#I don’t know. some people might disagree with me. I know I’m very privileged to still even be able to use mouth words still

[zebulontheplanet]

I think as an AAC user, I get jealous. I get jealous of those who can chose to use it or don’t use it (I have the choice to not use it, but then I just won’t communicate). I use AAC basically full time in public, and use it sorta at home. I prefer mouth words at home but I usually use It throughout the day.

I know this is probably horrible, but I can’t help but feel jealous of those who don’t need it to just get words out. For their mouth to work. It’s hard to be someone that feels like they have a brain and mouth disconnect. To have words that won’t come out so you HAD to get AAC.

I don’t know, I just feel very jealous of those who don’t constantly struggle with words. Who don’t stutter over their words, who are able to get their words out, who aren’t declining in speech. My speech just continues to get worse and it’s hard to go through that. It’s all just hard.

[waitingforeddyneddy]

Lmao I AM the old mod from Reddit. Just a few points

1) my friend did see them at merrily we roll along. Idk why this changes things. I still don’t like Ariana, she’s an ass. And I find it very telling that JB hangs out and associates with her and it HAS dimmed my interest in him, I still like HIM, but it’s definitely annoyed me. I won’t be seeing wicked, and I’m not convinced it will be good. 2 parts? Why?

2) I do still feel like the JB sub is very strict with voicing opinions. One of my comments recently got locked because I mentioned that I didn’t think JB should brag about meeting president Biden at the moment and I was told not to bring politics into the sub. Somewhat difficult, when JB is angling himself as a political activist/foundation member. But fair enough, it’s their sub and their rules.

3) I didn’t say Simone was jobLESS, I said it was weird she didn’t book as much as her counterparts. I put 0 blame on Simone for this btw - I said I feel like her management team was dropping the ball. Being the lead in a top show on Netflix should have put her on the short list for actresses that year. Fast forward to now, & the strike has delayed whatever project she’s in. That sucks. Because the only thing we’ll have seen from her in the last two years is Bridgerton s2 & 3.

4) I agree JB didn’t do much press for s2. And I still say, he won’t for 3. I didn’t say he’s too big for it. I said he might not want to, and if he’s busy (wicked reshoots and whatever project he books next - a play? Idk) he probably won’t make room for it. Also? Why would I think he’d do press for 3 when they *barely* promoted him for 2. He got his solo articles for 2, he’s not going to do that for 3.

I don’t really remember what else was in the comment but here you go!

Y’all don’t like JB (some of you even hate him) and that’s fine, everyone’s allowed an opinion. I wouldn’t say I’m a huge fan of Simone, I don’t hate her, I just don’t really care either way and people were really pissed at my opinion that she should have booked more after s2 lol.

I read your comments because I agree with some of the things posted, I disagree with a lot. But isn’t that what open dialogue is about?

Anyways, happy holidays!

happy holidays to you anon

listen, you know what I think about JB, I won't say that I hate him cause at the end of the day I can't hate a person I will never meet. I feel an intense dislike for him based on his public persona. Kudos to you for admitting that your interest in him has dimmed. If I was his fan I would be much the same cause you have to admit he surrounds himself with nasty people. Ariana Granda was an asshole way before she came out as a serial homewrecker, there's no one I hate more than privileged celebrities who use their fame and money to treat regular people as trash and we all know those horror stories that always surrounded her about her treatment of workers. Lmao she basically admitted she's a cunt in one of her songs, when people tell you who they are, believe them. As for JB, I don't know if his friendship with her is PR or not, It kinda doesn't make sense since I think his Wicked character doesn't even end up with her right? (I don't know Wicked very well) but it was very obvious those photos were staged because the way they were acting was embarassing and the fact that he keeps bringing them up and the buzz they generated as something surprising is even more embarassing for him. This is why I think he's fake as hell. What do you mean you can't believe people were talking about them and the fact some people thought they were a couple? Not everyone knows you're gay buddy, and they way you and and one of the most famous pop stars were all over each other is bound to create talk so stop acting kind of annoyed about the "straight allegations". Then there's his whole friendship with Matt Bomer, another gay man who wasted a good opportunity to shut the fuck up and punctual as a clock posted an israeli flag on his insta. The reality of Fellow Travelers is there for all to see. Paramount, the conservative author, the producers, writers and cast members seem to be zionists and JB himself was part of Israeli pink washing propaganda. Honestly kudos to you for saying your fave talking about being happy about meeting Biden is not a brag and them telling you to keep quiet is another reason JB fans are the biggest hypocrites cause what the fuck does it mean keep politics out when JB himself said he wants to be political lmao? he photodumped his israel vacation, he's proud of his zionist show, he's happy about meeting Biden. Ladies and gentlemen, I think it's best if you start accepting your fave is not on the right side of things at all, yikes. He's one of the cast members of Bridgerton who said he wants to be political but couldn't bother to post ANYTHING regarding a simple call for a caesefire, in the name of human rights being stomped and all the kids who are losing their parents or even worse their lives. Fucking yikes. And he wants to be political? Does he think being political is only about going to galas, meeting famous people and having drinks? Or does he think it's only all about queer rights? He's white, he's rich, I think he can afford to speak about queer rights AND human rights since he wants to get "political". Nah, I don't think he's a good person at all and the more I see and read the more I feel validated in my opinion.

As for Simone and her career...I don't know what's going to happen, I'm patiently waiting for news, she seems happy and I'm good with that. Of course I wish for more, we'll see. I don't think it's right to compare her to her other costars. Actors from Bridgerton who have been booked and busy are Phoebe and JB, they're both white with connections. Even Rege, who was the actor everyone couldn't stop talking about when Bridgerton came out, didn't book much. I mean he did a couple of movies but nothing that matched the level of hype he got. We all know why.

[hanarchy]

i keep losing followers bc of posting abt palestine and i know people online are generally of the attitude ‘cut those ppl out’ but like. that’s not cool? like i’m sorry but personally using my privilege or whatever mostly means obviously trying to influence policy (protesting, writing reps, trying to organize or at least learn how to etc.) BUT also and crucially that it’s safe for me to argue and have discussions and try to talk to people

and i don’t really have social media accounts where i only have followers. most of my socials are filled with people that i talk to personally and these people just unfollowing instead of talking to me makes me very sad.

i’m guessing that people unfollow for one of two reasons, either curating their feed or that they disagree/think that i’m wrong. if the first is the case that’s disappointing bc like… they could just mute me or tell me they’re unfollowing. and that would be disappointing but ultimately it’s their business and we can argue abt it at some other point.

and if it’s the latter i’m just disappointed that they wouldn’t try to talk to me about it. like explain your position to me!!! let me know the sources and the research you did!!! tell me why you think i’m wrong, i’m a reasonable person and even if we likely will never agree (and tbh yeah the friendship *might* end over it but i’ve spoken to several ppl who are more ‘moderate’ than me on this and i can see and understand their position) at least trust me enough to hear you out?? like for many of these people they are far away or former friends so a mutual unfollow is basically ending the friendship anyway? idk man.

[circular-bircular]

Clearing The Air About Sophie

I mean, since she posted something, and since I still get regular asks about her, and since we’ve had a whole grudge and personal feud thing going on for (months? years? time is an illusion to those of us with trauma based amnesia), I do kind of want to respond. Going to put it under a cut for all those uninterested in Sophiecourse.

Side note: This isn’t for Sophie. Like she says on her post, this isn’t an olive branch. It’s just… Getting thoughts and feelings out.

TL;DR: I actually agree with what she said about my personality flaws, I know them and work on them in therapy! I don’t hate Sophie, and I don’t really hate anyone else for that matter. I believe everyone needs chances to grow and change – transphobic, fakeclaiming assholes too. I’m tired of people punching at the mods of SAS who try their best and are pro-endo. I’m tired of people lumping me in with anti-endos when I really do not hang out that much with them. I’m tired of hearing the term “hate-group” thrown around because it has a very different definition than what’s being used and also I am white and privileged I should not be the voice on this! I’m tired of people yelling about SN when I’m not even in that server any longer. And, most of all, I’m tired of people dragging this drama on continuously in the public eye. Let it fucking rest, and please let this be the final essay I have to write about the topic.

Firstly, I want to address: A lot of what Sophie says is absolutely correct. I am loyal to a fault. I have allowed myself to get into a lot of situations that are incredibly fucking harmful, all in the name of being loyal to either a cause or a friendship.

This has led to me being set so far back in my recover lately that I’ve flinched at my partner touching me, split a new part in August of this year, and started obsessively stalking blogs again in the desperate need to know everything, just to appease anyone who might be curious.

I also agree that I mean… I really don’t hate Sophie. I hate a lot of her actions, and a lot of her takes, but I don’t hate her. I simply don’t hate people. It isn’t in my nature. I have a very intense dislike for her, but as she said – coke and mentos. I would likely go “oil and water,” but I think coke and mentos fits more, given my propensity for exploding. Trauma does shake one up.

Secondly: I want to address some of the negatives she’s said that I disagree with, or I feel her personal grudges might be impacting too much.

That’s how I see SAS, who will adopt labels like “syscourse enraged” or “pro syscourse conversation” on Tumblr, while their partner heads over to r/systemscringe to tell the anti-endos that SAS is “100% anti-endo” so they can get that sweet r/systemscringe demographic. SAS’s stance is whatever they think will convince the most people to listen to them.

I would greatly appreciate if people were to stop lumping SAS under that anti-endo label as well, as me and the person they’re actually referring to (Dude) agree on many things (and yes, disagree as well, as is only healthy in a fucking friendship). People so frequently ignore the things SAS has posted about endogenic systems that acknowledges their existence, while simultaneously condemning the entire mod team for the actions of… [checks] a singlet on reddit?

I would not be friends with the mods of SAS if their beliefs fundamentally opposed mine. If any of them were regularly fakeclaimers, harassers, or doxxers, I would be blasting them on each of my blogs that I could, with screenshotted proof (as I tend to do). The fact is, none of them are anti-endo. The one I would say fits closest to that label is Mod Signal, who’s opinions on endos seems to simply be, “god, I don’t want to fucking talk about that, can I PLEASE talk about the etymology of the word dissociative and the intersection of POC and medical spaces?” (Signal, you can correct me if I’m wrong on that, I just feel that’s the vibes).

The fact of the matter is, SAS – every mod there – is a traumatized individual who has made countless mistakes. I disagree with a lot of what Mod Dude has done and said, but not in such a way that it makes me ignore the words being said. He genuinely wants people to live their best lives and recover, while also groaning and laughing at the frankly ridiculous ableism in the world. And he calls that out, and points it out, and tries to clarify.

I don’t find that bad. There’s a reason why we’re friends.

Say, for instance, your friend is under fire for fakeclaiming and transphobia, and your response is to come up with a list of things the victim said to deserve it.

Sigh.

I am no longer a moderator at the Survivor’s Network. At the time of the post Sophie is referring to here, where the user fakeclaimed her with vicious transphobia, I wasn’t online, nor active in the server – I was busy that day, and couldn’t be attentive. I’ve raked myself over the coals endlessly about not being present 24/7 to discuss every last take coming from individuals in that server due to this obsession tumblr has had that any take from SN was clearly supported by everyone there.

It wasn’t.

I nearly left that day, and only stuck around because (as Sophie herself said) I am intensely loyal. And the individual took a step back, and when they came back, some new fire needed putting out. They had lost all memory of the post in question – and I had as well. It’s unfortunate.

When the post resurfaced, the user in question was guilt stricken and absolutely mortified that they had done that. This does not excuse the behavior. They could identify which part had gotten triggered enough to say that, and what led to them being triggered from her blog. This does not excuse the behavior. They wrote an apology to the server, as their actions now (somehow, someway) reflected on every individual in the server, and (more importantly, and accurately) apologized for how their actions might be making the server members feel unsafe. This does not excuse the behavior.

The “making excuses” she lists is the list of things I wrote out while in an incredibly triggered state where I tried to provide context for what could make an individual state such heinous, disgusting things about another person. Because I do not hate others. Not even transphobic, fakeclaiming assholes. They are all simply people, and I understood why this happened. I did not defend the action, but I defended the person. He didn’t deserve hatred; he deserved the chance to redeem himself.

Perhaps I’m too kind. But I believe everyone deserves chances to change. And given that he immediately privated the post (but not deleted, so that if people had questions, he still had the post to show them so he could prove his transgressions), stepped back massively from syscourse, and started discussing more about the self care he was doing to become a less hateful person, I believed he was making that change.

When the place this individual made alongside my friends came under fire for things that were complete fabrications and lies, I included that list in the document detailing each and every allegation. For transparency. Just like the document stated. I also wrote that piece while, once again, triggered and dissociated out of my mind. I was fully in my headspace, as a new part who did not even know her name, and having just abandoned everyone I knew and loved from Survivor’s Network.

I am no longer friends with that individual. Please do not lump me in with that space any longer, as they deserve better than syscourse drama in a space that is dedicated to growth and healing.

I will say this again, for those who did not hear: I do not, and never will, condone transphobia or fakeclaiming of others, regardless of your beliefs about them. Everyone deserves a baseline of respect. No matter their beliefs about anyone else, they deserve basic respect.

I have been harassed endlessly for that belief. It genuinely hurts the amount of times I’ve been accused now of defending transphobia, bullying, harassment, and fakeclaiming (not just from Sophie, but from various hate anons I’ve blocked or the countless plural servers I am no longer allowed to venture into due to being banned for “my actions” when they weren’t mine to begin with). I am not that person, and I’m so tired of being painted that way due to my desire to give people second chances.

Ugh. Anyways.

(Again though, this is only my opinion as an outside observer. And there could very likely be private conversations about their friends’ conduct I don’t see because it would be handled in DMs.)

This is fully accurate, and I wanted to highlight this for everyone in syscourse.

The majority of my syscourse takes place on discord. I’m always hovering between around 7 and 12 system servers that I’m present in at any given time. I’ve always used online spaces as a dissociative crutch to try and help myself focus on something while also dissociating, without losing myself entirely. According to my phone, while I get the most notifications from Tumblr (825 daily, on average), I spend around an hour a day on Discord at least. (Fun Fact: Since leaving SN, I now spend an average of 4 hours on my phone, which is down from 5-7 hours daily! Progress!) Discord is also the first thing I open each day, and I read through all of the servers I usually check for.

I conduct a lot of conversation in private. I don’t feel that the majority of this sort of… business… should be on a public forum like Tumblr. Honestly, I’ve frequently lamented about the fact that Sophie isn’t on Discord much (I’ve been in servers where she was banned due to inactivity) because I feel like I have such better communication there. There’s more time to have a back and forth, rather than these essay long posts that drain my energy and take me days to write (usually).

I do call people out in DMs. I have ticketed a lot of spaces I’m in to discuss with mods the actions of other users, to clarify for myself if I am being triggered, if I’m squicked out, or if I am in the right and they are acting inappropriately. I have blocked many individuals on Discord.

What you see on Tumblr is one of two things: carefully filtered, but edited for passion and attempting to sound as clear as possible, or not filtered in the slightest while highly charged. This post is one of the latter ones, believe it or not. The length of the post doesn’t change the feeling behind it!

The fact is, I can only really call out pro-endos… here. Because I am banned from so many pro-endo spaces… for… calling out. Pro-endos. And discussing their posts in servers that are condemned (wrongfully) of being collections of people in hate groups. Therefore supporting hate groups.

See the issue? It’s a never ending cycle.

I’m trying to join more endogenic oriented spaces currently, but… we’ll see. I find them incredibly stressful for my system, due to past experiences and the increasing need of people to find the “label” that fits others, but. We’ll see.

I’ll still use scare quotes when mentioning their syscourse alignment because I find them to often be out of touch with the endogenic community and our interests.

See above. It’s incredibly difficult to view and understand the endogenic community when each one immediately declares you a fakeclaiming bigot who supports hate groups…

I think because of their friendship with anti-endos, they still want to try to appease both sides as much as possible.

I want to write more about this at the end of the post, but believe it or not… I’m really not friends with many anti-endos. I think I can name 2 off the top of my head who actually do not believe in endogenic systems. And of those two, I only share a server with one.

I don’t believe there’s a world where endogenic systems and anti-endos can both find total acceptance

Hmm.

You know?

I don’t really disagree with this point as much as some may believe.

I actually do want the entire world, one day (or at least, the relevant people in the world) to agree that endogenic systems exist. I fully want anti-endo, as a label, to go away, and I want people to open their eyes and fucking understand what endogenic systems are actually about.

I do not believe there will be a world where anti-endos will continue to be a norm, and I think those who insist on crying about how there’s “people faking having a disorder” need to actually… you know… look. At the evidence we have so far (which is not much, I will admit, but is still there) and at the experiences people are having (which is far more telling and vast). I do not believe that there will be a world where anti-endos and endos can fully co-exist with everyone feeling safe and happy together.

I also do not think that is bad.

There is no such thing as a completely safe, tolerant space. Regardless of someone’s wishes or beliefs, we cannot all be together. We cannot all believe the same things. My heavy Christian upbringing has led to even my own system being at odds with its spiritual beliefs; I am a demonic protector who regularly talks to an angelic part, who both keep an eye on our demonic persecutor, and all three of us have different religious beliefs.

We cannot believe the same things. We will disagree.

That does not mean we cannot work together, cooperate, and exist in the same spaces. I think we need to learn how to, actually, in order for the more ideal “no more anti-endos” future to come to be. If anti-endos are not accepted as people, are not welcomed in by kind endogenic or pro-endos (like I was), then how would they ever learn?

Not that people need to risk their safety like that. I would never want that. But for those individuals who can handle that burden… I feel it is needed.

But this is all beside the point. That’s a good syscourse post for another day.

Circ doesn’t like me calling anti-endos a hate group because, in my (again, outside) opinion, they’re friends with anti-endos and don’t see how the people they’re friends with could possibly be part of a hate group.

I do not like people referring to anti-endos as a hate group due to them not fitting the definition of a hate group. I don’t like it because my POC friends (both neutral, pro-endo, and unaligned) have felt spoken over by others who insist that the actions of anti-endos are somehow comparable to the actions of groups like Nazis and the KKK.

Just a quick google search:

Anti-endos are not a cohesive organization or group, and does not have equal goals across the board. I believe extremist anti-endos could potentially fall under the label of having a goal, but they are disorganized. “The group itself must have some hate-based purpose.” Most anti-endos I have had both the pleasure and displeasure of knowing… just want to be left alone. And for those who do not want that, I call them out regularly on tumblr.

What leaders? What official statements? Again, this is vastly different from groups with an actual creed or motto, groups who are a real crisis in today’s life. Some asshole on tumblr who is rambling about “The People Faking A Disorder!!1!!” is not systematically oppressing endogenic systems. They are not killing them in the streets, or dragging them behind cars via rope (an event I will not be forgetting soon as a queer individual).

Okay, if we use this definition, I could see it. I could see someone calling anti-endos a social group that practices hostility. But that is assuming that every individual who uses the label anti-endo agrees with everyone else in that social group. Which is not the case.

There’s three options, all of which, I could only loosely tie to the term hate-group.

Regardless: It is not my fucking place. I am so incredibly privileged. While I live in fear to hold my partner’s hand in public, queer rights have come leaps and bounds from where they used to be, particularly in the incredibly democratic state I live in. There are individuals who are being killed daily for their race, gender, sexuality, religion, nationality, ethnicity – any element of identity – and I do not have that same sort of fear. It is not nearly as much of a reality for me as it is for others.

That’s why I uplift and repeat those calls that POC around me say. Those POC, again, are not anti-endos. They are pro-endo, predominately. I’ve also had many “endo uninterested” friends, to quote a few.

I do not like calling anti-endos a hate group because I do not believe they are one.

(Not saying this is the only reason they dislike me, obviously. I’m certain they can find lots of other reasons. But it does seem a recurrent theme that these are the topics that make them the most heated.)

There are many more reasons, you are correct! I do believe that there are some that make me far more heated. I just also don’t think saying them here would be any benefit. I’ve already aired out my issues with you on my completely privated side blog, which nobody can see.

That doesn’t need to be public, and hopefully never will be.

And of course, the SN document which included many outright lies or just massively twisted my past statements.

I tried to display everything I saw from Sophie’s blog as I saw it at the time, based on how the individual who fakeclaimed her read them. This is how they were viewed. That isn’t a lie – that’s how they were interpreted.

Also – I was not the only person who wrote that document. I abandoned that document before finishing it, tossing it to the very few current moderators who were left after working on it for a straight week. I cannot, at this point in time, recall what I wrote on it. For all I know, they bastardized what was written and changed every last word.

(They wouldn’t do that. They cared about getting the truth out as clearly as possible. Everything that was on that document should be the fullest, clearest interpretation of events from our perspectives. Nonetheless – I have no recollection of the details that were written anymore, beyond I think some of the section titles, and the allegations that were directed directly toward me).

I’m so tired of people saying I’m lying about what I read. I’m sorry, now, that I didn’t go back through again while on my vacation in August to link to each and every claim I made, to provide the context of the posts. I’m also glad I prioritized my mental health.

Particularly: if I read things that badly, it’s very clear I was far too triggered to be handling those topics in the first place.

And good lord, yes, everything you said at the end, though I’ll address the reverse as I know I have a wider anti-endo audience on my blog:

Do not fucking send hatred to Sophie. Do not go rallying against her. This is what I said on my callout post about her over a year ago, now. Do not interact with Sophie.

That isn’t about her. It’s about you. (At the time, it might have been about her – I abandoned MotCR for a reason. I was a dick back then, and while I stand by the call to action, I actually don’t necessarily stand by that post any longer. But I very rarely delete posts, so people can hold me accountable).

Sophie’s content often triggers those of us with trauma related to many topics – endogenic systems, tulpamancy, racism, spirituality, hallucinations, religion, and many other topics. She discusses those topics in conjunction with endogenic systems.

Someone who triggers you by talking about something that triggers you is not worthy of harassment. Nobody is worthy of harassment.

Someone you feel is spreading misinformation is not worthy of harassment. Nobody is worthy of harassment.

Stop fucking bringing me up to her! Stop bringing her up to me! I’ve said it so many times! I’ve begged her not to post asks about me in the past, but it’s just. Unavoidable when we share the same spaces, at this point, for us not to see each other’s posts. And when I see things, I address them, because that’s the point of a discourse space.

But you all are only harming everyone by trying to “defend” those you care about. Including those you care about! Have faith that the individuals you are trying to support can support themselves. Dragging my name into people’s inboxes to try and support me only continues drama that I would rather be left well enough alone, buried deep in the amnesic recesses of my mind.

Normalizing hatred toward Sophie will normalize pro-endos sending hate to those they view as Not One Of Them. This has happened before and will happen again if it becomes the norm. Pro-endos have been harassed to deletion and even death. Anti-endos have experienced the same.

Stop fucking doing it.

…

And for the last point, as an aside at the end, I have a genuine question.

How many anti-endo friends do you people think I actually have?

When I mention my anti-endo friends, I typically mean… like… 5. Max. And that number has severely dwindled, both due to the fact that I’ve made a lot more people open to endogenic plurality, and due to the fact that I’ve cut many individuals off.

I do not have many anti-endo friends. And of those friends I have, we don’t really discuss any syscourse. I have, I believe, one anti-endo friend at this point whom I share a server with. We discuss very little as we are both fairly inactive in that server. I believe the most recent discussion was “is it morally okay to steal from a big super market” (yes) and “what should I get for christmas this year” (thanks for the suggestion on the diamond painting, I’m kinda looking forward to it if I get it!)

The majority of anti-endos don’t like me. They don’t interact with me. Those that do often find themselves no longer identifying as anti-endo, or already didn’t blast their syscourse stance everywhere in the first place.

The anti-endos I do associate with are the kind that simply want a space away from Endogenic systems. They admit endos exist. They simply don’t want endos around them, and find that the anti-endo label is a quick and easy way to get endos to stay far away. (Huh, it all circles back to that “we should be more accepting of others, regardless of label” idea…)

Look. At the end of the day, one thing remains true: me and Sophie do not need to get along. She will continue arguing against the takes I make that she disagrees with, and I will continue arguing against hers. Honestly, that is far, far healthier than what was happening when I was trying desperately to avoid mentioning her at all. I feel now that I can actually engage in the discussions happening. There’s a lot of reasons for that -- the biggest I think being that I really could not give a rats ass about this topic anymore. I don’t care about what she posts.

The majority of what she posts nowadays are either vagueposts or takes about plurality, which I think is fine and dandy. It’s not my territory, and if I have problems or thoughts, I’ll typically post them on my own. Which I have been! Remarkably, our takes can often exist in conjunction.

Me and Sophie are not at war with each other. It’s more “you stay in your corner and I’ll stay in mine.”

Please let us keep it that way?

[freedfromthegalactichivemind]

Anon ask privileges on this blog have hearby been revoked.  I may re-instate them at a future time.  For now, I’m pissed off and safeguarding.  As for the Disk Horse: 

I do not follow anti-spop.  They are a blog I do not wish to follow and, normally, am disinclined to reblog from because...it’s right in the name, “anti.”  As a general rule, I do not follow or very much like critical blogs / salt blogs.  I participate in fandom to have fun.  (And, at this point, a bit out of personal spite since Spop is, by far, THE most toxic fandom I have ever been in.  I could be spending my time frolicking in the peaceful fields of Hyrule, but noooo, my brain’s gotta chew on moody magical teenagers and spacebats).  I also had some people try to kick me out of fandom at one point, so I feel like it’s my duty to hold on like grim death.  I am still here.  I happened to be checking up on a blog I saw come up in my suggestion-feed, remembering a person as a fanfic author I liked, decided to see how they were doing, and, boom, I saw an interesting discussion where they’d reblogged anti-spop’s opinion of the series’ treatment of Kyle.  The series’ treatment of Kyle is one of my pet peeves in the canon (along with Angella’s being trapped in between dimensions forever and not getting to meet a foreshadowed minotuar-princess), so I reblogged and added my two cents. 

After getting home from work (covered in grease and blood and very tired) I moseyed over to check out anti-spop becaue of the anon-rumor.  I scrolled through some of front-page content and didn’t see anything that stood out to me as “racist.”  In fact, I saw their intro-post citing that they are Brazillian / non-white.  So, I suspect they get the accusation of being “racist” a lot by people who disagree with them about Catradora, probably.  A few posts down and I saw them being... very, very anti-catradora.  Having once followed entrapdak-shippers, some of whom really dislike catradora who got into conflicts with catradora-shippers and seeing a lot of rawr back and forth, I did see a lot of heavy catradora-shippers flat out accuse people who did not like the ship of “racism” (because Catra is supposed to be Brazillian / hispanic or something?  I don’t know).  So, given the history of shipper-politics, I really do think someone was rumor-milling me because “oh, no, they follow me / look in on me and see me reblogging something from someone who hates their ship.” 

Look, I’m just tired of the mess.  I am not anti-anything.  Maybe if someone were to start shipping Frosta with Horde Prime or something, but, in general, the shipwars in this fandom tire me and the anti-character rhetoric tires me.  I honestly like all of the characters in spop.  Yes, I’m a primary entrapdak-shipper and Entrapta and Hordak-fan, but.... here’s my little secret...(or not so secret if you’ve followed this blog for a while and seen the kinds of fanart I reblog)... I *don’t* hate Catra.  There was one time when I borderlined on doing so when I was deep into the entrapdak-fan-hole hanging out with a lot of negative fans, but I kind of kicked myself out of it by actually re-watching the series.  I like Catra, a lot.  She’s a great character, very interesting and dynamic.  I might keep Hordak as my evil pookie-bear, but Catra gives me a lot of feels, too.  And I like Catradora.  After chilling out a little and actually observing again Catra’s genuine trying-to-make-good actions in Season 5, I’m really not of the school of “Oh noes, she’s been toxic, therefore she’s toxic forever.”   As someone whose gone through a butt-ton of therapy over the last year because of my own issues... I don’t believe in “toxic forever” in someone who is shown to be trying to make good.  I can’t.  In other words, running it back into fandom... I don’t believe that redemption applies only to tall goth warlords who were raised in cults.   I’m willing to extend redemption in this fandom to everyone but Prime.  (Hell, even Shadow Weaver can get redeemed with a skilled enough fanfic author)!  I don’t even care how the Catra-stans have treated the Hordak-stans anymore or vice versa.  Drop it.  Let it go.   The same for the Glimmadora-shippers or whatever.   And you know what?  Someone may detest your favorite ship for whatever reason.  Doesn’t give them vibes they like.  Maybe they interpret the characters together as toxic or whatever.  It doesn’t mean that you should be making assumptions about them and spreading anon rumors about them that you can’t back up. 

If the blog I reblogged from is, in fact, racist (and isn’t just “they don’t like your ship”) give me examples!  Cite them!  Show me posts where they’re being awful!   Until then, rumors and fandom politics can eat a sack of donkey-dongs. 

[trollicorn]

Hi, you're actively being transmisogynistic by accusing me of being some exclusionary gatekeeping asshole, like I have some double meaning to trying to keep queer spaces safe from cishets. It's incredibly disingenuous and you should reflect on your impulse to immediately jump down a trans woman's throat when all she's asking for is respect and safety from the people that have the power and privilege to ruin her life if they don't like how she's acting. You should be ashamed of yourself.

There's no code, no double meaning to what I'm saying. I'm not policing anyone, nor do I have the power to enforce any of this, because, as you might have noticed, I'm a trans woman. Please learn some basic manners and reading comprehension, or learn to keep your mouth shut.

I’m sorry I got heated. I understand I was being harsh. I didn’t want to accuse you, specifically, of being some kind of exclusionary gatekeeping asshole, nor do I think you specifically have the ability to enforce these kinds of rules. I don’t think that you’re a bad person for this opinion because I understand where it’s coming from. I meant more that, as a group, if everybody made sure to exclude cishet people from queer spaces it could easily have a negative effect on closeted people who need those spaces too. I know I took that concept kind of to the extreme and that that paints you unfairly and I’m sorry about that.

Obviously I don’t think there’s any double meaning to your words or you have some secret malice towards closeted people. I was talking specifically about the mentality, I wasn’t talking about you at all. I know I at one point said “it’s you” and I’m genuinely sorry about that, I mean “people who think like this” but it definitely sounds like an attack on you and I didn’t handle that correctly.

I do think it’s also disingenuous of you to immediately accuse me of being transmisogynist just because you’re a trans woman as this clearly had nothing to do with that.

I am also trans, as well as very visibly AFAB, and I experience misogyny and well as transphobia so I understand wanting a break from that.

I still disagree however, that something like a girl bringing her straight boyfriend is a problem if he is not being an ass.

I feel like there’s a bad philosophy underpinning that, and it’s not that I think that you hold that philosophy— I’m sure it makes you uncomfortable because of past experiences, and that’s fine— but I still wanted to address it.

I should have been more respectful about it though, and for that I am sorry.

[gambitedge]

So I’m not old by any standard other than my kids’, and probably other small people, but the more I think I grow and think I learn, the more inadequate I feel.

In fact, I’m confident I know less than I did yesterday, so most of the things I think or say have very little to do with my strengths and almost everything to do with simply noticing patterns of what works and what doesn’t.

That in itself even is a stretch, because often, I am only successful at living out what doesn’t work. In complete transparency, I don’t view myself as a failure. I have made enough mistakes for the population of an entire state, but I can occasionally do some things right.

I guess my point with all of this is that you probably shouldn’t put too much weight into my thoughts or ideas. Either way, I can’t stop you from adulting your own choices, so carry on.

Some things I notice or observe at an almost subconscious level, subtle nuances that I wouldn’t be able to name or list, even if I recognized what I was seeing. Fortunately, I have my moments, and there are rare instances where I can help a friend or someone I care for to see their world in a new way.

After that point of being shown an alternate path, the responsibility wishes heaviest on the searcher to coming to and grow in the process of modifying their world is you choose.

Hopefully I don’t sound full of my own ego. This concept, topic, and conversations have run scenarios in my close circle of friends recently.

I always want to know that I’m helping even if it’s only a small amount. I feel seep meaning and purpose when I have the opportunity and privilege to offer new directions and insight that might allow this person to grow into areas of life and themselves that they beforehand had only fantasized able.

In my opinion, everyone has a unique skill combined with vision and character to contribute to amazing creation and impact in the world. Sometimes we get stuck in a drain spiral fighting against where we don’t want to be, in order to more closely fit ourselves into where our contribution matters most.

Most of us simply give up on anything big and risky despite the passion and skill that person has. I’ve fought against the safe route my whole life, but I still can spin on ice about what it is specifically I do well to have the largest contribution in improving life for others.

All of this is like thoughts about a dream where the dream was a movie about thinking. I want to find that ability for myself that both provides financially to survive, but more importantly feeds my desire to have unique positive impact in the lives of others, especially when they feel lost or hopeless to get out of the pit they feel in.

Practical hope negotiator. Respond with a comment if you have any thoughts or questions. Do you agree or disagree with my soapbox fairy tails? Let me know as I’d love to understand with anyone else what drives you or what hopes you have for your or your family’s lives.

Until next time, toodles.

[caroldantops]

room where the light won’t find you (iv) || a.h.

ship: evil stepmother!agatha harkness x fem!reader; mentions of fem!reader x various other female characters

warnings: 18+ only; dark fantasy au (stepcest, manipulation, corruption, brainwashing), smut (dubcon, exhibitionism, degradation, humiliation, voyeruism, spit, choking), mentions of death and violence

part i  ▪  part ii  ▪  part iii  ▪  part iv - finale (you’re here!) ▪ bonus

After you officially take over as queen, life in the castle takes a complete turn. 

In a broader sense, your kingdom ends up thriving. Sure, the civilians are a little terrified of Agatha after the discovery that she can turn into the mighty dragon that perches on the top of the castle sometimes, blowing smoke that engulfs the air. But after they realize as long as they listen to the Queen, they are the most protected kingdom in the land. 

There are invasion attempts, people eager to take down the threat of your army, but really they stand no chance. Your army is already full of some of the most skilled fighters, sharpest tacticians, and brutal assassins around. But with Agatha’s magic? You’re unstoppable. 

Power becomes a drug for you. Perhaps even a bit of an aphrodisiac. 

Agatha is always one to remind you where exactly you got so much power. Sometimes she thinks you get a little too drunk on being able to send armies away with a simple command when she’s done all of the work - even sometimes going as far to think you can boss her around. 

Sometimes you bait it, knowing that trying to give her an order will end up with her sending everyone out of the meeting room and her hand gripping your face tight. 

“Open,” Agatha commands, spitting in your mouth when you obey (if you don’t, she has no qualms spitting on your face). “Seems like your head’s getting too big for that crown of yours, princess. Don’t forget, I’m the one who made you this powerful. I’m the reason you weren’t left bleeding out on the day of your crowning. I’m the reason you weren’t left crying and alone, lost on how to rule after your father died. You might have armies falling at your feet, but remember who you kneel for.” 

You’d never dare forget these facts, but you know that these arguments always spark a fire in both you and Agatha, feeding off of each other’s energy until Agatha’s slamming you against tables and walls, or you’re shoving her back into your throne so you can fuck yourself on the toy strapped around her hips. 

Even though you’re the queen, she still calls you princess. Affectionately or condescendingly, you’re unsure. 

You’ve always noticed that Agatha seems to have a way with commanding all the staff and guards, but they truly seem to fall completely complacent to both you and Agatha’s orders - perhaps it’s simply a matter of their deep loyalty to the throne. 

There are a few that attempt to disagree with you and Agatha’s decisions. Stephen is the most prominent one, and he becomes an example for the others when he finds out just how hot Agatha’s dragon fire can burn. 

Luckily, none of the people you care for end up ever falling into that fate. In fact, Agatha even shares a certain kind of…affection for many of them. 

It’s very common for people to walk in on the two of you in the middle of one of your heated moments. Sometimes Agatha sends them away with a flick of magic - if they haven’t already fled the room. However other times, Agatha has no qualms about showing you off, especially when she realizes how soaked your cunt gets when you’re being watched. 

“The kingdom’s perfect princess, letting me show her off like a common street whore. Imagine if all of them could see you right now, begging for my fingers ‘harder, harder!’” Agatha laughs in your ear as she feels your cunt gush. 

And after you’re done getting off to your staff watching you cum, Agatha simply wipes their minds clean of everything. 

Some get the privilege of keeping a few memories of your antics. And your former lovers get the extra special treatment of getting to participate on occasion. 

You were surprised at first, given Agatha’s assumed possessiveness over you. But she finds it wildly entertaining that you’ve been whoring yourself out to various women for the last couple of years - so not only does it give her the pleasure of having a front-row seat to you begging for your friends to make you cum, but she gets even more reasons to degrade you for being such a slut. 

Agatha doesn’t let them remember every detail, just enough to keep them satisfied and wanting to come back. 

You never would have imagined that your friends and staff would be so eager to use you like this, under Agatha’s command and watchful eye, but you’ve noticed a shift in them. The warriors fight more brutally, the others have less mercy in the decisions they make.

Corruption flowed through your castle, but as long as you and your loved ones were happy, you would continue allowing the darkness from Agatha’s magic to permeate everything around you. 

Perhaps that’s simply the tone you’ve set for your rule the second you started learning about dark magic from Agatha. A ruthless leader, surrounded, adored, and fucked by your closest. All of them fall gracefully to your feet as you sit on your throne. 

The throne that Agatha looms over, whispering words of wisdom that drip with purple poison, soothing you with hands that would cradle you just as quickly as they would wrap around your throat with an iron grip.

[thebluespirit83]

debunking pro-snape/anti-james arguments and putting it on the internet because clearly i hate myself. buckle up. this is gonna be a VERY long post. im ready for the amount of hate i will get; im willing to take one for the team. 

1. james forced lily into dating/marrying/etc him 

this literally never happened? because its almost as if lily is her own person who is able to stand up for herself-

“I wouldn’t go out with you if it was a choice between you and the giant squid,” said Lily.

“LEAVE HIM ALONE!” Lily shouted. She had her own wand out now. James and Sirius eyed it warily.

She turned on her heel and hurried away [from james]. 

-and so she would not allow someone to walk all over her. its almost as if james (canonically) matured as a person, and she appreciated this, realised he was a good person and got feelings for him? because james’ only negative traits were that he was conceited and a show off. people are able to mature and grow from these things! james did this! he did not ‘force’ lily to go out with him!

2. james and the other marauders bullied snape

you know what, i cant even disagree with this one. you’re right - they did bully him. but lets look a little bit at the context. 

sirius and james were both upper class, naive white rich boys. they are idiots. they were both stupid smart teenagers!! they were popular! and while this does not excuse the gross bullying snape was subject to-

Pink soap bubbles streamed from Snape’s mouth at once; the froth was covering his lips, making him gag, choking him

Several people watching laughed; Snape was clearly unpopular ... Snape was trying to get up, but the jinx was still operating on him; he was struggling, as though bound by invisible ropes.

-it (unfortunately) makes sense with context. james and sirius also stopped bullying people, and even expressed discomfort/regret with the way they acted-

“I’m not proud of it,” said Sirius quickly.

“Of course he was a bit of an idiot!” said Sirius bracingly, “we were all idiots!

[sirius talking to remus] you made us feel ashamed of ourselves sometimes

A lot of people are idiots at the age of fifteen. He grew out of it.

-when they were younger! i’d also like to point out these little lines i noticed when i was finding quotes for my argument which snape stans like to ignore:

James and Snape hated each other from the moment they set eyes on each other

I mean, he [snape] never lost an opportunity to curse James

there was a flash of light and a gash appeared on the side of James’s face, spattering his robes with blood

wow, look at that. the hate they felt for each other was mutual! snape also jinxed james! but oh wait - james was the one who matured! snape was the one who bullied his son twenty years later because he looked like james! 

3. snape didnt abuse the kids at hogwarts 

here’s a real argument i saw when looking through some pro-snape posts: ‘snape wasn’t an abuser, because abusers don’t let their victims retaliate, but snape did let the kids talk back to him’

what. the. fuck?! 

this is the dictionary.com definition of abuse: ‘to treat in a harmful, injurious, or offensive way’ or ‘to speak insultingly, harshly, and unjustly to or about’. i’m pretty sure snape did both of these things-

“I don’t need help from filthy little Mudbloods like her!”

“So,” said Snape, gripping Harry’s arm so tightly Harry’s hand was starting to feel numb.

Snape threw Harry from him with all his might.

[hermione’s teeth]  "I see no difference."

‘Idiot boy!’ snarled Snape [at neville]

-on multiple occasions. i’d also like to remind you guys that neville’s worst fear is SNAPE?! his TEACHER, a figure that is supposed to be there for emotional and educational support is his worst fear in this entire world?! above the woman who drove his parents to insanity? over failure, over his abusive grandmother, over everything? his teacher? and for the pro-snaper that used this quote-

Nearly everyone laughed. Even Neville grinned apologetically.

-to claim that it was a joke, it isn’t a joke. because when snape came out of that cupboard, he was terrified. yes, it’s an embarrassing thing to have as your boggart, but the point is is that it is. he is terrified of that man. 

4. james only joined the order because his wife was a muggleborn and he ‘had to’

this is just factually incorrect. james had been sticking up for muggleborn rights since he was in school, far before he started dating or even became friends with lily: 

“Apologize to Evans!” James roared at Snape, his wand pointed threateningly at him.

“I’d NEVER call you a - you-know-what!”

so this is literally not true!! plus, at least he did join the order, whatever his reasons where (which were canonically good). snape didnt join the order. snape was friends with someone who suffered discrimination in society, and instead of using his privilege to help her and support her, he joined a group that was set on murdering people like her. when james had a friend who underwent oppression (remus/lycanthropy) you know what he did? he illegally became an animagus. 

5. snape had to be a death eater to survive at hogwarts as he roomed with blood supremacists

this is the shittiest excuse i have ever seen in my entire life. as a poc, this comment really reminds me of the argument ‘i was raised in a racist white household! i cant control my beliefs!’

you can always control your beliefs. i understand not going on big rants about blood inequality in front of a bunch of supremacists, and i understand wanting to blend and fit in (especially because he was unpopular and needed the support the slytherin boys provided), but i will never understand then becoming an active member of the group yourself. he got the dark mark. he helped voldemort. he was a death eater, and a proud one at that! no-one forced him to join. this argument literally makes my blood boil. 

6. snape had a lot of trauma from being raised in an abusive household

okay? so did sirius. so did neville. luna was bullied at school, just like snape. harry lived in an abusive household. did any of those people bully children? did any of those people join a blood supremacist group? and dont get me wrong, im not calling any of these people perfect - they all had a lot of flaws - but none of them hurt another people to the extreme that snape did. 

7. snape saved the trio’s lives many times

this is the absolute bare minimum. ‘oh wow, he didnt let harry die!! what a king! he should be respected and praised! we should excuse all of his other actions because he didnt let people die <3′ 

8. snape is not a perfect person, he also did good that many people overlook

you’re right, snape did do some good things in his life. but unfortunately, for me and many others, doing a couple of good things doesnt excuse all of the shitty, abusive things he did too. we’re not ignoring them - we just dont think they’re good enough reasons to forgive him. 

‘but james and sirius hurt others! you ignore all the bad things they did in favour of the good!’ you do the same thing with snape, first of all. second, they did a lot of good stuff. james’ and sirius’ only crimes were being annoying. for being a bit of a dick, conceited, knew they were hot and were a bit entitled. while these things are annoying as fuck, they were also stupid teens that eventually grew out of their behaviour and became better people. not perfect! better. while snape just stayed bitter at the marauders, long after their deaths, and even took his anger out on an innocent child. 

9. people only hate snape because he was poc and queer coded

as a poc and queer person, please stop. this is a very bad excuse. being poc and queer (which im pretty sure he isnt, but anyway) doesnt excuse you from your actions. plus, a huge amount of harry potter readers are poc and lgbtq. why would they hate snape for those reasons?! 

so thats all i got for today. im not gonna go into a deep snily/jily thing because i literally cannot be bothered. anyway im done. i need to go revise, i’ve already spent long enough on this. 

[destinyc1020]

I’ve seen some weird takes here on tumblr but mostly on twitter of people trying to I guess erase Z’s blackness as like a weapon to hate on her if that makes sense? Or maybe a better way to phrase it is comparing her to her white counterparts as if they’re exactly the same in order to diminish her success. I’m more than aware that Z has had an extreme amount of privilege being not only mixed but also light skin but I think it’s weird that people are trying to act like her blackness doesn’t exist and that the obstacles she’s faced because of it simply don’t exist for her either. Or even that the only reason she’s been able to get to certain places is because of her privilege. I don’t know, I’m very proud of her and all that she’s achieved so it’s annoying to see people try to play it down.

I know you might not see this since you’re doing summer school but I hope it’s going well for you!!

Wow... Yet another reason why I avoid Twitter like the plague.... 🙄

Anyway...

I always feel like a lot of mixed-race/biracial individuals are sometimes in like this really weird conundrum. Some in society don't find them "black"/"Asian"/"Latin"/ etc ENOUGH, and then others feel they're TOO black, TOO brown or whatever. 🙄 So a lot of times some of them don't feel like they really belong or "fit in" anywhere. 😔 I imagine that sometimes it must feel confusing for some.

That's why, I feel like it's VERY important for both parents (if they are in an interracial rlshp) to instill in their kids a SOLID sense of identity, and drill into them that even if society sees them as more of one race than the other, the TRUTH is, they are BIRACIAL. 🤷🏾‍♀️

Teach them about BOTH sides of their culture.

Teach them that they are loved by you as parents REGARDLESS.

Encourage them to have loving, diverse friends that they can learn from and get positivity from (ALL parents should be doing this with anyway imo).

With Zendaya, one thing I've always liked about her is that she knows how society views her, and she is definitely very well aware of her light skin and biracial privilege in the industry.

I know some may disagree, but I'm of the mindset that Zendaya is biracial. To me that's just what she is. 🤷🏾‍♀️It's not a slight to her black side at all imo. She identifies as "black" though, and most probably view her that way in society, so I'm not going to take that away from her. But she is biracial. She's not monoracial black. Her parents are of two different races. But even with her fair skin, she is still racially discriminated against (just like Meghan Markle) and I have heard of some of the experiences she's had to undergo due to her race and color in the industry. 😩

The thing about Z though is that she's not blind to the fact that she is viewed differently in the industry compared to her white counterparts, and even her fully black counterparts.

But she also uses her privilege to uplift other black artists, photographers, stylists, and other black creatives in her work life.

She walks the walk, and talks the talk. 👍🏾

[floatingbook]

i'm a separatist (not a radfem) bi celibate woman who has never been with a man, yet bi/het radfems would attack me on here calling me "privileged" for being a separatist and saying anti-lesbian remarks. however they stop those remarks when i tell them i'm bi. i don't understand why it's difficult for bi/het radfems to believe there are osa celibate women throughout history and we're still here and i find those radfems to be deeply homophobic

Oh, they are homophobic alright. It’s easy to strike down. There’s that persistent myth that separatism is just a lesbian conspiracy so we widen our dating pool, because lesbians are sex-obsessed deviants. Also, lesbians want all male-attracted women miserable. But fairness and balance when it comes to separatism and lesbians would mean considering lesbians as more than stereotypes or statistics to be brandished when it helps their own agenda.

It’s difficult to consider anything other that hatred as the motive for someone who disagree with you because assuming hatred is so convenient. You don’t see eye-to-eye with me, so you must want me dead, or at the very least in an existence of suffering. Tell a religious person you don’t believe in g*d, and their answer will be that they hope you let go of hatred in your life and find g*d at some point. So much projecting. It’s the same here. They dislike you for pointing out the weakness in their assumptions.

They’ve been raised on the myth of the prince charming; on the idea that success means a husband, a house and kids; on the concept that their value is dependent on whether they can attract and keep a man. There’s the deep, entrenched idea that a woman can’t have a nice life if she doesn’t have a man providing for her. And there’s their apparent belief that if they don’t have sexual intercourse with a man they’ll wither and die. It’s all unquestioned stereotypes and beliefs. Pondering, examining them takes time and it’s not something you can do for them. They simply don’t share your paradigm. They might never do; they might never want to understand you. Putting yourself in someone else’s shoe, considering their perspective can be uncomfortable. It’s too much work for a lot of people. I’m not sure what can be done about it. Patience certainly.

The instinct to retreat, to stand your ground on what you think to be true, is powerful. The known is comforting. You don’t know what you’ll find, where you’ll end up if you start questioning things. Pretending is easier. Some women have decided that their line — as to what misogyny they’ll bear with — is way higher than yours. Some women don’t even have a line. You can’t make the line for anyone else. It’s a personal decision, the amount of bullshit you’ll tolerate.

Don’t think it’s solely on you to change their minds. It’s not. Remember to log off if their callousness, if their aggressiveness gets too much.

[furiousgoldfish]

Rate your (abusive?) parents! (this is not meant as a serious diagnostic tool, not all abusive parents can be measured this simply, however it does provides some reference.)

1. How warm and loving were your parents?

a. They made me feel very loved and appreciated. b. They were sometimes a little dismissive but I was taken seriously when necessary. c. I was loved.... occasionally... it was a hit or miss some days. d. They acted as if they would rather they didn't have me. e. They were fake warm, even if they were smiling I felt resented, despised and afraid.

2. How scared are you of your parents?

a. Scared? They're my parents. Why would I be afraid? b. If I swear something nasty at them they give a threatening look but I'm not that scared. c. They're scary on some days, if they're in a good mood it's fine. d. I have nightmares about them, I feel scared even if I hadn't done anything wrong. e. I would prefer to be dead than to face them again from the amount of terror I feel.

 3. How well do your parents  pay attention to your needs?

a. They know what I need before I even realize it. b. I have to remind them that I need new pair of sneakers sometimes. c. They expect me to say if I need something, otherwise it goes neglected. d. I don't like them paying attention to me, they don't most of the time. e. I'm allowed to have needs? Says who? 

4. Do they notice when you're in distress?

a. Yeah, if something happens they immediately reassure me. b. If I'm acting strange, someone talks to me the same day and helps me. c. Well, if I'm distressed about something obvious, and if they have nothing better to do. d. They'd only notice if I was already dying and then tell me it's my fault. e. Notice? They CAUSE the distress. They enjoy it. I'm sick of having to act strong.

5. Do your parents take time to teach you all necessary skills for survival?

a. If I feel like learning, I can ask them anything; they research if they don't know. b. Well they teach me what they know and I feel capable of survival so yes. c. I'm supposed to learn from watching them, they don't answer questions. d. No, they only tell me to stuff and get angry if I get it wrong. e. They convinced me it's impossible for me to survive and that teaching me is a waste.

 6. Do your parents provide you with basics (food, shelter, clothes, healthcare) unconditionally?

a. Of course! I know I can always count on them for these. b. Yeah, they want me to be safe and sound, even if they're mad at me. c. I have to figure out some of it myself, can't always count on food or healthcare. d. I get parts of it, and I'm told I should be grateful and that I'm in debt forever due to it. e. I'm threatened with being thrown out, starved and/or all my stuff taken away constantly.

7. Are your aspirations, hobbies, achievements and happiness important to them?

a. They want me to be as happy as possible and put a lot of effort into it. b.  Yes, if they can do anything to help me be happy, they do it. c. I'm not sure if they know all my aspirations or hobbies. d. They don't think my aspirations or achievements are worth shit. Happiness? I don't know her. e. They go out of their way to sabotage my achievements and happiness.

8. Do your parents provide you with rewards for completing tasks for them? 

a. Yeah! If I do everything well I get additional money or privileges I want! b. I am well appreciated, even if there's not always a reward, I get praised. c. If you count 'here's more things to do and then we'll leave you alone' a reward.. d. I get told 'it would have been better if you did nothing' and snapped at to do more e. If I don't complete the chores, I will get hurt. I get humiliated and criticized while doing it.

9. Do your parents criticize your style, appearance, friends or relationships?

a. They're happy with whatever makes me happy, they only say something if they're worried. b. Well one time I was in an abusive friendship, and they criticized the other kid. Otherwise, no. c. I don't think they notice most of the time. Only if it's in their way of something. d. They only criticize it if it reflects badly on them. e. I can't step into the house without being criticized. They hate everything on me.

10. Are your parents proud of you?

a.  Yes, they remind me so constantly. b. Well not all the time, but if I do something well. c. They don't have time to feel things and stuff about me. d. I don't think 'proud' and 'me' could ever occur in the same sentence. e. They'd be proud if I didn't exist.

Results:

If your answers mostly dwelved around a. and b., then your parents did well enough at least in these categories, and you were able to experience a measure of safety and acceptance in your home. This is what is generally expected of parents to provide for children, and if they're 'good enough', they'll be providing all this for the most of time. This isn't to say your relationship with them is perfect; they still might be pushing pressure and expectations in other areas, or disagree in fundamental levels with you. If you have even one result at d. or e., they might be covering up abuse.

If for a lot of answers you found yourself picking c., then you are likely to have experienced neglect, inconsistency, lack of nurturing, lack of care. This goes into the category of 'not good enough parenting' and abuse. It's likely to them, you were only a backdrop, someone to care about their issues more than they care about yours, a convenience they used to get things done. It's likely you often had to keep your own life in order and assist theirs. This can make you feel like you only exist when it's convenient to others, and give you major insecurities about your self-esteem, importance, and self care. It can also set you up for an abusive relationship.

If your answers were mostly d. and e., I am sorry to say but your parents were a complete disgrace and a failure. They not only neglected all of your needs, emotions and human rights, but did their best to cast as much damage on you as possible. You were not treated with dignity and humanity that you deserved. You've been put thru a lot of undeserved hatred, and life shouldn't have been so hard on you when you were just a kid. It's likely you are or will struggle with trauma due to neglect, hostility, hatred and cruelty that was forced on you when you were vulnerable and defenseless. You shouldn't have been left alone with those people. If your answers stem more towards e, it suggests narcissistic parents.

Mixed: If your answers range across all of the options, it suggests that your parents, even while doing well in some areas, neglected and abused you in others, which makes your situation fairly complicated; you want to believe they love you and you see a proof of that, yet they sometimes hurt you very badly, and their affection is inconsistent, mixed with bursts of cruelty and denial of your humanity and dignity. Know that it isn't hard not to abuse a child. It's not a completely unreasonable thing to ask of people to not be cruel to children, to not damage your well being. Your parents shouldn't have gone to such lengths to be hurtful to you, and being okay at other times is no excuse. Good people are good consistently, not when they feel like it. This is, again, a result that suggests abuse.

[pumpkinpaix]

this is gonna sound so harsh but im legit tired of chinese diaspora people who think that bc they are of chinese descent and they have pleco they can act like voices of authority in the fandom. if modao is the 1st chinese book you have read pieces of with a dictionary, if you have never interacted with the actual chinese fandom, you are not part of the intended audience and your biased opinion is not the One And Only Valid Truth 🍵

strongly agree | agree | neutral | disagree | strongly disagree | this is really hard for me to express in terms of an agree/disagree axis lol

genuinely cannot tell if you’re trying to shade me here anon lmao 😂

this got long and rambly (of course) asldkjfslj. i would love to make the excuse that it’s bc i’ve got a migraine and had No Sleep but. let’s be real i’m always like this.

ok i’ll start with where i agree: i don’t think anyone has the right to act like an ultimate voice of authority in fandom. i think different people with different backgrounds have varying realms of expertise and they should be respected when they share that knowledge, but that the instant someone starts to use that kind of power as a weapon against people they personally don’t like, i think they forfeit that privilege. no one has the one and only valid truth about a piece of media because that’s fundamentally impossible. i have definitely interacted with diaspo who behave like their heritage gives them some kind of incontrovertible authority over everyone else, and they’re fucking insufferable and often rather cruel, even/especially towards other diaspo. meet me in the denny’s parking lot and fight me for real. i’ll kick ur ass. >:c

however, I also think it’s true that there’s a lot of dismissal of heritage fans in this fandom, if that makes sense, from both sides of the equation: non-Chinese fans ignore our cultural hangups because they’re inconvenient, and non-diaspora disdain us for being not Chinese enough. that puts a lot of us in a position of feeling disrespected just for being who we are, or having our very real knowledge and unique experience as individuals devalued because of it.

regardless of my identity, I have formally studied a lot of things: literary translation, media analysis, the politics of oppression, film critique, religious studies, philosophy, four foreign languages etc. and that is all knowledge that I had to work for, and work hard for. I do have a certain measure of authority on all of these subjects over a layperson (to varying degrees), and there are going to be times when i will be more correct than someone who disagrees with me -- but I’ve also absolutely experienced people talking over that specialized knowledge because of who I am, which is, to be clear. extremely infuriating and hurtful. like, i have cried so much about it in the last 18 months. people see my racial and cultural identity before they see anything else, which is understandable to a degree, but upsetting when it becomes the basis for how my work is judged, whether positive or negative. i don’t want you to trust me blindly because i’m abc. I want to you to trust me because you have examined my work critically and judged it to be trustworthy!

so i guess this is getting into the strongly disagree part of the answer: i’ve been speaking a lot with other diaspora fans lately, and it’s been simultaneously hugely relieving and also really saddening. relieving because oh thank god someone else Gets It, and saddening because pretty much all of us, no matter what kind of diaspo we are (north american, european, SEA, taiwanese etc), we’ve all experienced a lot of pressure in this fandom, from non-Chinese, Chinese, and other diaspora fans alike. we’re all acutely aware that we are not modao’s intended audience because being diaspora vs being “from the mainland” or whatever, are actually quite different things, but modao still feels close to home. even if it was not written FOR us it is still familiar to us.

and, because so many of us are multilingual and multicultural, we end up being the bridge between the “actual” chinese fandom and the english-speaking fandom, which is largely made up of non-chinese. (sidenote: I hate it when people say things about being “actually” any identity because it’s almost always for the exact reason you brought up: to use heritage as street cred. it’s like damn, being “actually” chinese doesn’t make ur opinions any less rank. sure you might be “actually” chinese, but do you have basic reading comprehension and literary criticism skills? no? ok then sit your ass back down) many of us are most comfortable in english! so we produce our content in english! but we also DO often have a somewhat privileged access to the culture that underlies mdzs and can explain it in a language that other non-Chinese fans can understand. so it’s not surprising that people flock to us for answers to their cultural questions. and like. if we think we know the answer, it’s natural for us to try and help. this is fandom! we’re here to have fun and find community! and it is definitely a little bit nice to have my culture treated as something desirable for once instead of just like. a weird exotic curiosity that no one really cares too deeply about. and, since a lot of us are able to do things that non-Chinese fans can’t (research in chinese, for example. ask family members for help and more information etc.) we end up just having more information to share.

I think this sometimes results in a tendency for fandom at large to put heritage/diaspo fans on pedestals and tout them as authorities (or use our conflicting viewpoints as ammunition in fandom drama) when the diaspo in question have repeatedly stated that they should not be taken as authorities on something -- and then, once you reach critical mass, your reputation starts to precede you, and I think there’s a lot of misconceptions of how a lot of diaspo act in this fandom simply because of that phenomenon. most of us know that we’re not ultimate arbiters of some kind of cultural gateway, and it can be very tiring both to be treated as such when we insist we are not, and then punished by other people who assume that we acted like we were.

i don’t think there’s a benefit in trying to keep en fandom and cn fandom totally separate, and I also think it’s unfair to consider the cn fandom the “real” fandom. i think that way lies deeper misunderstandings, gatekeeping, etc. i think we can definitely acknowledge the differences between them, but i think trying to make meaningful connections between fandom circles is really valuable! i don’t think i’ve ever made it a secret that modao is my first cmedia fandom? so it’s also the first time i’ve had reason to interact with chinese fandom, which has been super enlightening and interesting! i’ve made some super cool friends and learned a lot about how fandom works in china, how it’s similar and how it differs from the fandom i’m familiar with.

and then, kind of circling back around, there’s also a bit of a sense like, okay, so if diaspo don’t belong in the CN fandom, but we can’t talk about our own culture with some degree of confidence in EN fandom, then like..... where do we go...? if we see EN fandom doing something that contradicts our cultural knowledge, do we just. not say anything? do we not count unless we’ve already ingratiated ourselves to CN fandom? that’s probably where the core of my strong disagreement comes from, because criticism of diaspora fans as like, acting above their station so to speak, feels just like a tired continuation of the same shit we’ve had to deal with for our whole lives, being told we’re not good enough for anywhere and that we should just be quiet and keep our heads down and get over it. that our opinions, despite coming from a unique perspective with a unique relationship to the subject in question, are less valid or real than “actual” chinese people, you know? and sometimes i see that and im like lmfao just sneer at me for being jook-sing and leave then if you’re so eager to think of me as lesser.

so yeah, basically im of a few minds: true! diaspora fans don’t get to throw their weight around just because they’re diaspo. they don’t get carte blanche to act like bullies or try to shape the fandom to their own personal liking and crusade against people who disagree with them. they don’t get to pretend their heritage makes them superior to everyone else, and i think western diaspora especially need to be careful when asserting any kind of moral lens over the text to acknowledge that we have our own biases to interrogate. i am not immune.meme etc. on the other hand, this vein of criticism tends to put all diaspo in a bit of a double-bind, and also, however unintentionally, plays into the general, continuous trend of dismissing diaspora for being diaspora, and i’m really not about that. i don’t think that’s the motivation behind opinions like this, but i do think that when the basis for the argument hinges on the idea that diaspora are not “real” chinese, no matter how much I too have beef with certain diaspora fans, the argument needs to be revisited. 

(ko-fi)

🍵 ((un)popular) opinions meme

[universallywriting]

Marinette Being a Special Powerful Girl is Good, Actually, and Not for the Reasons You Might Think

Can’t believe I’m doing this but, uh, let’s do some Miraculous Ladybug meta.

I’ll start by saying that the following is my opinion and just one way of looking at the text. If you read it different, you aren’t inherently wrong or bad or anything like that. I’ve just noticed people starting to engage in “Mary Sue” style discourse, and I’d like to disagree with that, and explain which I think that there’s another more valuable way to read the show.

See, MLB is sort of “casually woke”, and by that I mean the show, through passive representation and metaphor, clearly supports diversity. The show doesn’t typically go out of its way to promot this - we don’t get a lot of stories about directly confronting racism and sexism and tearing them down. When we do, it tends to be in code. “Rice flour” is a pretty great example of talking about racism without actually talking about racism.

Because it’s so passive, I feel like a lot of people miss that valuing diversity and rejecting these hierarchal systems is a huge theme of the show and has been from the very beginning. Season One is hard for a lot of people to get through, and the reason why is because of the repetitive nature. MLB values it’s background characters - everyone matters, everyone has problems, everyone has gifts. That means we get a lot of stories about people who, in most shows, don’t matter. But they do in MLB.

That’s what makes Marinette so special. Marinette is able to acknowledge the diversity of the people she’s surrounded by. She values the differences in people, and encourages people to follow their own path, and scolds people for trying to force others to hide who they are. Marinette represents change and progress - she makes change and progress, and these changes are good. The point of “Furious Fu” is literally that Su-Han shows up, antiquated and out-of-date with values from nearly two centuries ago, and is forced to acknowledge that the changes happening in the world are positive.

You know. As if a different perspective has incredible value.

Although the holders appear to come from a variety of backgrounds, the show is currently implying that the guardians have been, for a very long time, a group of isolated men. These men determine who is worthy of power and when it should be taken away. They have very specific rules about the type of people who are allowed to receive this power on loan. The “on loan” part is important - because the guardians are always the one with the “right” to take away the miraculous from other people. They even have rules about keeping the young from holding the miraculous but…. Not against their own children training and becoming guardians and having uncontrolled access to the miraculous.

That’s not a plot hole. That’s the way power and privilege work systemically.

Marinette represents the first time that the miraculous holders are no longer borrowing their power, but control it. This change is depicted as positive, and it’s not just because Marinette is a super special cool girl. It’s deeper than that.

Because. LIke. Lemme talk about our girl Alya.

I cannot understate how powerful the moment is when Alya is permanently handed her miraculous. It’s not a mistake or an accident that the first person Marinette permanently hands a miraculous to is a black girl. That’s important. It means something. The show easily could have been written so that Marinette gave it to Luka, but they didn’t go down that path. They wrote the story in such a way to ensure it was Alyra.

Alya is the person who supports Marinette while she’s breaking down. Alya is the only person Marinette can trust enough to confide it. Alya is the person who figures out how Marinette can make protective charms, as well as providing countless pieces of important intel across the series from her own, independent research - before she’s ever handed the power of the miraculous. Alya, this absolute angel of a girl, is shown to reject Hawkmoth. She hands back her miraculous every time, returning the power she’s been given. Even when she thinks that Marinette will never trust her to wield it again, she hands her power back to Marinette.

Marinette was trying to follow the old rules and the show has answered this with a forceful, resounding “No.” We hear Marinette say directly that she was wrong. It is not her place to choose when and how other people use their power. It is wrong for her to keep it and pass it out when she feels it’s necessary, rather than trusting her friends who have proved themselves worthy of this power.

So then why is Marinette so strong? Why can she wield all the miraculous? Why is she the best Ladybug? And, to me, the answer is simple. If Marinette couldn’t wield this power herself, what would giving it away really mean? If the kwamis were useless to Marinette, how much would it really say for her to permanently give them out instead of temporarily?

Marinette could hold every miraculous if she wanted to. She could use multi-mouse every mission and take every role for herself. We have proof of that now. Technically, Marinette could do this on her own. She doesn’t need to trust others, like other people in the past were required to. Others had no choice but to loan out the miraculous to others. Marinette does.

When Marinette permanently gives Alya the miraculous, she’s saying, “You matter as much as I do.” She’s saying that it doesn’t matter that Marinette has the ability to use all this power herself. She shouldn’t. She knows that other people are just as worthy as she is, with their own strengths and weaknesses, and that their differences and diversity make them stronger. Miraculous Ladybug is the story of Marinette creating a team of superheroes, and this has become more and more evident every season, especially with the time travel. This is not the story of super special Marinette saving the day. This is the story of Marinette choosing to be a leader, and a team player, and creating the strongest team of superheroes the world has ever known because of it.

Marinette’s not a Mary Sue. She’s acknowledging her own power, her own privilege, and then doing her best to dismantle it.

And, honestly, I think that’s absolutely fantastic.

[galemalio]

3 Examples of Racial Bias in Animation Storytelling

It’s not hard to grasp that a white person, while not explicitly or consciously racist in the sense we might usually imagine, is still inherently racially biased because they benefit from and grow up used to white supremacy.” - Scottishwobbly, Tumblr

This is nothing new. This is something POC (People of Color) have been talking about in separate fandoms. Nevertheless, it needs to be acknowledged by those unaware.

This article is not made to say that some of the animations that I will use as examples are bad. But in the hopes that we, as consumers and creators, will do better in the future in handling characters that are POC. 

Most often, racial bias in storytelling is when the narrative treats white or light skin toned characters better than darker skin toned characters. The darker skin toned characters are often POC-coded or actual POC.

White creators often do not notice their racial bias in their storytelling as they benefit from and grow up with white privileges and white supremacy. This can also apply to light-skinned POC who have light skin priviliges. 

Some of us don’t often see it but real people who relate to the characters of color do. Especially when it reflects from their experiences with racial bias, microaggressions, colorism and flat out racism.

So when they speak up, it’s important to listen to them to unlearn the racial bias we may have in ourselves. 

I will be emphasizing “the narrative” for I am criticizing how the story treats its dark-skinned characters and not because I am criticizing the characters themselves.

This article is critiqued by @visibilityofcolor​ as a sensitivity reader once and then additions were made before publishing. If you’re looking for a Black sensitivity reader, you can contact her. 

This article is a 14-minute read at average speed so buckle up. Unless you want to skip to your show mentioned below. External Tumblr Resources will be put in the reblog.

Here are three examples that I was made aware of. 

Example #1: The Narrative Treats the Light-Skinned Character at the Expense of the Dark-Skinned Character

Steven Universe was one of the animations that pushed lgbt+ representation in cartoon media. However, there are narratives here and there that showed racial bias. 

SU creator Rebecca Sugar was raised with "Jewish sensibilities" and both siblings observe the lighting of Hanukkah candles with their parents through Skype.[1] Rebecca Sugar also talked about being non-binary.[2] 

But as a white person, she (and the rest of the SU crew) is not aware of the inherently biased values from growing up and benefiting from white privilege. 

One example is the human zoo. There are people that have spoken up about this such as @jellyfax​​ of Tumblr who pointed out that the Crewniverse mishandled a loaded topic and reinforced a white colonist propaganda where the captive humans of mostly black/brown people are naive, docile and childlike in order to subjugate the people that they colonized. .

What I’m here is how a character of color from the main cast is more obligated to the lighter-skinned character. 

In the episode, Friend Ship, one fan had spoken out about how Garnet, who had been validly angry at Pearl, was compelled by a dangerous situation to forgive Pearl. Garnet is a Black-coded character. While Pearl is a light-skinned character.  

Garnet was mad at Pearl for tricking her into always fusing with her. Then they were trapped in a chamber that was going to crush them. In this situation, they have to fuse in order to save themselves but Garnet refuses to because she was still angry at her. 

In the end, they were forced to talk it out, for Garnet to understand Pearl’s reason for wanting to fuse with her and everything worked out well.

The narrative focused so much on Pearl’s self-worth issues at the expense of Garnet’s right to be angry. 

Yes, it showed that Pearl is trying her best to make up for it but Garnet should have been allowed to work at her own anger at her own pace instead of being obligated to consider Pearl’s feelings over her own. 

I wouldn’t have noticed it until someone had mentioned it. Because it was never my experience. 

But it’s there, continuing the message that it’s okay to put the emotional labor on Black people and disregard their own feelings for the sake of the non-Black people who have hurt them -particularly light-skinned women. 

White Fragility and Being Silenced White Woman Tears

Again, racial bias in animation storytelling is often not intentional because white creators do not experience it due to white privilege. 

Without meaning to, that scene alone shows Garnet as the Angry Black woman trope that is ungrateful and rude to Pearl who then ends up in tears. Without meaning to, Pearl with her light skin, became the tearful white girl trope that had to be sympathized over.

The Angry Black Woman trope is a combination of the worst negative stereotypes of a Black woman: overly aggressive, domineering, emasculating, loud, disagreeable and uppity.[13] 

The Tearful white girl trope comes from the combination of the stereotypes of white women being morally upstanding and delicate and therefore should be protected.[13] 

Which, unfortunately, many white women have taken advantage of.

These two tropes are harmful to WOC (Women of Color) because they experience the "weary weaponizing of white women's tears". This tactic employed by many white women incites sympathy and avoids accountability for their actions, turning the tables to their accuser and forcing their accuser to understand them instead.

(Image by Виктория Бородинова from Pixabay)

In "Weapon of lass destruction: The tears of a white woman", Author Shay described that white tears turns a white woman into the priority of whatever space she's in. "It doesn't matter if you're right, once her tears are activated, you cease to exist." [11] 

White woman tears have gotten Black people beaten and lynched such as Emmett Till. Carolyn Bryant who had accused 14 year old Emmett Till of sexually harassing her in 1955, admitted she lied about those claims years later in 2007.[15]

In Awesomely Luvvie's "About the Weary Weaponizing of White Women Tears", she states that the innocent white woman is a caricature many subconsciously embrace because it hides them from consequences. [10]

In The Guardian’s article, "How White Women Use Strategic Tears to Silence Women of Colour", Ruby Hamad shares her experience:

"Often, when I have attempted to speak to or confront a white woman about something she has said or done that has impacted me adversely, I am met with tearful denials and indignant accusations that I am hurting her. My confidence diminished and second-guessing myself, I either flare up in frustration at not being heard (which only seems to prove her point) or I back down immediately, apologising and consoling the very person causing me harm."[4]

This is not to say that all crying white women are insincere. But as activist Rachel Cargle said:

“I refuse to listen to white women cry about something. When women have come up to me crying, I say, ‘Let me know when you feel a little better, then maybe we can talk.’”[3]

One of the most quoted words in “White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism.” is this:

“It is white people’s responsibility to be less fragile; people of color don’t need to twist themselves into knots trying to navigate us as painlessly as possible.”[3]  

When white women cry in defense, instead of taking accountability, People of Color are then gaslighted into thinking they’re the bad guy. This is emotional abuse and a manipulation tactic. 

People of Color shouldn’t have to bend backwards to accommodate discomfited white or light-skinned people who have hurt them. 

How She-Ra and the Princesses of Power (SPOP) Did It Right

Despite SPOP having good lgbtq+ representations, there are other biases in the show. Such as Mara, a WOC whose only purpose was to sacrifice herself for the white protagonist. There was also the insensitive joke in their stream regarding Bow’s sibling that perpetuated an Anti-Black stereotype which Noelle Stevenson has apologized for.[14]

But the scene I have encountered where the Black character was validly angry and his feelings were treated well by the narrative, came from SPOP.

Bow, a black character, was validly angry at Glimmer, a lighter skinned character. Glimmer made a lot of bad decisions, one of them was using Adora and their friends as bait, without their knowledge, to lure out and capture Catra.  

Glimmer tearfully apologized in Season 5, Episode 4. Adora readily forgave her. But Bow didn't. 

They faced dangers along the way but the story didn't put them in a dangerous situation where Bow has to forgive Glimmer in order to get out of it. 

This was Glimmer's words of apology:

"Look, I know you're still mad at me. Maybe you'll be mad at me for a really long time. I deserved it. And maybe... maybe we'll never be friends like we used to be. But I'm not going to stop trying to make it better. I made a mistake with the heart of Etheria. I should've listened to you and I'm sorry. You get to be mad. For as long as you need to be. But I'm not going anywhere. And when you're ready, I'll be here."

In short, Bow was allowed to take the time to be mad and not just get over it for someone else’s sake. The story validates his feelings and he was allowed to take his own pace. That is emotional respect the story gave to him.

Example #2: The Narrative Gives Better Endings or Portrayals to Colonizers than Their Victims

Avatar: The Last Airbender has handled dark themes well such as genocide, war, PTSD, disability and redemption with great worldbuilding.

However, I never noticed the racial bias in ATLA until people spoke up of the double standards in ATLA’s treatment of light-skinned colonizers compared to their dark-skinned victims-turned-villains.

The characters in question -Iroh, Azula, Jet and Hama- are all flawed and well-rounded in a believable way. But how the narrative treats them is unequal.

General Iroh is an ex-colonizer who gets to redeem himself and not answer for his past war crimes, living a peaceful life as a tea shop owner. The only reason Iroh changed was when he was personally affected by the negativity of their military subjugation -his son’s death. It wasn’t the harm of the Fire nation ravaging Earth kingdom villages or cities and affecting millions of people that opened his eyes.

Azula, the tyrannical daughter, had closure of her mother's rejection when she was a child and was able to escape imprisonment.

Jet and Hama, victims of colonization who have done bad things, did not get similar conclusions to their stories OR compensation for what they have gone through from the Fire Nation's colonization. 

Jet was given a second chance but was arrested for trying to expose Zuko and Iroh being firebenders -firebenders who were their enemies for conquering their villages. Then he died from the injuries of the person who had brainwashed and mind-controlled him. 

Hama was imprisoned for life. 

Compared to the sins of the light-skinned colonizers, the narrative didn’t give Jet and Hama the development where they could heal from their trauma, receive compensation for what happened to them and really have a chance in life. 

The dark-skinned victims of colonization just became a lesson to the viewers how they shouldn’t hold grudges for being colonized. The end. They have received consequences for their actions but there is no continuation to their stories after that. 

It almost seems like the narrative is saying that because they have harmed colonizers who have no part in their trauma (and in Jet’s case, some Earth kingdom villagers), they are therefore unworthy to be given an actual chance in life. 

While Azula and Iroh, who have actively participated in conquering, colonizing and attacking the Earth Kingdom itself, were.   

Someone once said that if indigenous people have control over Hama’s story, it would have been done differently. But the ATLA crew are white, non-indigenous people who prioritized redeeming colonizers instead.

The narrative has also affected how the ATLA fandom thinks. If most fans are asked who they would want to be redeemed, the popular option would be Azula over Jet or Hama.

Once again, I don’t think the ATLA crew noticed it due to their racial bias. But still, the harm is done and the racially biased message is continued: 

The colonizers and their descendants don’t have to make amends for the colonizers’ crimes. Or if they do, only lightly since it’s in the past (no matter how recent that past is). 

The colonized who rebel will tend to hurt innocent people and then get a grisly end for getting in way over their heads.  

I would venture as far as to say that the narrative may have the  added subconscious desire to quiet their white anxiety on the vengeance of the colonized. As I have learned when writing about Vodou stereotypes and how they have stemmed from the history of white anxiety of Black vengeance, of Black fetishization and of dissolution of the white race through intermarriages.

In @visibilityofcolor’s blog, someone asked:

 “So I saw some of the really heated debates on here and on twitter about how if Iroh and Azula can be portrayed sympathetically despite their actions then characters like Jet and Hama should've been given a chance too. Do you think that the writers understood the implications of only redeeming characters from the colonizer/fascist nation but not giving the characters who suffered because of their fascism a second chance too?”

To which VisibilityOfColor replied:

“No, because at the end of the day, the writers are white. When it comes to stuff like this, it’s no surprise when we see white writers redeem problematic characters before they actually redeem victims of those racist problematic characters. For instance, Dave Filioni, who worked on both avatar and star wars rebels, did the same thing when redeeming agent kallus who was an soldiers in the imperial army and took credit for a genocide. where as victims of the empire were still painted in negative lights. i really don’t think they understand.

They have this ‘be the better person’ view on things, which is what a lot of white people tend to emulate when it comes to people of color standing up to their oppressors. and unfortunately, these are ideas passed on to children, esp minorities. that they should forgive people and communities who hurt them and ‘be the better person’. this is why white ppl don’t need to write narratives for people of color.”

Example #3: The Narrative Favors the Light Skinned Character Than Dark Skinned Character in Similar Situations

I would like to reiterate that racial bias in storytelling is often not intentional. I am not saying the creators and the people who support them are bad people. No.

However, I encourage that once a racial bias is made known in our work, it is our responsibility to change them to stop the perpetuation of its harmful message.

Hazbin Hotel is a popular cartoon with whimsical designs and its concept opens the conversation about redemption. The creator, Vivziepop may not have noticed the racial bias in her cartoon as a white Latina [5] that grew up with and benefits from white privileges, along with the Hazbin crew. 

In the Youtbe video, "Hazbin Hotel - How Art took over Writing", Staxlotl states:

“I understand that there was a lot of time and effort put into this pilot, almost three years worth of effort. But I think most of that time was spent into the art and visuals when it should’ve gone into polishing the writing in the characters.”[6]

Once again, I’m not here to critique the characters but how the narrative treats its dark-skinned characters.

The story treats Charlie, the white-skinned, “Disney-esque” protagonist princess differently from how it treats Vaggie, the dark-skinned, more outspoken and protective Latina girlfriend of Charlie who supports the princess’ cause. 

In its pilot episode, both girls experience humiliation. While Charlie is portrayed by the story as someone the viewers have to feel sorry for...

...Vaggie is portrayed in her humiliation as the butt of the joke for the viewers.

While they both didn’t like what Angel Dust did, Charlie was sympathized over in the narrative as a moment... 

...while Vaggie’s angry but valid callouts were dismissed and ignored as part of the comedy.

While Charlie was someone that needs to be protected in the narrative... 

...Vaggie is left to fend for herself. 

Again, I don’t think the creators noticed the racial bias of their cartoon. However, this racial bias is reflected in the harmful perceptions that dark-skinned women, particularly Black women and Black girls, are more mature, tougher and need less protection at a young age.[7] 

This adultification bias perceives them as challenging authority when they express strong or contrary views and are then given harsher discipline than white girls who misbehave.[8] And this continues when they grow up.

In a 2017 study, Black women and girls aged 12-60 years old confirmed they are treated harsher by their white peers and are accused of being aggressive when they would defend themselves or explain their point of view to authority figures.[8] 

This bias also coincides with the Spicy Latina trope of a brown-skinned, hot-blooded, quick-tempered and passionate woman.

Everyday Feminism described this trope as "Although objects of desire for many, the spicy Latina may have too much personality to handle. So much so that she is often viewed as domineering or emasculating." [16]

Sounds familiar? (Look at Angry Black Woman trope above.)

Why is it that a light-skinned character, Charlie, is allowed to be vulnerable and be sympathized while the dark-skinned Latina character, Vaggie, is mocked, dismissed and expected to tough it out?

Severina Ware had to remind the world in her article that relates to the bias against dark skinned characters:

“Black women are not offered the protection and gentleness of our white counterparts. We are not given permission to be soft and delicate. We are required to exhibit strength and fortitude not only because our lives depend on it, but because so many others depend on us. Black women should not be charged with the responsibility of saving everyone when nobody is here to save us.”[12] 

As @cullenvhenan​ of Tumblr has said in her post:

“if you're a white creator and your brown/black characters are always sassy, reckless, aggressive or cold and your white characters are always soft, demure, shy and introverted you should think about maybe why you did that”

(Image above from Iowa Law Reviews’ “Aggressive Encounters & White Fragility: Deconstructing the Trope of the Angry Black Woman”)

Detecting Your Own Racial Bias

It would be hard. No matter how much you edit and create, you may miss it because it was never your experience. 

So how do we prevent our racial bias from creeping into our creations?

Listen to POC and their feedback.

As @charishjb from Instagram has shared, here is one of the things that we can do (tumblr link here) [9]:

Consider POC voices. Listen to their experiences. Hire sensitivity POC readers. Put multiple POC voices in positions of leadership in creative projects.

Then we can stop the racial bias that perpetuates again and again in the media. I hope for that future.

[eve-ate-the-right-fruit]

So I’m not liveblogging conference this time, because I’m wanting to stay in the moment and take my spiritual promptings as they come, rather than spending some of my brainpower composing posts and reading other people’s thoughts before I’ve had time to gauge my own. I’m also blessed that I get to attend two sessions of conference, so I’m not wanting to be on my phone while I’m in the conference center. I just wanted to jot down Saturday’s highlights before I go to sleep.

I was there for the morning session in person, and it was crazy how strongly I felt the Spirit just watching the first presidency enter the room. Y’all know I have my issues with those three men, but I dunno, there was something about us all standing together, sharing that moment. I really do believe they are the successors to an important spiritual legacy, even if I’m not always a fan of how they wield their institutional power.

This conference, I’m trying to willfully misread the dogwhistles. I think members of the church get so caught up in these catchphrases that we miss the lessons behind them that the Lord wants us to hear. I can’t feel the Spirit if I’m playing 3D chess with implications that might not have even occurred to the speaker. I get why we do this, I know it’s a defense mechanism, but it tires me. Even if the speaker did mean a seemingly innocuous phrase in a homophobic way, that’s not how the Lord meant it. I’m going to skip that nonsense and focus on the message the Lord wants me to hear.

So when Holland talked about how the Lord wants us to give all of ourselves, as we are, I thought, this also includes our queerness. God receives the gift of our queerness when we give ourselves to Him. When Christofferson talked about how God’s unconditional love does not excuse us from the mandate to become our best selves, I refused to see my queerness as something that needed to be fixed. 

I think we all have flaws that we don’t work on because we’ve become complacent with them. I know someone in my life who says “I’m very impatient, that’s the kind of person I am,” and tries to use that as an excuse for the way he treats others when he gets impatient. God loves that brother just as he is, but He still wants him to be patient with others’ shortcomings.

Elder Gilbert was my favorite talk of the morning session. I’m probably not the first to say that he did a great job talking about privilege.

I actually liked the topic of Elder Oaks’s talk, even if I disagreed with a few of the points he made. I don’t support writing off people who stop attending church as “choosing to be offended.” But Elder Oaks is right that we get service opportunities, exposure to new viewpoints, and community support by attending church that we don’t get by practicing solitary spirituality, and I think that’s a message people need to hear.

I don’t have as much to say about the afternoon and evening sessions, just that I really loved Sister Porter’s story about the guy who returned to church activity after 20 years. I want to see more church leaders validate struggling with difficult questions about the church and moving forward with faith at the same time.

I get the sense that Elder Ballard thinks he won’t be much longer for this earth. His talk invites you to challenge yourself. What are your priorities?

Sister Eubank’s talk seemed different from other talks that have made a point of highlighting the church’s humanitarian efforts. It felt like she was coming from a place of wanting to be clear and transparent about how tithing funds are spent. It felt like she was showing us the church’s report card. I hope we get a talk like that every conference.

I also liked how more than a few speakers dunked on materialism. Not exactly radical, but it is the kind of messaging we need.

Well, this post has gone on long enough. I’ll probably write up something similar tomorrow night.