoulMates:  

Now this panel requires a little explanation. Wade kills Peter, not knowing he’s Spider-Man. Weasel takes over for Peter (they don’t know its him) so no one suspects he’s dead. Deadpool begins to feel guilty he killed his best buds best bud, so he tries to bring Peter back to life. Losing his stunning good looks (switching back to how he looked before Weapon X making his wife Shiklah estranged (then she married Dracula but thats beside the point)). Spider-Man is Peter’s “true self” or patronus for Harry Potter fans. Wade is stupid and hasn’t connected the dots yet, effectively making him the biggest simp in history. Seriously, who destroys their marriage for the c h a n c e for getting some with their idol? A Simp, that’s who.

Peter forgives Wade for killing him (and for saving him from killing their genetic daughter itsy-bitsy). If someone killed me they better be hot as fuck before I even thing about forgiving them. Ignoring Peter’s super sexy forgiving nature, uh, he’s kinda simping. 

Died in each others arms. Nothing else is needed. 

They’re heartmates. From what I read, the feeling has to be mutual in order for it to work. The witches (long story, comics are hard to explain) that captured deadpool were expecting his wife so they could get the headmistress back. Instead, they got Peter. Basically Heartmates = soulmates but chosen for you instead of chosen by you. 

To conclude my point: 

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk. 

[olderthannetfic]

I'm a Chinese, nationally and racially. Racial projection seems to be a common practice in western fandom, doesn't it? I find it a bit... weird to witness the drama ignited upon shipping individuals with different races, or the tendency to separate characters into different "colors" even though the world setting doesn't divide races like that. Such practice isn't a thing here. Mind explaining a bit on this phenomenon?

--

Sure, I can try. But of course, fish aren’t very good at explaining the water they swim in.

Americans aren’t good at detecting our own Americanness, and a lot of what you’re seeing is very much culturally American rather than Western in general. (In much of Europe, “race” is a concept used by racists, or so I’m told, unlike in the US where it’s seen more neutrally.) Majority group members (i.e. me, a white girl) aren’t usually the savviest about minority issues, but I’ll give it a shot.

The big picture is that most US race stuff boils down to our attempts to justify and maintain slavery and that dynamic being applied, awkwardly, to everyone else too, even years after we abolished slavery.

There’s a concept called the “one drop rule” where a person is “black” if they have even one drop of black blood.

We used to outlaw “interracial” marriage until quite recently. (That meant marriage between black people and white people with Asians and Hispanic people and others wedged in awkwardly.) Here’s the Wikipedia article on this, which contains the following map showing when we legalized interracial marriage. The red states are 1967.

That’s within living memory for a ton of people! Yellow is 1948 to 1967. This is just not very long ago at all. (Hell, we only fully banned slavery in 1865, which is also just not that long ago when it comes to human culture.)

Why did we have this bananas-crazy set of laws and this idiotic notion that one remote ancestor defines who you are? It boils down to slavery requiring a constant reaffirming that black people are all the same (and subhuman) while white people are all this completely separate category. The minute you start intermarrying, all of that breaks down. This was particularly important in our history because our system of slavery involved the kids of slaves being slaves and nobody really buying their way out. Globally, historically, there are other systems of slavery where there was more mobility or where enslaved people were debtors with a similar background to owners, and thus the people in power were less threatened by ambiguity in identity.

Post-slavery, this shit hung around because it was in the interests of the people in power to maintain a similar status quo where black people are fundamentally Other.

A lot of our obsession with who counts as what is simply a legacy of our racist past that produced our racist present.

--

The other big factor in American concepts of identity is that we see ourselves as a nation of immigrants (ignoring our indigenous peoples, as usual). A lot of people’s families arrived here relatively recently, and we often don’t have good records of exactly where they were from, even aside from enslaved people who obviously wouldn’t have those records. Plenty of people still identify with a general nationality (”Italian-American” and such), but the nuance the family might once have had (specific region of Italy, specific hometown) is often lost. Yeah, I know every place has immigrants, and lots of people don’t have good records, but the US is one of those countries where families have on average moved around a lot more and a lot more recently than some, and it affects our concepts of identity. I think some of the willingness to buy into the idea of “races” rather than “ethnicities” has to do with this flattening of identity.

New immigrant groups were often seen as Other and lesser, but over time, the ones who could manage it got added to our concept of “whiteness”, which gave them access to those same social and economic privileges.

Skin color is a big part of this. In a system that is founded on there being two categories, white owners and black slaves, skin color is obviously going to be about that rather than being more of a class marker like it is in a lot of the world.

But it’s not all about skin color since we have plenty of Europeans with somewhat darker skin who are seen as generically white here, while very pale Asians are not. I’m not super familiar with all of the history of anti-Asian racism in the US, but I think this persistent Otherness probably boils down to Western powers trying to justify colonial activities in Asia plus a bunch of religious bullshit about predominantly Christian nations vs. ones that are predominantly Buddhist or some other religion.

In fact, a lot of racist archetypes in English can be traced back to England’s earliest colonial efforts in Ireland. Justifying colonizing Those People because they’re subhuman and/or ignorant and in need of paternalistic rulers or religious conversion is at the bottom of a lot of racist notions. Ironic that we now see Irish people as clearly “white”.

--

There are a lot of racist porn tropes and racist cultural baggage here around the idea of black people being animalistic. Racist white people think black men want to rape/steal white women from white men. Black women get seen as hypersexual and aggressive. If this sounds like white people projecting in order to justify murder and rape... well, it is.

Similar tropes get applied to a lot of groups, often including Hispanic and Middle Eastern people, though East Asians come in more for creepy fantasies about endlessly submissive and promiscuous women. This nonsense already existed, but it was certainly not helped by WWII servicemen from here and their experiences in Asia. Again, it’s a projection to justify shitty behavior as what the party with less power was “asking for”.

In porn and even romance novels, this tends to turn up as a white character the audience is supposed to identify with paired with an exotic, mysterious Other or an animalistic sexy rapist Other.

A lot of fandoms are based on US media, so all of our racist bullshit does apply to the casting and writing of those, whether or not the fic is by Americans or replicating our racist porn tropes.

(Obviously, things get pretty hilarious and infuriating once Americans get into c-dramas and try to apply the exact same ideas unchanged to mainstream media about the majority group made by a huge and powerful country.)

--

Politically, within the US, white people have had most of the power most of the time. We also make up a big chunk of the population. (This is starting to change in some areas, which has assholes scared shitless.) This means that other groups tend to band together to accomplish shared political goals. They’re minorities here, so they get lumped together.

A lot of Americans become used to seeing the world in terms of “white people” who are powerful oppressors and “people of color” who are oppressed minorities. They’re trying to be progressive and help people with less power, and that’s good, but it obviously becomes awkward when it’s over-applied to looking at, say, China.

--

Now... fandom...

I find that fandom, in general, has a bad habit of holding things to double standards: queer things must be Good Representation™ even when they’re not being produced for that purpose. Same for ethnic minorities or any other minority. US-influenced parts of fandom (which includes a lot of English-speaking fandom) tend to not be very good at accepting that things are just fantasy. This has gotten worse in recent years.

As fandom has gotten more mainstream here, general media criticism about better representation (both in terms of number of characters and in terms of how they’re portrayed) has turned into fanfic criticism (not enough fics about ship X, too many about ship Y, problematic tropes that should not be applied to ship X, etc.). I find this extremely misguided considering the smaller reach of fandom but, more importantly, the lack of barriers to entry. If you think my AO3 fic sucks, you can make an account and post other fic that will be just as findable. You don’t need money or industry connections or to pass any particular hurdle to get your work out there too.

People also (understandably) tend to be hypersensitive to anything that looks like a racist porn trope. My feeling is that many of these are general porn tropes and people are reaching. There are specific tropes where black guys are given a huge dick as part of showing that they’re animalistic and hypersexual, but big dicks are really common in porn in general. The latter doesn’t automatically mean you’re doing the former unless there are other elements present. A/B/O or dubcon doesn’t mean it’s this racist trope either, not unless certain cliched elements are present. OTOH, it’s not hard for a/b/o tropes to feel close to “animalistic guy is rapey”, so I can see why it often bothers people.

A huge, huge, huge proportion of wank is “all rape fantasies are bad” crap too, which muddies the waters. I think a lot of people use “it’s racist” as an easy way to force others to agree with their incorrect claims that dubcon, noncon, a/b/o, etc. are fundamentally bad. Many fans, especially white fans, feel like they don’t know enough to refute claims of racism, so they cave to such arguments even when they’re transparently disingenuous.

--

Not everyone here thinks this way. I know plenty of people offline, particularly a lot of nonwhite people, who think fandom discourse is idiotic and that the people “protecting” people or characters of color are far more racist than the people writing “bad” fic or shipping the wrong thing.

But in general, I’d say that the stuff above is why a lot of us see the world as white people in power vs. everyone else as oppressed victims, interracial relationships as fraught, and porn about them as suspect. Basically, it’s people trying to be more progressive and aware but sometimes causing more harm than good when those attempts go awry.

[nostalgicatsea]

Common questions about and excuses for racism in fandom

I noticed that the same excuses, justifications, and questions that have come up in response to racism in fandom over the years appear in the notes for my post, so here’s a FAQ of sorts to address them. Hopefully, this will help people understand why these arguments don’t stand up to scrutiny and have something to refer to in lieu of writing a new reply every time someone says these things. 

Due to the length of this post, I made a Google doc for easier reading. Please note that several points are specific to the Marvel fandom and to the post linked above and are often M/M-focused (I explain why in that post), but generally speaking, the following can be applied to any fandom and various relationships. 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

I can ship whatever I want. Stop being the fandom police!

Shipping isn’t activism. 

Fandom is supposed to be fun. Being told what to do or not to do isn’t fun.

I put a lot of different people in my works, and I do research about the groups they’re in. For example, I have a *marginalized group here* character (e.g., disabled), and I did research to represent them accurately. It’s not fair to say that I don’t care about diversity.

I don’t think people should write about POC if they’re white, just like I wouldn’t want anyone to talk about *insert topic you’re passionate about or interest group you’re in here* (e.g., the BDSM community) if they didn’t know anything about it.

I really don’t have any knowledge about what it’s like to be a POC, though, so maybe I’m not the best person for this. If POC want to see themselves represented, they should make their own works.

I’m not comfortable with writing POC as I’m unfamiliar with the struggles they experience. I don’t want my writing to come off as inauthentic, inaccurate, or offensive. Why are you saying it’s harmful to use this as a reason for abstaining from writing POC?

It doesn’t make sense to include every single POC in my work.

What you said and the data you have don’t necessarily point to racism. It might just be individual preference. I prefer certain ships over others, and it has nothing to do with race/I don’t see color.

A big part of what informs my shipping is physical attraction or interest in the characters.

I don’t ship _____ because I see them as brothers/sisters/siblings.

Some white characters and ships are popular in the MCU fandom because people bring in canon characterization or material from the comics to the character(s)/ship. Your MCU-only examination fails to account for ships with one character from the MCU and one from comics (e.g., MCU Bucky/616 Clint or Spideypool).

Some subfandoms just have fewer POC which means there will naturally be fewer ships featuring POC. To say that the Marvel fandom is racist as a whole is disingenuous; you can see how more diversity in the cast leads to more diverse ships in fanworks.

Some of the characters and ships are popular because white characters get the lion’s share of screen time and development or they appeared in canon earlier.

Is it racist to racebend a character?

Racist language in fics is more important than fandom representation.

My fanworks tend to focus on one ship and don’t really include other characters in general. When they do, the others mostly talk about that relationship. Am I falling into the trap you mentioned? 

I feel guilty about not including or writing about *character of color’s name here*.

How do I ensure that I don’t offend anyone if I include POC in my work?

What should I do to examine myself for any implicit biases?

The rest of the post is under the cut.

I can ship whatever I want. Stop being the fandom police!

As explicitly stated several times in my post, I agree that you can ship whatever you want. I’m not targeting a specific ship. I’m not telling you to stop shipping what you ship. All I’m asking is for everyone, including myself and other POC, to regularly examine ourselves for any implicit biases. If you’re a multishipper, are all of your ships in the fandom white? If you only have one ship and it’s white, are most or all of your ships in your other/previous fandoms white? Is the only media you consume predominantly or all white? 

Shipping isn’t activism. 

No, it isn’t and in many cases, shouldn’t be seen or treated as the same thing. However, by responding this way to POC who want to see themselves represented in fanworks more and not be ignored or written stereotypically, you’re telling us that our mere existence is a “political issue.” 

Fandom is supposed to be fun. Being told what to do or not to do isn’t fun.

It should be fun for us POC too, and it’s not when we’re consistently misrepresented or we don’t exist in this fandom. By using this as an excuse to exclude POC from your works, you’re saying that only some people are allowed to have fun or that having fun is conditional. Also, no one is forcing you as an individual to do or not do anything. See two paragraphs above.

I put a lot of different people in my works, and I do research about the groups they’re in. For example, I have a *marginalized group here* character (e.g., disabled), and I did research to represent them accurately. It’s not fair to say that I don’t care about diversity.

Just like you do research for those groups, you can easily do research on POC. Also, please be aware that this statement is similar to the “I’m not racist because I have a ___ friend/have a ___ person in my works” argument that many people use to prove they’re not racist, homophobic, sexist, etc. We aren’t interchangeable with other groups. 

I don’t think people should write about POC if they’re white, just like I wouldn’t want anyone to talk about *insert topic you’re passionate about or interest group you’re in here* (e.g., the BDSM community) if they didn’t know anything about it.

Something like BDSM is a lifestyle and preference. It is a choice. Being a POC isn’t. We can’t take off our identity every time we leave the house, the way you might keep it secret at work that you’re in the BDSM scene. 

I really don’t have any knowledge about what it’s like to be a POC, though, so maybe I’m not the best person for this. If POC want to see themselves represented, they should make their own works.

We do. Also, all of us fanwork creators make works with characters who are different from us all the time. Fandom is largely composed of people who aren’t straight cis men, yet the bulk of works on AO3 features characters who are canonically or implied to be straight cis men even if we end up changing that in our works. Most of us aren’t billionaires, but we don’t have a problem writing Tony. We don’t know what it’s like to be a WWII-soldier-turned-brainwashed-assassin who was kept in cryo for decades except when deployed on missions, but we don’t have a problem writing Bucky. The list goes on.

I’m not comfortable with writing POC as I’m unfamiliar with the struggles they experience. I don’t want my writing to come off as inauthentic, inaccurate, or offensive. Why are you saying it’s harmful to use this as a reason for abstaining from writing POC?

Your concern isn’t harmful. Reducing us to our trauma is, and you��re doing that if the reason you’re not comfortable with writing POC is that you don’t know how to write our struggles. We’re not only our pain. We’re more than that.

Not every fic has to be about the trauma of being a POC. We deserve to have fun, silly fics in addition to serious, plotty drama. We’re not thinking about our suffering 24/7 even if we do think about or are affected by it a lot. It’s not like if you write a Sam/Bucky fic, Sam is going to randomly lecture Bucky about the history of Black people in the U.S. and modern enslavement through the prison industrial complex while Bucky is trailing kisses down his neck in bed. We don’t need everyone being racist to MJ in a Pride and Prejudice AU. If you do want to include their struggles because that informs the way the characters think or act in your story, you can do so in ways that feel organic. 

Additionally, this is an excuse that we hear often; you may have heard it as people in Hollywood have used it to explain why they don’t have any, or at least any major, characters from marginalized groups in their works. If we allowed this excuse, an overwhelming majority of who we see in the media would be straight, cis white men considering who has power in the film and TV industry—and we would have to say that’s okay. We would have to say that the only people allowed to write about a certain group are members of that group, e.g., only women can write women. That’s not acceptable especially considering the gatekeeping, oppression, and high barriers to entry and success that make it difficult for marginalized people to even be in the room let alone make a name for themselves.

Fandom is no different. You’re saying that you can’t relate to POC because you’re white, but none of us POC have any problems making fanworks with white characters even though we don’t know what it’s like to be white. There are straight women who write fics about gay men and don’t feel uncomfortable doing so when they don’t know a single thing about being a gay man and the struggles of gay men (M/M can include bi or pan men, fics about gay men by straight women can sometimes include problematic portrayals, and straight men, queer women, and non-binary people write M/M too, but this is just an example).

You should be more careful when writing a POC if you're not a POC. The same goes for men writing women, cis people writing trans people, straight people writing queer people, able-bodied people writing disabled people, etc. However, there ARE ways to go about it, and while I understand the fear of messing up, the truth is everyone is racist, sexist, etc. Everyone including people in marginalized groups. Being a white lesbian doesn’t mean you can’t be racist. Being an Asian man doesn’t mean you can’t be sexist. You can see that within groups themselves. POC are not exempt from racism against other POC or from internalized racism against themselves or their own group. Women aren't free from internalized misogyny. The best we can do is to not make that prevent us from making inclusive works; if you make a mistake, which may happen, all we can ask is that you try your best to be open to feedback and grow. 

It doesn’t make sense to include every single POC in my work.

No one is telling you to. Choose characters who make sense for the story. Don’t choose them just so you have a POC in your work. We don’t want them to be tokenized. 

What you said and the data you have don’t necessarily point to racism. It might just be individual preference. I prefer certain ships over others, and it has nothing to do with race/I don’t see color.

This argument is identical to the “not all _____” rebuttal (“not all men,” “not all white people,” etc.) which places the blame on a few lone individuals and shifts the conversation away from an existing widespread problem. When there’s a consistent pattern and there are many examples of it both within the fandom and in other fandoms, it no longer is about individual preference. 

I urge you to consider the following:

If most people say they don’t write about or include a POC in their work because it’s too difficult or they’re afraid of making that character inauthentic, but they don’t seem to have an issue with writing other characters from groups they’re not in (e.g., if you’re a straight woman who writes a lot of M/M fics despite not knowing what it’s like to be a bi, pan, or gay man), doesn’t that say something?

If most people have the same reasons you do about not being interested in POC (e.g., “they’re not fleshed out enough” while being interested in or fleshing out minor white characters who get the same or even less development as those characters) or ships with POC (e.g., saying “they’re like brothers” while being interested in a white ship with similar dynamics and tropes or seeing why other people might ship it if you don’t), doesn’t that say something?

If most people give characters of color the same roles in their works even if that makes them OOC and/or the role reduces them to a (frequently stereotypical) trope, especially if they’re never fleshed out beyond that trope (e.g., the funny sidekick, wise friend who always helps or gives advice/free therapy, or responsible, mature, and sometimes stern friend who “parents” the protagonist), isn’t that saying something?

If race truly isn’t a factor for you when it comes to liking characters and ships, then this isn’t about you and you don’t have to distract people from the conversation by announcing that. That said, we should all look at characters and ships we like anyway instead of assuming that’s the case as that’s good practice. How much of your list is white? If it’s mostly or entirely white, why is that the case and why do you feel differently about ships of color?

A big part of what informs my shipping is physical attraction or interest in the characters.

What characters and actors do you find attractive or interesting? Are they all or mostly white? If they aren’t, are you drawn to any ships that include those POC? Refer to the section above.

I don’t ship _____ because I see them as brothers/sisters/siblings.

Part of this is preference as it comes down to perceived chemistry and relationship dynamics. However, POC are often not seen as romantic leads both in fanworks and the media and are just friends or “brothers/sisters” (this is why Crazy Rich Asians was a big deal). Sometimes, people even argue against POC being or having love interests in the name of diversity. You see this a lot with WOC in the media where the explanation against a love interest is “she’s a strong, independent woman who doesn’t need a man”; yes, they don’t and sometimes the story doesn’t need a romance, but WOC deserve love too and it’s strange that while white women can get the guy and be independent, WOC can’t and it somehow belittles or reduces them if they do. 

The way you can gauge whether it’s just preference at play or biases you may not have been aware of is to see how many relationships featuring a character of color fall under the “just friends/siblings” category for you, what you need to ship something, and how you feel about white ships with the same type of relationship or same lack of chemistry. For instance, you may say that there needs to be enough interaction for you to ship something and that’s why you don’t care much for Rhodey/Sam. Do you feel the same way about Clint/Coulson then, which has much less interaction (actually much less than Rhodey/Sam in this case)? If it’s about chemistry, are Steve and Sam just “brothers,” but Bruce and Thor aren’t or, if you don’t ship Bruce/Thor, you still “see it” and get why other people might be into it?

What do you ship, or what ships do you understand even if they’re not for you, and how is that different from ships that follow the same beats? Why are Steve and Bucky not brothers, but Rhodey and Tony are (there are many parallels between the two relationships—and one can argue the latter is more nuanced—than appears at first glance, and Rhodey/Tony can be just as sweet or angsty)? If you like the rivals/enemies-to-lovers or meet-ugly aspect to Steve/Tony, Sam/Bucky, Scott/Jimmy Woo, and M’Baku/T’Challa have that dynamic. You like that superior/subordinate-to-lovers dynamic that Clint/Coulson has? Coulson/Fury. Flirty meet-cutes or love/trust-at-first-sight? Steve/Sam.

Some white characters and ships are popular in the MCU fandom because people bring in canon characterization or material from the comics to the character(s)/ship. Your MCU-only examination fails to account for ships with one character from the MCU and one from comics (e.g., MCU Bucky/616 Clint or Spideypool).

I explained why I focused on the MCU here and that most of the fics that feature an MCU character and comics ’verse character tend to be heavily or entirely MCU-influenced here.

Also, characters of color exist in the comics, cartoons, and games too. By this logic, Steve/Sam and Rhodey/Tony should be juggernauts in the MCU fandom considering the depth and history of the characters and relationships. Ask yourself why people are happy to ship MCU Spideypool, to draw on the comics for that relationship and even bring a non-MCU character into the MCU and write him based on his comics history and characterization. Ask yourself why people are unhappy with MCU Clint’s terrible writing and lack of characterization and decide to give him his 616 (usually Fraction-era) characterization. And then ask yourself why people don’t do that for characters of color and then use “___ is a minor character/doesn’t have much development” as an excuse for why they’re uninteresting or not shippable with others.

There are many strong and interesting relationships in the comics, but only a few make it to the MCU fandom and almost all, if not all, of them are white.

Some subfandoms just have fewer POC which means there will naturally be fewer ships featuring POC. To say that the Marvel fandom is racist as a whole is disingenuous; you can see how more diversity in the cast leads to more diverse ships in fanworks.

It’s more important to see how many fanworks there are for ships of color in a fandom than how many ships of color there are in that fandom. See how few works there are for POC ships other than MJ/Peter in the MCU Spider-Man fandom despite the diversity of the cast. See how the most popular ships are white and three of them involve white characters from the Iron Man fandom (explain to me how Harley/Peter has over 1,000 works, but Ned/Peter has 436). 

And sure, you can say almost all of the Black Panther ships feature a character of color so there’s “more” diversity, but see how few works there are for them and how works with a white character fare compare to POC-only ships (almost all have 100-200 or fewer fics, with many having so few that I didn’t include them in the post, while BP ships with a white character have more works despite little to no interaction between the characters). 

Both of these, by the way, are critical and box office hits with characters who are clearly supposed to be the faces of the MCU now that the OG6 are gone. Black Panther is an award-winning critical and box office hit, and it is, more than any other film in MCU history, a huge cultural phenomenon with tremendous impact. It broke so many records and milestones, and it’s STILL breaking and making them. It has the most nuanced and balanced ensemble cast with side characters just as three-dimensional as the lead, a rarity in MCU films. Yet, its tag only has 3,966 works, fewer in total for the whole fandom than some of the white M/M ships on this list. Even if you account for BP fanworks that may have been tagged as MCU instead of BP, the number is paltry as you can see in this post. People simply do not want to make fanworks for characters of color (in this case, specifically Black characters) and don’t. It’s not about how diverse or successful a film is.

Some of the characters and ships are popular because white characters get the lion’s share of screen time and development or they appeared in canon earlier.

Yes, that’s true, but fandom has no problem catapulting white ships with minor characters into extreme popularity. See Clint/Coulson. See fics prioritizing Happy and having him show up more than Rhodey in Steve/Tony fics. 

It’s not about chronology. Many ships of color came before white ships as a whole and before white ships with the same white character they have. See Bucky/Clint vs. Bucky/Sam. 

Lastly, please don’t tell me how certain white M/M ships came to be to explain how they’re exempt or how I’m failing to consider other factors for their popularity. I’ve been in the fandom since 2012, and I’ve seen almost all of the white ships in the fandom be born or boom into popularity. Don’t try to explain, for instance, that Clint/Coulson is big because Coulson has his own show and his fans followed him from the show (this logic falls flat when you look at something like Luke Cage); that ship became huge way before that happened and way before Agents of Shield became “big.” Also, see the section above regarding screen time, development, and fame. 

Is it racist to racebend a character? 

People’s opinions differ on racebending—and often that comes from personal background and on the situation—so I can’t speak on anyone’s behalf. However, I think everyone can agree on the following:

Racebending a white character is not the same thing as whitewashing a POC. For example, making Tony Stark Indian vs. turning T’Challa white or as canonical examples, making Fury black in Ultimates and the MCU vs. making the Ancient One or the Maximoffs white. The latter (whitewashing T’Challa, the Ancient One, and the Maximoff twins) is racist for various reasons. There’s a long history of POC being erased and white people taking roles from POC, a huge imbalance in representation between white people and POC, the unfortunate perception by the public and media that “white = neutral/standard” (Bruce’s whiteness doesn’t define his characterization and development), and the way race plays a role in influencing the way POC feel, act, and are treated.

Racebending a POC from one ethnicity or racial group to another is also problematic as we’re not interchangeable. Hollywood often does this and goes, “But they’re still a POC! We’re being diverse!” 

In general, people who racebend white characters to POC want to see more POC in canon and in the media! These aren’t mutually exclusive.

Sometimes people racebend because they’re not represented at all in their works. (This happens with other marginalized groups too; for instance, some people make cis characters trans in their fanworks as there are few to no trans characters in the canonical source.) For example, there are, as of now, no Latinx superheroes in the MCU films. Even if people wanted to, they can’t make works with an MCU Latinx superhero unless they bring one from the comics or the one Latinx superhero from Agents of Shield (if they know the comics or AoS), make a minor Latinx film character like Luis a superhero, or racebend their favorite white character and put a fresh spin on the character, drawing from their personal experience and background.

There’s a massive difference between fans racebending a character and a creator taking credit by pretending they viewed a character as non-white or didn’t see race all along when it’s clear that the character is canonically white (this is different from a creator saying they support anyone, POC or white, playing that character onscreen or onstage). 

Racist language in fics is more important than fandom representation.

We don’t have to pick our battles. Both are important! I focused on fandom representation as it’s much more quantifiable and easy to find and analyze data for than racist language on a fandom-wide scale on my own without any tools. You’re right that the latter is a problem as is racist representation in fanworks, though. 

My fanworks tend to focus on one ship and don’t really include other characters in general. When they do, the others mostly talk about that relationship. Am I falling into the trap you mentioned?

If the story is about a relationship (examining that relationship and the feelings of the characters in it) and there isn’t much of a plot outside of that, then that makes sense. However, even in situations like this, consider how much time you dedicate to characters of color vs. white characters. If the story is about a ship featuring a POC, do you spend more time on the white character of that relationship? Their white friends and how they feel about that relationship? If it’s about a white ship, do white side characters appear more than side characters of color even if the latter have a closer relationship with the protagonists? For example, does Wanda show up more than Sam or play a bigger role than him in a Steve/Bucky fic? Do you have Pepper show up all the time (or even Happy), but Rhodey is chronically absent? Do only the white characters get to be more than the tropes you’re using, if you’re using any, while the POC don’t get to be nuanced? Are there any stereotypes that you’re reducing the POC to?

I feel guilty about not including or writing about *character of color’s name here*.

See “It doesn’t make sense to include every single POC in my work.” Include the character(s) who make sense for the story, perspective you’re writing/drawing from if applicable, and central group or ship if this is a ship-specific work. For example, if you’re drawing the Avengers and you include the newer Avengers, Rhodey and Sam should appear too, not just Wanda, Scott, Bucky, and/or Carol (this happens a lot). If you’re writing a Tony POV fic that includes other characters, depending on the story, it may make sense that Sam doesn’t appear much as he and Tony aren’t close whereas he would in a Steve POV fic.

How do I ensure that I don’t offend anyone if I include POC in my work?

You can’t ensure anything as POC aren’t a monolith, but you can try to be as informed as possible and avoid common pitfalls while writing. You can do research, just the way you might research anything you’re not familiar with. You can ask if anyone is willing to do a sensitivity read while you write or before you post. You can look for betas. There are a lot of resources out there, but these are good places to start if you’re looking for more information and help:

Writing with Color - resources

Writing with Color - Stereotypes and Tropes page

Reference for Writers - POC tag

What should I do to examine myself for any implicit biases?

We should all take stock of:

our feelings about different characters and relationships, both platonic and romantic, who we prioritize in our works, and how much they’re prioritized

our decision whether or not to seek or make content with characters of color. This includes content for white ships because sometimes every white character in the MCU shows up as a side character, but characters of color don’t or all of the white characters play bigger roles than the POC despite how close they are to the protagonist(s)

the way we interpret and write/draw those characters. For example, is Sam a yes-man? A figurative or literal therapist for white friends? The bro who only cracks jokes and/or gives sage advice but seems to not have any flaws, struggles, or life of his own outside of his white friends? The BFF who thinks his white best friend is being ridiculous about another white guy and wants them to get their act together already? Does the character of color talk in the way you perceive everyone of that race to talk rather than the way they personally do (e.g., does Luis randomly and awkwardly switch into Spanish when he talks just because he’s Latinx despite never speaking Spanish with Scott? Does Sam use AAVE with Steve, Bucky, and Natasha when he doesn’t do that with them?)? 

Also, here’s a Google doc with more anti-racist resources.

Even well-meaning people can slip up or not be as proactive as they hoped they would be so it’s just good practice to check in with ourselves every once in a while and see if there’s anything we missed or didn’t notice.

[whitetrashjj]

most people that don’t like kie don’t like her because she

1. gets mad at JJ when he calls her out for being rich

2. prioritizes john b constantly because whatever feelings she has towards him gave her tunnel vision

3. tried to guilt-trip pope into missing his scholarship interview despite the fact that, like he said, she wasn’t there for any of them when big john went missing

4. talks about the gold, pope’s scholarship, and things that happen to the boys because of them living in the cut as if it’s okay to just toss them aside when it’s only okay to do that for her- seeing as she doesn’t need the money, and she doesn’t need a scholarship. the only thing that makes her a pogue is that she decided to hang out with them, which is fine but she can’t act like she goes through what people on the cut do seeing as she doesn’t actually live there or go to their school. these things are only expendable for her.

5. she tried to fight pope on the boat because he rightfully called her out on her “moral high ground bullshit”

6. she gives off performative activist. she’ll talk about saving the turtles but when jj is clearly hysterical or something with his buying a hot tub using his share, she says he could have “literally given it to any charity” as if he isn’t quite literally the charity… even without seeing the bruises it’s clear that jj is in an unstable environment with someone who doesn’t care about him and can’t support him financially.

7.she doesn’t sympathize with jj until after the jj/pope/kie hot tub group hug when she sees his bruises. she just ignores whatever he says when he mentions her financial privilege and insults him in a non-friendly way. (he insults her too obviously, but since the show never goes in depth to discuss kie’s struggles as a biracial girl or pope’s struggles as a black boy, it’s not something that jj can randomly sympathize with, seeing as it’s never brought to light. if it was brought up and jj were to react like she’s being annoying for pointing it out or pointing it out to spite him, i would have major problems with jj because acknowledging whatever privilege you have is important, especially when you’re with people that don’t have that privilege/when you’re someone whose character is supposed to be the activist type. and i’m not equating racial privilege to financial privilege, i’m just mentioning it because classism is pretty much the basis of the entire show and its plot.)

anyway… this is the reason i’ve seen most jjpopes dislike kie. mentioning the “kiara sucks” anon as if that is a blanket statement of all jjpopes is strange. we aren’t some raging misogynists out to get her, but you saying that pope is a very flawed character with no examples to back it up but also getting irritated when someone says kiara sucks with no examples to back it up is ridiculous. these are examples. since this is in response to your response to that ask, i’ll also add that while your experiences as a queer person are valid, they aren’t universal (“Any queer person knows that you can’t be as forthcoming and open about our affections as straight people are.”)

i get where you’re coming from with saying a regular character might not be outward about his feelings, but jj is not a regular character. jj is a nothing-to-lose kind of character, so your reasoning for why those many displays of affection throughout the show weren’t intended to be romantic just doesn’t really add up? of course he values pope’s friendship and wouldn’t want to risk it, but it’s also evident that he’s a very good liar and could easily say he was joking or wasn’t trying to seem like any of his actions were romantic, something you can also probably understand/have experienced as a queer person. your very statement that jj is someone who flirts with anyone is counterproductive to the statement that that means he doesn’t have feelings for pope. he flirts with every girl, but he can only form a lasting bond while also doing things you’d normally do with a crush, with pope. a lot of jjpopes including myself think he’s gay, and comphet/trying to prove to yourself that you’re straight by engaging in meaningless hookups (like jj) is reason for that headcanon. i get what you’re saying for other characters, but there’s no indication of jj not having that same nothing-to-lose attitude when it comes to people he has romantic feelings for, so there would be no reason for the pull-back or hesitation that you mentioned. and since he knows pope and his connection (whether it be platonic or romantic to both of them) is so strong, he probably assumes nothing could break that bond/dynamic either way.

also no one called you anti-black or implied that you were for saying pope is a flawed character, but it would be surprising to see one that isn’t rooted in that because all of them in the past have been- this fandom is wildly colorist and homophobic (another reason representation like jjpope is so important) and it’s extremely hard to find someone that doesn’t like pope without an explanation for their dislike that isn’t rooted in racism. that’s just common sense, though.

You know, I've been looking at this ask for a long time just wondering if it's worth my time to address all of this - like I didn't realise one could send asks this big. But I'm bored and got a beer in me so fuck it let's go.

So first let's talk about the reasons you hate Kie. I'm gonna admit that I to think she is flawed, like every other obx character, she is also a victim to bad writing and under developed. But also I just do not understand how people can hate her or insists that she is a bad person, don't get me wrong sometimes you just don't vibe with a character and there is nothing wrong with that but hating them and tearing them down is a very different thing.

Now I've said this before but let me reiterate. Not liking a character or ship or preferring one over the other does not automatically make you racist, misogynistic or homophobic. But I do think it is important to take a step back and assess our motivation and perhaps internalised biases. Sometimes you will find that you reasoning is without much substance and realise that you have some things to work on, sometimes even though mentally you don't have the conscious block there is something internalised about that - I know I have been subject to that. This doesn't make you a bad person, and you don't have to force yourself to like it or anything, but just be aware and sometimes it's okay to just remove yourself for the conversation because the people who do like it aren't supporting something that is morally corrupt and it doesn't have to be the subject of discourse. People can like different stuff.

So:

1. Did you mean pulls faces when JJ calls her rich? Cause that's what she does, gets a little annoyed, pulls a face but doesn't say anything because she know he's got a point. I'm very confused about you definition of angry and perhaps be careful about perpetuating the 'angry black woman' stereotype.

Also, I think it's important to note that clearly the kooks vs pogues divide has pretty much abolished the middle class, and you are either lower class or 'rich'. The Carrera's very clearly still struggle with money and are not on the same level of kooks as the Cameron's. So yeah, I think she's justified to roll her eyes at JJ saying she's rich as fuck and doesn't need money.

2. Prioritizes John B because his dad's gone missing, he's been abandoned by his guardian, is being threatened with being taken away from his home and everything he knows and is in general spiralling? Yeah. What a fucking monster. Also, I find it hard to find a justification for Kie having canon romantic feelings from John B that isn't just born from heteronormativity - her caring about him and then getting kissed by him does not equal a love match.

3. It wasn't about missing the interview - which wasn't until the next fucking day - it was about not giving up looking for their friend who was in a really bad way. Like - you cannot say that getting a scholarship when you are 16 is more important that John B's actual life being at stake ?

The fact that she wasn't there when John B went missing wasn't relevant? Like I've talked about why I hate Pope in this scene. But like, Pope is saying 'um you can't call me out on being a bad friend now cause you were a bad friend then'. That's the point, Kie caring so much about John B is rooted in guilt cause she wasn't there, and now she's trying to be there and support him, to prove that she's a better friend now. That's she's different, because she is.

4. I would love some specific examples of her brushing this stuff off like it means nothing. Other than the boat scene which once again, justified. And once again, Kie isn't destitute at all and no she doesn't fully understand the struggles of the boys or the cut but her family is not rolling in it and spending weekends on Yachts. Like this point is such a bloody reach.

5. I don't love that she got physical with him either. But she didn't do that because she got called out. She got upset because Pope was the one person she confided in about that happened during her kook year, about how bad it was, about the fact that she was suicidal and Sarah saved her and that's why she was so drawn to that, not because she wanted to be a kook, and Pope just throws that back in her face because he's jealous that Kie cares more about John B's problems than his.

6. Well this is just a misrepresentation of what happened. She said give it to any charity because in that moment it seemed like without a reason JJ just blew that money on stupid shit. Pope thought the same thing that's why he yells at him for not using it for restitution. In that moment he just seems like he is being drunk and irresponsible, because they didn't think he would go back to Luke, Pope literally says that he wouldn't. And then note how when they see the bruises they know what happened and the tone instantly changes cause they realise what happened. And that he did try to do the right thing and got flogged because of it. And she is right in there to comfort him and reassure him. So like... yeah.

7. Please give me example for this. I don't see Kie insulting him that isn't a justified call out or playful banter that is returned and part of their push and shove dynamic. You know... just being friends.

The only times we see Kie react to JJ's home life she is concerned and sympathetic. She's the only one who's worried about JJ going home when he storms off and is instantly there to comfort him when she knows he's had interaction with Luke. I really don't know where you are getting this from.

I don't use it as a blanket statement, I know not to group shippers in as one, I know there are jiara shippers that I do not see eye to eye with for a second. The reason I bring up the 'kiara sucks' thing is because of the context it was used. We weren't talking about Kie, it wasn't relevant, it had no reason to be there or anything to back it up. It was random bitching and as you say fandom is a very racist place so yeah, it seemed like racism to me. Like you realise you are calling me ridiculous for being annoyed that someone just came to me and said Kie sucks without reason, and then this ask goes onto be annoyed that I have some issues with Pope and that more than likely racist for thinking it because you've elected to ignore my massive post outlining my stance on this.

My experiences as a queer person are not universal, no. But I do know they are very common. I'm so thankful that there are people out there who don't experience this and I hope that in the future it will be the norm. But realistically, with what we know about JJ, I think it is more than likely that would be his experience.

Look if you headcanon him as gay say the things with girls is comphet, then that's your view and I won't fight you on it. But remember that that is a headcanon. And what I have been talking about is were they intentionally setting up jjpope and are those actions indicative of romantic attraction, which if they we're they would have made a point to frame it as comp het, which they didn't, they might in the future but for now - they aren't. In terms of being a good liar, I just- like gay panic is a very strong thing. There young girls who tell everyone they don't like hugs because they actually really liked the hugs and feel like people will know that they are gay if they hug their friend, a hug. I can't see 'I'm a good liar' being enough to overcome those sorts of feelings.

The thing is while JJ has a nothing to lose attitude when it comes to his life and future the same doesn't apply to his relationships, because the Pogues are his thing to lose, his only family, the one good thing. I can't see him just saying fuck it I could risk losing Pope. So I can't agree with you there.

First of all, I was called anti-black for not liking Pope, despite the fact that I don't hate him, and just had valid reasons for thinking he is flawed, not the devil incarnate. Two, I am well aware that this fandom is racist, like all fucking fandoms, and have talked about it. And I think that fact that I don't hate Pope and laid out very clearly the reasons I don't think he's some perfect angel that does no wrong kinda shows that I'm not just random bitching because he's black. Also - I'm a fucking Kie stan. I have to deal with people hating on Kie for the same reasons they love Sarah - it's very obvious to see people motivations there.

And you are right. An interracial mlm ship would be great representation. So would an interracial ship between the hot guy that everyone loves with the black girl - because doesn't he always end up with the white self insert? But reminder that ships don't automatically have superiority because they have 'better' representation and certainly does not represent a shipper 'wokeness'. Personally I think a platonic relationship between two men that are as close and physically affectionate as JJ and Pope - especially when one is so traditionally masculine as JJ, especially if one or both of them could be queer - would be great representation for young boys struggling with toxic masculinity.

So yeah, I think your reasons for hating Kie don't have much basis in canon. I do not give if you like her or not but.. hating her and trying to prove that people shouldn't like her, that she's not good enough for JJ and coming into my ask and putting her down for no reason, still does not sit right with me.

[normal-thoughts-official]

Ur take on a malec beauty and the beast au please

ugh you got me in a difficult position here because on the one hand, i do love the idea of a beauty and the beast malec au. i just think the idea of a socially isolated person who thinks themself/is perceived as monstruous and who has locked away their heart and doesn't believe they could ever be loved fits magnus like a glove. but on the other hand, i don't want to make magnus, a brown character, animalistic, for obvious reasons. and i can't really think of a way to make him monstruous that doesn't fall into animalization/beastification (both racist tropes) or ableist tropes

so i'm thinking... maybe the spell is just that people are repulsed by him/fear him automatically? like it just creates this horrible almost impossible to ignore repulsive/fear/"fight or flight activating" aura around him for absolutely no reason and makes ppl be repulsed and/or hate him. even if it doesn't change his appearance at all. it's not really a changing or shifting spell, more like a spell of hatred

which like.... i know doesn't sound like anything poc/queer people don't already go through but there is a main difference which is that it makes it impossible to find a community. like even other brown and queer people look at him and feel this... huge disgust and even fear and might even hide and so the isolation is absolutely total and it fucking hurts. and besides it is one thing (a very bad thing) to walk around and have to be on constant alert because you never know if someone is going to be violent, and have to deal with occasional comments and disgusted reactions... it's another to consistently have like, children screaming and people cowering 100% of the time without exception, you know? he's basically living the life ppl with social anxiety think they live and he has nowhere to turn to, no one who understands or who's more likely to actually want to talk to him because of his differences. there's no one to lean on. even the people who love him aren't immune to it, even if of course they are not turning their backs on him

so anyway here are my thoughts: this was totally done by camille lol beacuse the whole backstory about being mean to an elderly lady doesn't fit magnus anyway and also i just like sprinkling camille angst where i can. so after magnus finally got himself free of her and her stupid claws she hexxed him back into isolation. both as punishment (a kinda "if you don't want me, then you have no one" logic) and just to make him more vulnerable because again, abusers want you alone and isolated and away from a support network so you are more dependant on them and more likely to buy into their thwarped logic if they can immerse you in it. so she's just trying to manipulate him into getting back with her, because she wants him and most of all his power

and basically you know the drill, if he doesn't find anyone who will love him romantically until the rose withers yada yada he will die. and again she just wants to make the spell so it constantly drives home how alone he is and how he can't find anyone who will love him (except for her), and make it so he's more and more likely to come back to her as time goes by because then the spell will be broken

(sidenote: camille obviously doesn't actually love him, because anyone who does that to someone doesn't love them. but as the one who cast the spell, she can lift it whenever she wants. so all she has to do is kiss him and lift the spell and be like "see, magnus? who else would love you like this, but me? even after all these years?". and honestly if it had come to that magnus would know she was lying because there is no way this is love, none. but anyway it doesn't come to that, that's just what her plan is)

anyway it still doesn't work because magnus is done and he won't get back to her, and he particularly doesn't want to get back with her after, you know, all this trashfire. and he just sets his jaw and is like "fine" and accepts that he will live however long he still has with his friends and people he loves and away from her, basically

and like gosh sidenote but this would have been so painful for his friends. camille very deliberately made it romantic love because she knows magnus has so many fucking people who love him, but him and the immortal squad have found family dynamics, not romantic ones. so there is nothing they can do even though their love for magnus is just... so real and pure and they hate to see him like this, hate to know that right when he finally got rid of her she made sure he still couldn't go out in the world. especially since magnus has always been so damn sociable, loved to be surrounded by people and to meet them and care for them. but here he is, walking as hidden as he can and with his head down avoiding eye contact because he knows the horror is there and some children run away screaming when they see him

and i just picture this desperate little scene with raphael in particular where he's just like.... "i'll try to kiss you. we have to try" and magnus is all, "my boy, you don't even like kissing, and she was very adamant that it had to be romantic" and raphael is almost in tears like "but i do love you, goddamn it! i should be able to undo this spell" and it's so sweet that he's trying and willing to be in this really awkward position where he kisses (yikes) magnus (which is just weird especially since magnus is kind of a father figure to him) because he's just... so desperate to have him free of her, finally, once and for all, you know?

but obviously it doesn't work, not even with dot, who had a kinda fling with him in the past but doesn't really feel Romantic Love™ for him even though she does love him, it's just... not what the spell requires. and it's unfair as hell and there are lots of tears but just the fact that magnus falls asleep surrounded in a teary cuddle pile after some of the absolute worst kisses of his life because his friends/family love him enough to put themselves in such an uncomfortable position in the hopes of making him free, is enough to make him feel a little better. and the fact that they are still there for him and obviously still love him so fiercely even though looking at him now literally evokes fight or flight instincts in them is already more than anything camille could ever give him. if anything, she's proven how loved magnus is

and that helps him get through it that day and is something he tries to hold unto in the worst days, but still, it's hard and it just... sucks. it's tiring to go out in the street and always have people staring at you and to see the horror in their faces and be so isolated and never really know what might happen, if he will be attacked or harrassed or what exactly will happen. so he isolates himself more and more and soon the only people who ever see him or visit him are his friends. and fuck, do they hate seeing him like this

things settle in a weird kind of way. magnus is still living his life and working as a wizard and etc and in a way the spell even helps him have some more credibility because you know, isolated scary person is kinda what ppl expect from wizards. but he avoids having contact at all costs and mostly sends the potions they request and stuff their way, and the only ppl he sees are his friends unless he absolutely can't avoid going outside. and he's fucking miserable. and every once in a while camille will come back to be like "so, magnus, are you ready to stop with this little tantrum of yours and come back to me now? how is the rose doing, by the way?" because god forbid he catches a break

also it turns out that magnus' adoptive streak becomes even stronger because he is 1- extra lonely; and 2- empathizing more than ever with the outcasts. don't get me wrong, he always has, he's a fucking brown, bi trans man for fuck's sake. we all see ourselves in the stray dogs and lonely people one way or another. but now this is turned up to a thousand, so, you know

so he has one (1) extra kind of contact in his life which is basically with stray animals (particularly cats cuz u know, this is magnus) that he finds around in need of help. they can all leave if they want, but a lot of them stay, particularly the black cats, disabled animals, and others that have a particularly hostile environment outside. you know

(not me again with my very specific hcs about deaf pitbulls who fall in love with my faves but LOOK pitbulls are very sweet and caring animals who don't deserve the fame of monsters that they have and if the idea of one being best friend's with magnus and them having a loving and caring relationship doesn't appeal to you then idk what the fuck to tell you)

this of course doesn't help his image cuz this guy is just going there and collecting black cats and snakes and has a huge pitbull around with him at all times but it's not like it can get any worse so magnus doesn't care, and besides, he can't just leave them out to die in the cold and harrassment of middle ages white ppl who think black cats are the worst possible thing but rats carrying deadly diseases are fine (and look, i know rats are also animals that get a lot of shit and persecution, but like, seriously, clean the streets)

and every once in a while there will be a person in need too, like a homeless person in need of a place to stay or some sick person who has been abandoned or something of the sort, so magnus brings them in as well and cares for them as well as he can, but also tries to maintain minimal contact because he's been burned too many times, okay

so like, cue alec! i know in the original BATB belle ended up with the beast to save her father's life but fuck that. i lowkey consider making it "izzy ran away from home so alec comes after her and they both end up staying with magnus" but i think i like it better if it's just alec who decided to leave. like he's done with the abuse both towards him and his sister and he wants to be able to live his life even if he's gonna have to start over in some other village all alone. anywhere but here and all that

and of course alec used to be plenty rich and he has a lot of skills that help him pass by - he's a good archer and hunter, he's a good leader and organizer so he could do wonders for a failing business, he's smart and cunning - but he also has, like, 2 gold coins to his name. maybe some more from stuff he took from home and sold, but still

initially he is living at a tavern and i guess i'm making simon, raphael, and maia tavern owners again! i don't even care anymore, it suits them. rapha is the cook and the three of them run the business and simon also makes musical appearances during dinners every once in a while, and they are living the happy queer polyamorous life of their dreams. we have no choice but to stan

anyway alec is staying with them and he becomes friends with i think maia in particular since, you know, she is the one with the most contact with the customers since rapha is in the kitchen and simon is up the stage most of the time. plus they are both the same brand of bastard and they have an easy understanding between them that just works

and look! simon, raphael, and maia are 3 trans, non-christian/non-white (unnecessary addendum: the concept of whiteness didn't exist until around the 17th century, but whiteness as a concept came basically as a substitute for christianity [link to source], so i'm counting the fact that simon is jewish and raphael and maia are not culturally european as equivalent to non-whiteness in this context) people, so it's not like they would ever kick a gay man running from an abusive home out. but you know what they also are? magnus' friends. and after a while of talking to him maia thinks he is trustworthy enough for them to send magnus' way, because magnus needs as many friends as possible. plus, he wouldn't kick a person in need out, so unlike with them magnus can't really push this newcomer away so he'd have more company. plus, the possibility that he might fall in love with magnus and undo the stupid spell is there, i'm just saying! i'm not saying it WILL happen but why not give it a fucking shot?

raphael in particular is of course super protective of magnus and he swears to god that if this guy gives him half a bad look raphael will end him, which earns him some pats on the shoulder for his troubles and "rapha, we don't want magnus to be hurt either"s. maia says that she's been assessing him for quite a while now and she's pretty positive that he won't be terrible to magnus, but if she's wrong, she'll kill him personally too. and rapha trusts maia. how could he not? she's maia

so, they send alec magnus' way. "i'm sorry alec, but we are struggling to make ends meet *hides gigantic gold stash* and the tavern is packed *raphael upstairs stomps at maximum speed to make it seem like their 13 empty rooms upstairs actually have people* and we really need your room to give to this customer *simon in a wig* BUT we have a friend who we're sure will give you shelter if you ask, it's not very far away, and once we have a free room we will let you know". and alec is just like, okay, because he's been staying there for free or considerably less than the usual fee/in exchange for some stuff he hunts for quite a while now, and they are nice, so it's not like he can complain

and they don't tell him about the spell exactly because it is not their story to tell but they do let him know what to expect re: magnus' vibes and say it's a spell. and alec's like ok i guess. alec's very practical, he doesn't really care, and it's not like it's the guy's fault anyway. which is exactly why maia is sending alec there

so they send magnus a heads up ("magnus this guy is HOMELESS and we are SOOOOO packed can you please give him shelter for a little while thx xoxo"). alec arrives there a while later carrying like 3 prime rabbits he has hunted as a thank you gift because he hates being dependant on people but it's not like jobs abound in the middle ages, and he is actually a little embarrassed to go in and ask this guy he doesn't know for shelter but he IS kinda desperate. for now

anyway he is standing there with his 3 rabbits debating whether or not to knock on the door and magnus just opens it magically like "i know you're there, dear, just come in" so alec does and awkwardly presents him the rabbits and shit and is all "thanks for letting me stay, uh. i can help you with food and taking care of the house and stuff" even though, you know, magnus has magic and doesn't need it

(and magnus appreciates it deeply, because it is tiring to do it all magically on his own but most non-magical people don't even consider that)

and like... it is very awkward at first because magnus does NOT trust at all and he mostly just wants to keep away from anyone who can... look at him. but they ARE living together (oh my god they were roommates!! just kidding they each have their own room but you get it) so it's inevitable. but like magnus' insecurity makes him keep to himself for long times and makes things awkward, kinda like how the initial days with the beast and belle the beast was rude and kinda shitty except magnus is not shitty, just... private

and maybe the subject even comes up like "thanks for the meal alec. i'll go eat it in my room" "i mean, you could eat here if you want" "and ruin your appetite? no thank you" and alec is just like "*shrug* it won't ruin my appetite. unless you are my parents, the concept of failure, or some girl wanting me to marry her, i don't think there's a lot the spell can do to make me scared. besides, you literally have a kitten on top of your head right now and you refuse to remove it and are using a spell to keep her from jostling when you move" "her name is Fluffy, and she is sleeping!" "right, my bad" "wait did you say the concept of failure?" "yea"

it's not that the spell doesn't work on alec; it does, just like it works on his friends. but he is willing to go beyond that initial repulsive reaction that he knows is illogical anyway (and alec is the kind of guy who is just like "if my feelings aren't logical, i don't listen to them" which in this case is useful lmao). and the thing is that once you get to know magnus there is nothing about him that is scary, and the feeling just becomes completely ignorable, because humans are nothing if not adaptable. but most people don't want to go through the trouble to try, and magnus himself doesn't want to let himself be vulnerable enough to give them a chance because there IS a great chance that he will be met with some level of aggression, even if it's an unintentional microaggression

and eventually they grow closer and build trust. i think this happens particularly when camille steps in for one of her regularly schedule shoving-it-in-magnus'-face visits and alec is just like. "hey why don't you just use magic to keep her away?" and magnus realizes that he never even THOUGHT of that and like, jesus, how much has he been unconsciously torturing himself? so he does it, and he ends up telling alec about the story of the spell, which might be the first time he's told someone that didn't know him before the spell was cast

(alec: "so she's basically just killing you slowly?" magnus: "don't be silly, alexander. torturing me first is the most important part". and he sounds self deprecating and almost resigned and god alec feels murderous)

ohh but wait bonus: magnus says that she will only undo the spell if he gets back with her, he doesn't mention that it technically can be undone by romantic love or whatever bullshit's going on because he doesn't believe it can happen anyway, so, who cares

anyway! time goes by. fun fact: alec and magnus get along really fucking well. magnus is so so smart and knowledgeable and he shows alec many of his inventions that never got to see the light of day or that were stolen by someone else who wasn't cursed and took all the credit. he also fascinates alec with his magic, but mostly with his personality. there's something just endlessly endearing about this guy who is so fucking proud of his puns and so so nice and gentle to every creature he encounters, be it a kitten or a pitbull, who's letting alec stay with him for no reason other than that alec needs it

and alec is so goddamn appreciative of it because like he IS and we stan! and he's always trying to give back to magnus which is kind of a rarity, but most of all he's also extremely funny beneath the whole no-bullshit attitude, he's caring and fierce and resourceful and strong (so's magnus) and they click so well. they can also talk about their similar experiences with like, abuse and trauma without making it super heavy and they're just,,, so supportive of each other. so like yeah surprise surprise they fall in love

but they don't really say anything because (on magnus' part) that's just fucking ridiculous, he's a monster; and (on alec's part) he will put magnus is a way too uncomfortable position if magnus doesn't like him that way and they will just... be living together. and magnus will feel like he has to compensate to alec somehow and alec doesn't want that. it's just complicated when one of them is dependant on the other, and besides, alec has had very little to offer magnus so far

(no, he has no idea how much his company means to magnus and has brighted his depressed ass life. he is stupid)

sometimes magnus' friends visit and they're always just so happy for him, to see how he's hanging out more and let someone into his life after so long. it earns him a lot of forehead kisses and "i'm so happy to see you like this". and over time he starts to invite them over more as well as just open up back to the people in his life :')

angsty but also kind of fluffy sidenote: i picture that every time they kiss his forehead or cheek or whatever they linger for a little while and then open their eyes slowly and sigh like "i had been hoping that it would work this time. magnus, you know i love you, right?" and magnus is all like "i know just from you saying that, darling. it's just not how the spell works" and aaa

and like to be extra clear im not saying that alec fixes him or romantic love heals him or whatever, just that having let someone in, someone who didn't know him before the spell, and have them completely accept him and realize how much he had been missing out re: touch and human contact helps him realize how much he misses his friends and how pushing them away is stupid when they've never been anything if not supportive of him. they don't care that he's cursed. and obviously magnus was already on the way to that if he even managed to let alec in anyway

anyway! dramatic healing scene. LOOK. usually i'd be all for "they don't change back actually because people don't have to look beautiful to be lovable". like the original BATB disappointed me sooo badly because i had just been hoping that he'd stay the same way and still be loved. but in this case it's not that magnus doesn't look beautiful! it's that the spell has made him be hated by people for no reason other than existing. and breaking the spell is not changing magnus himself, it's changing that hatred. so, yeah. i'm not saying it's a deep metaphor or anything, just, you know daudhasdja it's different from the usual monster thing

and i'm torn here because on the one hand i LOVE the drama of the original BATB where everyone decides to gather to kill the beast and belle saves him and shit, but idk if it fits with the vibe ive been building here. no actually @ me shut the fuck up. you know how i mentioned that they kick camille out with magic finally? i actually had no intentions of following through with this in any way but like of COURSE she would be absolutely pissed out of her mind and want to get back in some way, we already know she's vindictive. so i'm gonna use that. this is what neil gailman meant when he said that writing is just making a rough draft and then writing it again but like it's on purpose this time

anyway! so after they yeet her camille is obviously furious and fuming and it might have finally dawned on her that magnus will NOT fucking cave and she is losing power over him, not gaining it. so she decides to play a last card and get him to almost die so he kind of HAS to take her bid, you know? so she makes up some shit about how magnus has kidnapped the lightwood heir and she's only now hearing about it, and no one else is safe and yada yada. and she has "proof" because alec IS indeed there and again the spell just helps everyone easily agree with her that magnus is That Kind Of Guy or whatever, and middle ages ppl weren't exactly waiting for a good enough reason to grab their pitchforks. and they don't even KNOW about the spell, really. all they know is that he's very powerful, secluded, and they all fear and almost hate him just from one look

so camille makes up some bullshit story about how he made a deal with the devil to become extra powerful, and that the source of his powers is the rose, so they have to get rid of the rose to kill him. (sidenote: i never understood why the hell the rose was never used as a weakness against the beast. like was he keeping it super guarded and safe just for the fucking shits?) so they devise an attack so someone can sneak up and get the rose, and camille makes up some bullshit story about how they have to destroy the rose a specific way so it takes longer and she has time to manipulate magnus before he dies. man, it's easy to be a villain when your target is secluded

anyway! big attack at magnus' house. magnus' friends don't hear about it until it's too late because camille knows exactly who they are and warned them that they were on "the witch's" side. alec is maybe away hunting when it happens? camille obviously has magic in this AU so she can check for that information. maybe she even says that she will be the one responsible for finding the lightwood heir so there is minimal risk of him revealing that she lied lmao

oh no, violence! they battle and yada yada. catarina is probably the first one to realize what is happening because i figure she, madzie, and dot are the ones who live closest to magnus'. they send fire messages and get ragnor, simon, maia, raphael, and meliorn to help. oh yeah, and alec i genuinely forgot trust me to forget about romance in a romance-focused au. but alec is the only one of them without any magical resources and he's far away and on foot, so he's gonna be the last to get there, which camille had been counting on

but alec or no alec, they can keep the attackers at bay because they're all powerful and smart and shit and a lot of them have magic as opposed to the mundanes who don't, but of course that's mostly because they are holding off on attacking and the invasion is mostly a distraction because their PLAN is to use the rose. and camille tells them all to leave once the petal puckering starts so she can "protect them from any lashouts" (have her big villain speech). and it's not like any of magnus' friends is gonna leave to go after them when magnus is dying, bUT they also won't attack camille because she's his only hope. and they won't be able to get to stop the rose plucking in time because that's in another room and while she made it slower than something that the person can use to kill him in a second it's also not slow enough for them to get there on time (maybe there's a spell against magic use near where magnus keeps the rose? just for extra safety, so the ones with magic can't portal there or whatever)

anyway. big villain speech. magnus screams in pain every time a new petal is plucked. his friends are either running to the rose thing desperately or trying to get camille to stop this madness, she's going to kill him for fuck's sake. i don't know which chooses to do what so you can figure that out i guess. and for that extra drama, right when the last petal was going to be plucked, wee woo alec lightwood arrives! and he went straight for the rose because magnus had told him about it and he figured that there was a good chance the attackers might go for it. so he shoots the person's leg or something and gets them away from the rose and yay, day saved! mostly. because now there is only one petal left to fall before magnus dies, so at the very least, his lifespan has been shortened considerably. also, he is still in pain

i'm torn about what happens to camille then. on the one hand, i love killing camille! bonding activities for the whole family. on the other, she kinda is the only one who can save him now. they all know magnus won't want to get back with her, but hey, it's not like camille wants a relationship! she wants magnus to be her asset. a relationship was just the best way to get him to do that she had initially. but magnus doesn't want to cave and be dependant of her, so, you know. but maybe they can try to convince her to stop this fucking madness, god knows how

so okay yeah no camille-killing yet because they don't want to jeopardize magnus' safety, so she just leaves convinced that either way, she wins, and this might be the best possible scenario actually because magnus will have lots of times to think it over and be real desperate and come to her and strike a deal. so, yay her! she just needs to lie to the mundanes that the mission was successful or whatever, and it's not like that's gonna be hard because magnus won't want to be seen there again, so

we are all running to check up on magnus now. he's kinda like, on the ground coughing blood, but he'll live for as long as the last rose doesn't fall. still, they all settle on trying to help him, getting him in bed, tending to his wounds, etc. and thinking about what the fuck they are all going to do now. so you have raphael and maia making magnus soup, simon running his mouth as he throws around ideas on how they can fix this, ragnor, cat, dot, and madzie (who is here now that the danger is over ofc) checking and rechecking magnus' vitals for the billionth time and trying to figure out how much time they have, meliorn using their fae powers to stop his pain. and madzie is all snuggled in bed with magnus holding his hand and asking if he wants her to tell him a bedtime story, and magnus just... feels cared for and loved

alec meanwhile i think would tell what ACTUALLY happened to the person who was doing the rose thing - i actually have thought about it and think it might make sense for it to be luke. just because i love him and it kinda fits the whole "initially sided with shadowhunters, lately became a downworlder" thing. and like luke genuinely believed he was saving a person/people so alec brings him in too and magnus is all "catarina, dear, can you help heal his leg? i would, but i don't think i have enough magic right now" because he is the sweetest man immediately wanting to help the guy who almost killed him. and luke is in awe

(and alec brings him on purpose, too, because he knows that anyone who actually talks to magnus for a little while will see what an amazing person he is. and he hopes that luke, as a mundane, can tell the others that and turn them against camille)

and after that, of course, alec sits down by magnus' side and Does Not Leave. he's just there holding his hand and talking to him and magnus' friends, who are all also kind of. sitting there, trying to snuggle up in a gigantic pile of like 10 ppl to cuddle close to magnus and make sure he feels loved and cared for and that they know he is real. madzie gets special privileges in that sense because she's smaller and also a kid, so she gets to be kinda snuggled up with him. so alec has to be content with holding magnus' hand lmao (which he is, he's just happy that he's alive and okay. and he has a whole plan to get camille to undo the spell, mostly involving getting the mundanes against her and telling her that she is only safe for as long as magnus lives, because once he dies, she will have a bunch of ppl who will hunt her down to the faces of the earth to make her pay for what she did to him. the only reason they didn't do that yet is because she can still save magnus' live, so is she really going to let him die knowing that she will be next?)

so alec takes his hand and tells magnus that they will fix this, he promises, and give a little kiss on magnus' hand. just a little peck, no deep intentions, but magnus gasps a little because he feels something, and his eyes water a little bit because he's so touch starved and tired and hurt and alec kissed his hand and he can feel this kind of ache inside him, somehow a good ache, but he just can't explain it. and so alec notices his watery eyes and he very tenderly wipes his tears away and tells him that they're all on his side, will always be, and kisses him on the forehead. and this kiss? this kiss is full of adoration and love and purpose, and magnus gasps and the wounds that hadn't been healed suddenly mend together, and the petals that had fallen go back to the rose before it disappears in a beautiful flash of light, and suddenly magnus' magic is back full force and he just looks at himself for a second, and everyone erupts into joy because holy shit, the spell is broken

and alec is so confused because again! he didn't kNOW about the whole true love's kiss thing or he would have asked magnus to let him kiss him as soon as he learnt about his feelings, because even if magnus didn't feel the same way, alec could undo the spell. and he's like "why the hell didn't you tell me?? we could have fixed this months ago" and magnus is like "i didn't think it would make a difference. wait, you're in love with me? have been for months?" and alec is like "first of all, yes. second of all, i have nothing else to say, i just said 'first of all' because i was so indignant"

and magnus laughs and jumps on him and kisses him on the mouth this time and they are both smiling and laughing into it and so so happy. and raphael is kind of just peppering kisses on maia's face too, like, "you were right, he undid the spell, thank you" and maia was never sure that this would happen but she will take the credit actually please and thank you

and they all live happily ever after and kill camille together the end i guess. god this post was so long i'm so sorry