#I mean the internet more broadly obviously… but it’s like tumblr’s Thing no | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

abwatt · 1 year

Text

getting clients by the theoretical numbers

Yesterday, I spent $10.00 to ‘blaze’ a Tumblr post, so that it would be shown on the walls of 2500 people in America between 11:00 am Eastern time on Saturday 18 February 2023 and Sunday 19 February 2023 at 11:00 am. Twenty-four hours, 2500 people. Ten bucks, or a thousand pennies, and a nominal 5000 “eyeballs” (being aware that in any 2500 people there are going to be some blind folks, some one-eyed, etc). If I haven’t made an order of magnitude mistake, I paid two cents for every 5 people who saw my blazed post.

If you’d like to know more about why I did this...

Now, marketing theory predicts that any ad campaign is going to have about 1.25% return on investment, at each of three levels— if you know you got 2500 people to see your ad, then roughly 31 of them will stop long enough to look at it and read it. Then, roughly 1.25% of those 31 people will click the link. (which is 0.39ths of a person) — which means that you have somewhere between a 1 in 3 chance and 1 in 2 chance that one of those 31 people will be interested enough at that moment to see your product. And then you multiply that single person by 1.25% again, and you’re flipping a coin — a roughly 50% chfor ance or 1 in 2 that they’re interested enough at that moment to buy your product.

So, that’s the game.

How did I do with my blazed post, then? Well, it got three re-blogs and 12 likes. So in terms of engagement, it got a lot... considerably more than the last six astrology columns I posted.

But — (and this is complicated, because a lot more people use anonymizing software or use computers that automatically prevent them from getting tracked, than used to) there was literally not a single tracked visitor from Tumblr to my own website. Not a single person clicked the link — at least, not that I know about, bearing in mind that a lot of people use anonymizers or have built-in ones on their phone or laptop.

In essence, I don’t know if I did better or worse than my baseline performance at all. There’s no reason to assume that I did, though: twelve likes and three re-blogs is above the norm. It’s nearly half of the 31 theoretical people who engaged with the ad long enough to read it. Half the people who the theory said would engage, engaged-and-responded to the ad, That’s astonishing, and very positive.

But.

It also implies that the internet has another 1.25% step somewhere between looking at a given ad, and purchase of something from that advertiser’s website, something like click-throughs. And $10 for 2500 impressions is not nearly enough.

So we have this table.

1.25% of viewers will read the ad; 50 of those will engage with it in some fashion and remix-reblog-like it.

1.25% of ‘lively engagers’ will visit the website;

1.25% of visitors will investigate to buy;

1.25% of investigators will buy.

Based on that, how many impressions do I need to have to make one sale?

Well...

1 buyer / 0.0125 = 80 investigators

80 investigators / 0.0125 = 6,400 lively visitors

6,400 lively visitors / 0.0125 = 500,000 engagers

which is basically a million viewers.

But blazing a post to a million people isn’t an option. There's basically a $10 tier, a $25 tier, a $65 tier, and a $150 tier. It’s $150 to blaze a post to 50,000 people on Tumblr. For that price I get...

625 engagers

312 engagers

3.9 lively visitors

a 4% chance that one of them will investigate deeper

a 6 in 10,0000 chance that this person would buy today.

OH.

And suddenly two things should be clear, if you’ve read this far.

If you want a hundred regular reliable customers, (particularly as something like a Tarot reader or astrologer), this can only be achieved by word-of-mouth, living in the same neighborhood (loosely/broadly defined) as them, or being obviously available to each other somehow (like through a shop or some other sort of marketplace portal). You need a LOT of people, or you need to be a specialty service-provider, or both.

A lot of advertising works by repeated exposure, rather than one-off ads; the hardware store down the road from you in a town of 50,000 has a sign that 80% of the population sees five days a week .... those people represent 200,000 views a week... live there for 10 weeks, and you become part of the two million views, and probably part of that hardware store’s word-of-mouth campaign, too (which has a much higher success rate than 1.25%)

And this means that I have a magical target. I have a sense of what I would like to achieve — more paying clients for my astrology business. I have a sense of what the baseline numbers of an ad campaign would be — what it will cost me financially, and what sorts of numbers I need under ordinary circumstances to get the number of clients I would like to have.... And third, I have a sense of how improbable it would be to go from here where I am now, to there where I would like to be.

Which means I have some sense of how I’ll know when the magic worked.

And that’s pretty elegant.

In a bit, before I do any magic, I’ll think through the ethics of what I want to do and why, and how I’ll structure the work... and I’ll share that thought process here.

#advertising magic #magic of advertising #baseline expectations

5 notes · View notes

loki-zen · 2 years

Text

There’s all kinds widely-held truisms about how women (or people who are perceived as women, or as women with certain additional adjectives) are treated and can interact with the world that seems totally foreign to my experience, even though I wouldn’t deny for a second that to all intents and purposes ‘white, cis, middle-class woman’ is how I am broadly perceived.*

Some of this stuff is located in other people and some of it’s in me.

For instance, I think I am typically assumed to be both good and safe with kids Because Girl, but I live in fear of people acting on this perception because on some level I’m convinced that I’m not seen that way?

I have good cause to worry on some fronts - I know my being found out as a kinkster would shatter this perception for some, or as poly or bisexual, and I’ve even heard of terves tryna brand people as unsafe to be around children because they’re trans-positive (they frame this in terms that make it sound like the kinkster thing, in fact!). And it’s definitely true that there can be a certain.. like the reaction can be more extreme when they originally perceived you as safe bc they’re taking out their anger at themselves for being ‘wrong’ on you.

But I don’t think that’s it, not entirely. I think lots of people-perceived-as-women* more visually weird than me nevertheless have a confidence I lack here; they seem to be able to take an unrelated small child running up and hugging you in such a fashion that their innocent-of-any-connotations face bounces off your clothed mons pubis in their stride, rather than posting about it on tumblr years after they quit teaching youth theatre because of how profoundly uncomfortable it made them in a way that seems analogous to what I’ve always been told is the particularly male(/perceived thereas) fear that if you breathe wrong around children people might brand you The Worst Thing Imaginable.

I’ve never scored free drinks or drugs from an attracted stranger - this has always seemed to me to be obviously Not Fucking Worth It, and I feel kind of attacked when someone offers, which in any case hasn’t actually been all that often, given how often internet men think this sort of thing happens, especially to women who clearly are considered attractive by a fair number of people.

I’ve never taken it for granted that security apparatus wasn’t interested in me. I used to get followed around department shops by security personnel. I’ve had less-than-satisfactory interactions with the police, including one I’m pretty sure I still have trauma from. I’m acutely aware that people like me are vulnerable to police and state-official violence.

I don’t really have a point here, it’s just.. even people on my side, even people who agree with me on a lot of stuff that I think most people aren’t sufficiently nuanced about do still look at me and assume that things like this are true of me.

*in terms of what I am I could add an asterisk to pretty much every list item but ‘middle class’, and that’s provided you understand ‘middle class’ in a British way, but this isn’t the Carrd that I don’t have so I’ll leave this digression at its current length.

* I hope this term is clear? I intend it to mean “mostly the category ‘women’, but excluding those people who are women but are not (presently, in the relevant context, or yet) perceived as women, and including those who are not women but are readily perceived as women.

15 notes · View notes

tricktster · 4 years

Note

Is TST for the satanic temple

It is merely a happy happy happy coincidence, but don’t take that to mean that they don’t have my full-throated support and admiration.

Since you kids are on tumblr, I’m guessing a lot of you already know that The Satanic Temple (TST) is not, in fact, a group of people who worship Satan. For those of you who might (understandably) have TST confused with an an actual Satan-worshipping entity, rest assured - supporting TST requires no actual Satan worship - or anything worship, it’s a “non-theistic religion.”

So, you might be wondering, what’s the point of a purported Satanic church that explicitly does not believe in, nor worship, Satan?

Great rhetorical question! Thank you for the invitation to geek out! In this essay I will explain why The Satanic Temple is an incredibly clever maneuver to protect the individual rights and liberties of people in the United States of America, and why you should all, regardless of religious belief, stan them. I am sorry! This is going to be a long one! I’m going to use a page break!

(Apologies if anything I say here is really basic obvious stuff that you already know. I will probably cover some familiar ground, but I didn’t get taught about any of this in high school beyond a few throwaway paragraphs in a textbook, so I’m writing with an audience of ‘me in high school’ in mind.)

As you know, the founding fathers did some pretty wild shit when they decided on what the United States of America was going to look like, and among the wildest was the decision that America would not have a state religion. I cannot express to you guys how significant this decision was in shaping American culture... soooo I won’t try because it’s beside the point and this is already going to be way too long. All you really need to take away is the following:

The U.S. constitution provides both that religion and government are to be kept separate, and that the free exercise of religion is a fundamental individual right, and those portions of the constitution have pissed a lot of people off over the last 244 years.

So there’s actually three parts of the bill of rights that are in play here. In the First Amendment, we have the Establishment Clause, and the Free Exercise Clause:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion [The Establishment Clause], or prohibiting the free exercise thereof [The Free Exercise Clause]; or abridging the freedom of speech [...]”

These clauses were the only part of the Constitution that touched on religion until the 14th amendment was ratified in 1868. For those of you who are curious about the timing of a new amendment in 1869 and are as bad with significant dates as I am, the Civil War ended in 1865, and, as such, it’s worth noting that the purpose of the 14th Amendment was to guarantee equal civil and legal rights to Black people. I am not the first person to note that uh, we are clearly still working on that.

Anyway, for our purposes, the pertinent part of the 14th amendment is the Equal Protection Clause:

“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Okay, very broadly, here’s what each clause actually does:

The Establishment Clause says that the US government cannot sponsor any religion, or involve itself in religion to the benefit of one religion over another.

The Free Exercise clause says that the US government cannot stop someone from holding a religious belief (or force them to adhere to another religious belief)

The Equal Protection Clause prohibits discrimination on the basis of religious belief

These all look pretty great on paper, but in practice, enforcing them has been wildly hit or miss. I’m going to discuss why, so I’ll say up front that none of this should not be construed as an attack on Christianity. Religious faith is intensely personal, and I want to emphasize that I am in no way advocating for adherents to the Christian faith to be unable to practice that faith. I am a sincere advocate for everyone to be able to freely practice their own religious beliefs (or lack thereof), and that’s exactly what’s at issue here - when one religion is positioned above all others, anyone who does not believe in that particular religion is impacted detrimentally.

So with that caveat in place, it’s important to recognize the following: the United States is, and has always been, a majority Christian nation. 65% of Americans identified as Christian in 2019, which is a historic low. Even ten years back, it was closer to 85%. In accordance with the demographics of the US, Christianity is, if anything, over-represented in US government. 85.4% of US congressmen identify as Christian. 82 out of the 100 senators identify as Christian (I’m not counting members of congress or the senate who identify as members of the Church of Latter Day Saints in those numbers). Furthermore, every single president has identified themselves as Christian - the spiciest America has gotten in re: the religious beliefs of a POTUS was JFK, who was, you know, Catholic.

This is important, because it directly impacts how we interpret what “separation of church and state,” “free exercise of religion,” and “nondiscrimination on the basis of faith” actually mean. When a country is predominantly comprised of people who share the same faith, that faith becomes part of the shared cultural concept of national identity: even though the US is, in practice, relatively diverse in terms of ethnicities and religious faiths (as far as countries go), if you ask someone on the street to imagine an American, they are probably going to imagine a white dude who loves Flag and also Jesus. That national identity is reflected in the country’s chosen representatives, and in return, in the legislation passed by those representatives and the behavior expressly condoned by the government as a whole. The end result of all of this is that in the United States of America, Christianity and the exercise of government frequently intersect.

Take the late forties and early fifties. WWII is over, and two global superpowers have emerged that are at diametrical positions; there’s our old capitalist pal the US in one corner, and in the other, the godless, socialist menace of the USSR. I’m being silly and hyperbolic here, but not about the godless bit: the USSR was officially an athiest state, and the government forcibly converted its citizens to atheism. So, the US squints at this and swings hard in the opposite direction; this is a Christian nation, we are sticking “under god” in the pledge of allegiance, we are putting Ten Commandment sculptures in front of our courthouses, we are mandating prayer in school, and if you have an issue with any of that, you are not a patriotic American.

Some of that stuff from the 50s still exists today (“under god” is still kicking around), but a lot more of it is essentially outlawed thanks to the branch of government that I haven’t mentioned yet, the federal judiciary. How this played out was essentially that someone would be impacted by state-sponsored Christianity, they would sue, and their case would eventually be appealed up to the level of the Supreme Court, who would look at the Constitution, admit that it’s pretty unequivocal about the whole separation of church and state thing, and bar the state sponsored religious practice at issue, or at the very least ensure that the state was not sponsoring one faith to the exclusion of others. So, to return to our ten commandments in front of the courthouse or nativity scene outside of a government building; (I’m really simplifying things here but this is the gist) the court has repeatedly decided, those are fine, as long as you give fair play to any other religion that wants to erect their own religious display there too. It’s either that all religions have an equal opportunity to be represented, or no religion does.

I know, this is supposed to be about why The Satanic Temple is cool. We’re getting there.

Let’s jump ahead to the early 2000s. Bush Jr. is president, thanks in no small part to massive evangelical Christian support, and those evangelical Christians have some demands: they want schools to teach creationism, they’re gunning directly for reproductive rights, and they have had enough of this whole gay nonsense. A lot of legislation gets passed during the Bush era that gives the Evangelical base what they want, and among those big evangelical wins was on teaching intelligent design in schools. This didn’t happen everywhere, but some states basically said that intelligent design could be taught alongside evolution in public school science classes, and that evolution and intelligent design had to be portayed as equally valid theories.

Obviously, a lot people were upset about this, because... well, it’s science class. Among the people who thought this whole thing was bullshit was a guy named Bobby Henderson, who wrote an open letter to the Kansas Board of Education in 2005. Referencing the Supreme Court decisions I discussed earlier (either all religious beliefs get equal play or none of them do), Bobby demanded that along with evolution and intelligent design, Kansas schools devote equal time to teaching the creation story of his religious faith, and if any of this is sounding familiar, that’s because Bobby described his religious faith as “Flying Spaghetti Monsterism.”

The memetic potential of this argument was basically designed for the internet era, and it wasn’t too long before purported adherents to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster was filing lawsuits that challenged all sorts of government practices that obviously skewed Christian. They were making classic reductio ad absurdum arguments; if it was ridiculous that the government should promote the message of the Flying Spaghetti Monster in a given sphere, it was equally ridiculous that the government should promote the message of other religious faiths in that same sphere.

The whole pastafarian movement had one major weakness, however - it was expressly, deliberately silly. Nobody could mistake a Flying Spaghetti Monster argument to be made in good faith, and the courts used this to basically ignore FSM challenges that would otherwise be valid. Here’s what the Nebraska federal district court decided in the big Flying Spaghetti Monster case, Cavanaugh v. Bartlet:

“The Court finds that FSMism is not a ‘religion’ within the meaning of the relevant federal statutes and constitutional jurisprudence. It is, rather, a parody, intended to advance an argument about science, the evolution of life, and the place of religion in public education. Those are important issues, and FSMism contains a serious argument, but that does not mean that the trappings of the satire used to make that argument are entitled to protection as a ‘religion.’”

That’s the Pastafarian problem in a nutshell. They had great points, but they weren’t actually a religion, and that left the courts free to disregard their arguments by saying that they lacked standing. “Standing” is legalese for the concept of who is able to bring a lawsuit based on a particular act or law. This sounds esoteric, but it makes logical sense: If your neighbor gets hit by an ice cream truck, is injured, and is now hundreds of thousands of dollars in the hole for medical debt, he has standing to sue the ice cream truck driver. He suffered an injury that was caused by the ice cream truck driver, and the court has the ability to direct the ice cream truck driver to pay for his medical bills and pain and suffering etc. If you, on the other hand, decide to sue the ice cream truck driver because they ran over your neighbor, well, did you actually get injured? Would it being about any sort of justice if the ice cream truck driver had to pay you money? If the answer is no and you try to sue anyway, the court’s going to kick that lawsuit out.

Constitutional challenges often die because the person suing doesn’t have standing to bring the case. Remember how I mentioned earlier that “one nation under god” is still in the Pledge of Allegiance? A case about that actually got all the way to the Supreme Court, before it was tossed out for lack of standing - the problem was that a student’s father had brought the lawsuit, instead of the student herself. Likewise, the Flying Spaghetti Monster cases usually went nowhere because the courts would say “okay, you’re claiming that this law is trampling on your right to practice your chosen religion, but your religion is deliberately ludicrous. Your holy book was published in 2006 and heavily features a beer volcano. You don’t actually believe in any of this, so you haven’t actually suffered the harm that you’re claiming this legislation caused.”

So, uh, how the hell does an athiest challenge the constitutionality of laws like the FSM movement tried to without just getting tossed out for lack of sincerity?

Okay. Okay. We’re finally here. Let’s talk about The Satanic Temple.

In 2013, after witnessing how the FSM movement failed to accomplish meaningful change, Lucien Greaves realized that even though the basic concept of what FSM was trying to accomplish was solid, the issue was in its execution. If you wanted to challenge laws that unconstitutionally favored Christianity, you couldn’t be joking around about your fake religion; you had to play it absolutely straight.

What Greaves came up with is incredibly clever. He set about constructing a new religion for the purpose of using the FSM playbook without falling into the same judicial pitfalls. He made sure that the new religion would constitute an actual belief system in the eyes of the law, which involved identifying the mission and core articulable tenents of the religion. I’m quoting them both below because they’re cool as hell:

The Mission of The Satanic Temple

“The mission of The Satanic Temple is to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense, oppose injustice, and undertake noble pursuits.

The Satanic Temple has publicly confronted hate groups, fought for the abolition of corporal punishment in public schools, applied for equal representation when religious installations are placed on public property, provided religious exemption and legal protection against laws that unscientifically restrict women's reproductive autonomy, exposed harmful pseudo-scientific practitioners in mental health care, organized clubs alongside other religious after-school clubs in schools besieged by proselytizing organizations, and engaged in other advocacy in accordance with our tenets.”

The Seven Tenets of The Satanic Temple

1. One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason.

2. The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.

3. One's body is inviolable, subject to one's own will alone.

4. The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.

5. Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs.

6. People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.

7. Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.

Tenets aside, though, this next bit is what just delights me to my core with how crafty it is: Instead of making up his own religious text and history, he went directly to the Bible and said (I’m paraphrasing) “the historical foundation of The Satanic Temple is the exact same as the historical foundation of Christianity. We share the same holy book, and our faiths are grounded in the same tradition. Here’s the only difference: We believe with all sincerity that the character in that book who said ‘hey, try the apple, the pursuit of knowledge is worth rebelling against authority for’ is actually the good guy in the story, and although we are not a theistic organization, it is our sincere religious belief to comport ourselves in the manner espoused by the literary character Satan.”

Holy shit, guys. Holy shit, that is smart. He set up his religion so that you couldn’t attack it for being fake without also attacking Christianity for being fake! Simultaneously, he designed a religion that would reliably produce the perfect reductio ad absurdum argument- you want to display your ten commandment statue on public land? Okay, chill, but per the Constitution, we get equal play, so if you want those ten commandments, you’d better be cool with them sitting right next to our 3000 lb bronze statue of children gazing adoringly up at Baphomet:

Oh, wait, you don’t want to have that statue on government property? Cool. Totally fine. Just take your ten commandments slabs away too, and we’ll call it a truce.

The Satanic Temple exists to protect individual constitutional rights. Regardless of your own religious sentiment, it’s hopefully easy enough to see how incredibly shitty it would be to have your elected government promote religious beliefs that you do not share, to have religious sentiments that you find abhorrent expressly condoned by the government, or to have your own rights of expression and against discrimination constrained by a government that expressly santions only the religious beliefs of the majority, in spite of the concepts expressed in the United States Constitution. The only way to challenge an unconstitutional law is to sue, and it takes a lot of time, effort, and most of all resources to see a constitutional lawsuit through. Organized religion and government entities have a much easier time defending those cases than an individual does in suing them; by supporting The Satanic Temple, you’re directly evening the odds.

P.S. I know I talk a big game about how cleverly The Satanic Temple was designed, but you know how you can tell that it’s actually brilliant? The IRS granted it tax exempt status as a religious entity in 2019. Yup. Even with the IRS directly under the thumb of Donald J. Trump, a man desperate to maintain evangelical support, the IRS finally had to concede that they could not find any reason why The Satanic Temple shouldn’t be treated the exact same way as any other church. Angry that a Satanic entity doesn’t have to pay taxes on its income? Well, buddy, get ready to learn what megachurches get away with.

216 notes · View notes

deans-asscot · 3 years

Text

LatAm Dub Voice Actor Panel: Translation/Transcript

Hello all, I have taken it upon myself to translate the panel with Guillermo (Memo) Rojas: Dean's LatAm Voice Actor. There is a lot of confusion and I think it's best if you read for yourself to come to your own conclusions. The translator in the panel failed to translate important things and also added in her own opinions/interpretations. I also think there were times when they were talking about different things. I don't blame her, because I'm sure she was nervous/excited and live translating is hard! I would like to thank her for doing the panel and trying to get us answers! I have added my own opinions/notes in red. I have included some time stamps so you can follow along in the video. I tried to focus on all the important parts regarding the dubbing and also useful background info. Please note that everything is translated by me except for the Translator's own translations, I left those in English as she said it. I apologize if there are any mistakes, I did my best.

[9:54]

Memo: I got covid in the last two... I don’t remember if I got it during.. uh, during.. the last episode of the season or during the special or during both. I have doubts, cuz I still haven’t recorded them. I have to record them from what I understand.

[Translator translates]

[10:37]

Translator: [Spanish] We’re going to start with the easy questions. Because there’s one... I’m not sure if you know but you guys in the Mexican dub broke the internet.

Memo: Yes

Translator: [Spanish] Oh, you already know?

Memo: Yeah, sorry to interrupt you. A lot of people reached out to me and I feel bad not being able to, broadly speaking, answer all of their questions. But I was in the middle of my covid situation and a tracheal situation where I couldn’t talk without choking. Now I’m working in therapy with this situation. And if that wasn’t complicated enough it seems like I have 2 sequels: one is confirmed the 2nd not yet. So I couldn’t respond to EVERYone that was reaching out to me on the internet. From various means, from Insta, Facebook, Youtube. Actually a very old channel that I’ve never used. With respect to the situation with Dean and the other guy.

[11:49]

Translator: [Spanish] How different is the process between directing for live action and directing for animation? And which do you prefer?

Memo: Okay, so what’s the difference between one and the other: basically, you can say that it’s a little similar. Because we’re talking about a certain quality that we have to respect or give, in this case. There are guidelines [interrupted by Translator] that we have to follow.

[12:10]

Translator: [translates] It’s very similar because we have to give the same quality in both senses. There is a process that we have to follow.

Memo: Yes, correct. Now the guidelines are usually given to us by the production company, in this case, what we call the client.

Translator: [translates] The lines are given by the producer house or what we call the client.

[12:31]

Memo: In this case, so we have to stick to the guidelines that they ask for. The ones which go hand in hand in regards to the production that is being worked.

Translator: [translates] We have to follow the rules. Which go hand in hand with the kind of production we are doing, either animation or live action.

Memo: Yes, actually, saying that both are the same would be lying to you. Because we could have 2 live actions and they’re not the same. Guidelines: there are basic technical points to follow but when it comes to acting and theatrical production, they change.

[13:03]

Translator: [translates] I would be lying to say they are the same because if you have two different live actions they are going to have different procedures. So when you are acting them that is when the change come in.

Memo: The greatest difference I could tell you would be the technical points to follow in each of them. And for the acting part, in this case, it would be to give 100% from each and every one of us.

Translator: [translates] and uh, in the technical those are the differences but in the acting sense I can tell you that the important thing is to give 100% every single time.

[...talk about other acting jobs...]

[17:42]

Memo: [Talking about the show 911] I don’t think there’s a piece that I enjoyed more watching being dubbed by a translator and directed by Fogatry. Who has an amazing gift to not only direct but also adapt dialogues. And there has been great synergy working on this series and others that he has done me the favor of supporting me as an actor to give me roles. And that I enjoy doing a lot. Not only his directing but also... I don’t know we have a certain synergy so he can direct me and I can act how he indicates and he makes me feel it, you know? It’s... it’s something interesting.

Translator: [translates] It is one of the series I most enjoy as... I also enjoy to be directed by Fogarty because of special synergy. He makes me feel the characters better so we work very well when he directs me.

Memo: Yes, I sincerely love working with him.

[...talks about voice acting...]

[19:51]

Translator: [Spanish] Well now that you already mentioned the guidelines, and I mentioned in the beginning: comes the big questions. What were the guidelines in that final line in Supernatural that broke the internet?

Memo: Its a curious thing because... because I don’t even think the director nor the translators had any idea of the tendency (inclination) that existed. Because there wasn’t information that said previously that something like that could happen.

Translator: [translates] It is very funny because neither the director nor I had any idea of what was coming. We didn’t know that something like that could happen.

[...talks about his birthday and eating cake...]

[20:52]

Memo: Yes, so uh, being honest, when we recorded it, it was very like, “blink blink (squints)” [takes off glasses and looks confused] “What’s going on? What’s happening?” But, we did it, you know? But none of us in the production team saw anything in him during filming that would say something like that.

Translator: [translates] When we saw it, it was like a blinking moment and we did it. But at the time we never thought that it would happen./ [Spanish] And here I have to ask for clarification. Because obviously we are referring to the fact that Castiel confessed to Dean after ...12 years... of intense stares. [Memo laughs] But the main question is Dean’s response. Because everyone heard, in your voice, very clearly “y yo a ti” (and I, you).

Memo: [same time] “Y yo a ti” (and I, you).

Translator: [Spanish] where did that “Y yo a ti” (and I, you) come from? Was it in the script? Was it you? What happened there?

[21:50]

Memo: The adaptation was completely from my director. And the guidelines for acting came from him and I did what he asked me to do.

Translator: [translates] Everything was...okay everybody I asked about “and I you” I know that Tumblr was waiting for this moment. And he says, everything came from the director. He adapted it, he gave me the guidelines. It was his fault.

(Note: Memo only knows what his director told him. Adaptation = edited translated script for lip synch etc.)

[others laugh]

[22:16]

Memo: But we all love him. We all loved it. We never saw it coming so directly.

Translator: [translates] But everybody loved it everybody wanted it at the end. We didn’t see it coming so directly but it was great.

[22:28]

Memo: If we remember correctly, from the length of all of Supernatural we rarely see a situation where Dean is seen being involved with a woman. It didn’t happen. Unlike his brother.

Translator: [translates] If we remember all the seasons of Supernatural, we never saw Dean romantically involved with a woman unlike his brother./ [Spanish] Here I will just correct you as a fan, it did happen a few times but it was before your times. (He started voicing Dean after season 12.)

[22:52]

Memo: Yes, it was before my time but it was never more than a general empathy.

Translator: [translates] Yeah it was before me but it was never farther than a general empathy.

Memo: He was never involved. Neither directly nor [cut off]

Translator: [translates] He was never involved, not completely.

Memo: It wasn’t his thing, right?

Translator: [translates] It wasn’t his.

[23:10]

Memo: Especially, because we can compare him with his brother.

Translator: [translates] Especially because we can compare him with his brother.

Memo: We remember the last relationship he had in the last 2 season.

Translator: [translates] We remember his relationship that he had in the last 2 seasons./ Uh, Eileen, the deaf woman.

Memo: Exactly, with Eileen, that was really intense. And [gets cut off] at the end.

Translator: [translates] Was very tense and painful at the end.

[23:33]

Memo: Dean basically didn’t suffer that. Like for me, to a certain point they tied him more emotionally with the fact that he lost his mother...more than once.

Translator: [translates] With Dean, he didn’t suffer what Sam did, because he was emotionally more tied with the fact that he lost his mom more than once.

Memo: Yeah, so uh [gets cut off]

Translator: [Spanish] We have a question. So it’s not a “rogue translator��, it’s a “rogue director”? Says [asker’s name].

Memo: uh... yeah yeah, I’m seeing it [the comment] yeah [laughs] Look, Fogarty has a tendency... Fogarty has really intense abilities. [gets cut off]

Translator: [translates] Fogarty has an intense ability.

Memo: Yeah and one of them is adapting the dialogues.

Translator: [translates] And one of them is to adapt dialogue.

[24:16]

Memo: When you see a piece that Fogarty translates and he manages to adapt when he has time to do it, even if he won’t direct it, and he’ll leave it for you in Spanish.

Translator: [translates] You see a work by Fogarty when he is going to translate even if he is not going to direct and he leaves it in Spanish.

Memo: So, the dialogue goes like this, if I remember correctly, it said “tambien yo (me too)” or it said something like that.

Translator: [translates] The dialogue said, if I remember correctly, “tambien yo” “and so do I”. If I remember correctly.

Memo: Exactly. And then we changed it to “Y yo a ti” (And I, you).

Translator: [translates] And then we changed it into “Y yo a ti” “and I, you”.

Memo: For the effect of lip syncing, rhythm, and more things.

Translator: [translates] Because of the formation of lip vowels and other things./ Before you came in I explained it as a translator. My absolute hate for the lip... [Spanish] my hate for the lip syncing.

[25:12]

Memo: [laughs] Yeah, it’s an impressive topic to discuss. Now a days with the speed of production that we have it’s difficult to give attention to that part. Which we should, that much is very clear to me of course. But not all of us have the ability that Fogarty has in that sense specifically. We don’t have the speed that Fogarty has to adapt like that [snaps fingers](to adapt fast).

Translator: [translates] Uh, we don’t have the time now a days to do it, we should but we can’t. But we don’t have all the...brain cells and the speed that Fogarty has to make those changes.

Memo: We all have different abilities. And when we work together, but well not everyone pitches in all of the different abilities that they have, and Fogarty does his part.

Translator: [translates] we all have different skills and when we work together we all put all job there, and Fogarty does his part.

Memo: We all need a Fogarty in every company.

Translator: [translates] [laughs] We need a Fogarty in every, in every enterprise... in every company./ [Spanish] I have to make a pause cuz you saw my cat pass by...

[...talks about her cat hating Sam...]

[...redirected to comments...]

[27:35]

Translator: [reads comment in English] They are asking a lot about if you know what Dean said in the original English Script before Fogarty got his hands on it. [translates to Spanish] If you know what was on the original script before Fogarty changed it?

Memo: Again. What? [Did not hear/or did not understand the question]

Translator: [Spanish] If you know what the original script said. What it said originally.

[28:00]

Memo: Yes, If I remember correctly... yeah, yeah, it was... it was something allusive, WOW, it was totally correct of course. [get’s cut off]

Translator: [translates] it was uh...

Memo: “y tambien yo” (and me too) or “tambien yo a ti” (And I, you as well) it said something like that. [gets cut off] (so its difficult to understand what he says next but sounds like “unmistakable, unmistakable”)

Translator: [Spanish] Ladies, the original script said “yo tambien” (me too) okay so [name] asks if you listened to the original while dubbing?

Memo: Yes, of course.

(NOTE: I think for Memo, the “original script” was the first Spanish draft before they adjusted/adapted for lip synch and what not.)

Translator: [Spanish] No. Say that (unclear) [laughs] yeah

[28:30]

Memo: No, immediately I would’ve been like [takes off glasses and leans in] “What?”

Translator: [Spanish] Yeah, yeah. What happens is that. Supernatural has a very intense, very loyal fandom. As you can see now [points to the comments] so it’s been uh...which the change brings the big question [gets cut off]

Memo: [reading comment in English] Someone translate it! [laughs]

Translator: [Spanish] What was your favorite episode to dub for Supernatural?

Memo: With my short term memory, this last episode.

Translator: [translates] So I asked him which one was his favorite Supernatural uh Episode to dub and he said that with his short term memory, the last one

Memo: It’s cuz, it says a lot, it says a lot.

Translator: [translates] It says a lot.

[29:19]

Memo: It says a lot. In one scene it says everything.

Translator: [translates] In a scene it says it all.

Memo: So it’s very impressive, it’s really nice. I never... I never saw it coming. Never saw it coming.

Translator: [translates] I never saw it coming. But it was beautiful.

Memo: Yeah, yeah

[...talks about breaking Tumblr, Dean finally getting a dog, Memo watching Supernatural...]

[31:40]

Translator: [Spanish] Once more, you broke the internet. And they’re asking: if the original script said something in regards to Dean’s feelings for Cas, [Memo says “no”] or was it all added in by the director Fogarty?

[31:54]

Memo: no, no, no. Actually the original booklet that we had never had any indication that told you that he was in love or that he reciprocates the love and that they knew. No. Nothing. Really, that phrase was what topped off the entire series.

(NOTE: I think Memo is talking about the first Spanish script he saw and all the previous scripts, saying he saw no indication UNTIL that one line.)

Translator: [translates] Okay guys. I’m going to go slow with this so it’s put to rest. No. The original did not say it. It was not... stated clear. With the last phrase was what concealed the whole series. The whole thing.

Memo: None of us saw it coming.

Translator: [translates] No one saw it coming.

Memo: No.

Translator: [translates] No one saw it coming but... it was the director adding it because that was what made sense. (NOTE: Memo never said this part about the director!!!)

[32:46]

Memo: Actually, when they started to bombard me with a bunch of questions on the internet, I started to investigate what happened, right? And yeah, I saw clearly, how the director and the writer decided to take a very hidden tendency with respect to them both. In various scenes, in very, very simple dialogues. In which they made that like allusion that they both had feelings for one another. But it was so, so faint that almost no one noticed it.

(NOTE: I think Memo is referring to the English writers/directors and the questions people asked him were in regards to being surprised that Dean reciprocates.)

Translator: [translates] He is saying that uh what the director... the dubbing director saw that... the director in English were creating this love story but it was so subtle and so “tenue (faint/dim)”... so discrete that no one saw it coming./ Which brings us to the fact that yes, this man is a heller.

[33:41]

Memo: I think that it’s clear to all of us that the fact that it broke the internet with this information, it was a surprise for absolutely everyone. Because well, we would all say, right, that if you want to be a real man, you gotta be like Dean.

(NOTE: I think Memo thinks that people were shocked Dean reciprocated because everyone views him as a manly man. I don’t think Memo is referring to the English/Spanish dubbing differences.)

Translator: [translates] I think that with the great effect.../ hold on [Spanish] You are going to break the internet again with this.[laughs] [translates] Okay I think that we... have to see this is... that how we can because after all everybody says that if you want to be a real man you have to be like Dean Winchester./ And Dean Winchester is in love with Castiel. [laughs]

[34:35]

Memo: And to me... it’s... actually it’s something really beautiful for me. Because it doesn’t have to do with gender it has to do with the feelings. And it... it was a marvelous play made by the writers. Marvelous. Marvelous. You didn’t see it coming. And look at that, you liked it.

Translators: [translates] I believe... that it’s very beautiful it was a play by the original writers, by the American workers, that you didn’t see coming but when you see it, you like it. And you end up loving it.

Memo: Yeah

Translator: [reads comments in Spanish] Um, we have 2 questions. One is from [name] that asks if something got left out of the translation?...

Memo: No.

Translator: [Spanish] No, nothing. [translates] Nothing was out of the translation. [Spanish] And the other is that they ask if they ever called you back to rerecord that “Y yo a ti” (and I, you)?

Memo: No.

Translator: [translates] No./ The “Y yo a ti” isn’t going to be redubbed people, calm down.

Memo: [laughs] No

Translator: [English] He was not called to remake the dubbing.

Memo: No... no, no, no. It’s clear to me that my director understood perfectly the context of that text.

Translator: [translates] It is very clear that the director understood perfectly the texture of this text./ [Spanish] I have a question. From experience, because at one point I got to dub, I got to translate, dub some lines, not that controversial... but very complicated that the client returned it. The client, when he heard it he said, “No, we can’t do this” Okay the line was, you’re gunna see why they returned it: “I’ve listened to jazz since I was a sperm in my father’s testicle.”

Memo: Okay [laughs]

Translator: [Spanish] So... so the client told us, “No, change it.”

Memo: What did the original say?

Translator: [Spanish] That’s what the original said!

Memo: [English] So, what?

Translator: [Spanish] It was in Japanese, but that’s what the original said. Uh but since it was for “kids” because it was anime, they returned it.

Memo: Ohh, okay, okay, okay. Maybe they asked you to smooth it over like “I’ve listened to jazz since before I was born” and that’s it.

Translator: [Spanish] Exactly. So my question is do you know if Supernatural has a quality control from Warner?

[36:52]

Memo: I would be lying if I said yes. But I have worked with Warner for a long time as an actor and director. And some very specific works like superhero type and things like that might have a filter like that. But series like Supernatural... I honestly doubt it. I think that the delegations and decisions on these situations would be totally up to the director.

Translator: [translates] Okay, so I asked him if there was quality control for Supernatural in specific and Memo tells me that he doesn’t believe so./ [Spanish] Okay, now comes the big questions cuz you broke the internet. [looks at comments] um, these are going really fast, ladies. Two people ask if you acted Dean as someone who was always in love with Castiel this whole time or did it surprise you too?

[37:46]

Memo: No. Never. Same (also surprised).

Translator: [translates] No, it was a surprise.

Memo: Actually, I’m going to be very sincere with you guys. For me, Saying to a friend I care a lot about... to someone I care a lot about... to someone of the same gender, I tell them “Te amo (I love you).” I don’t have a problem with that.

Translator: [translates] I’m going to be very truthful with you. If I have a friend, a very close friend of my same gender I will tell him “Te amo” (I love you) and I don’t have any problems.

Memo: So, I felt it in that way. Honestly.

Translator: [translates] I felt it for that side./ [Spanish] And then you found out that no. (In regards to it not happening in English).

Memo: uh huh, exactly [laughs] “Hey, what happened?” [jokes]

[...talks about Jensen on The Boys, using Facebook...]

[40:42]

Translator: [reads comment in Spanish] Guillermo, what’s your opinion, now with all that you know, about the relationship that Dean has with Cas?

Memo: Okay, it was a revelation for everyone. Including me.

Translator: [translates] It was a revelation, first.

Memo: I love how they did it. Because nobody saw it coming. Not even us, who record it.

Translator: [translates] I love him.. I love how it.. how it come cuz no one saw it coming, not even we that we are recording it.

Memo: And I think that with all the personality and the psychology that we have of the character, we can reason that if someone knows how to hold back their feelings, it’s Dean Winchester.

Translator: [translates] And we can tell by the psychology of the character that if there was someone that knew how to keep his feelings at bay, was Dean Winchester.

[... talk about co-star, deep voice, and Memo not seeing the finale yet until he records it...]

[...he’s asked to say “Hello, Cas” in Dean’s voice if Cas were to return from the Empty...]

[44:40]

Memo: Oh, It’s assumed that I told him I loved him too, as long as he didn’t come back! [jokes]

[...talk about his ideal finale of a peaceful happy ending for TFW...]

(In conclusion I don’t think Memo saw the original English script. And to him the “original script” is the first Spanish draft before they adjust for lip synchs. He thinks his director is great and did his job correctly. Memo’s shock was in Dean being in love with Cas (not necessarily the dubbing discrepancies) but he understood why it happened once he researched and saw all the hidden allusions left by the writers. I don’t think adding “rogue director” to the discourse is helpful because I don’t think Memo knows either. Here is a link to the director’s dubbing fandom page (it’s in Spanish): Adrian Fogarty.)

#Supernatural #Latam dub #Spanish #Spanish spn #Translation #Guillermo Rojas #Memo Rojas #Transcript #Live panel #Dean #Destiel #Destielgate #Dean Winchester #Voice Actor #Mine #i stayed up late for this and woke up early to finish editing haha #i hope this helps people #spanish dub #long post

41 notes · View notes

dgcatanisiri · 3 years

Text

This is too long for me to be comfortable to put out without a cut, but dear god, did I need to rant and ramble on this subject...

I always feel awkward when I want to complain about how video games portray and fandom reacts to queer men, because I feel like the conversation (at least here on Tumblr) gets focused on the female protagonists - you know, the Commander Shepard or Alexios/Kassandra debates and that sort. The things where there’s valid comments to make about how important these female protagonists are, especially in an industry that is deeply misogynistic, and, in the case of the Assassin’s Creed protagonists, keep being developed with an eye towards the female-only protagonists, only to have a male protagonist shoved alongside them, if not upstaging entirely (such as Jacob being the center of Syndicate’s marketing, or how Bayek was originally going to die and Aya be the central protagonist of Origins, or the creation of Alexios and probably male Eivor on the basis of “women protagonists don’t sell.”)...

BUT, when I want to talk about my perspective as a gay man, as wanting to play these games for that empowerment, get to enjoy these games for representing me as a gay man, because Shepard, Ryder, Alexios, etc. get to be played as such, that having these male characters who are able to be played as attracted to other men means something to me, and that leads me to not just play the male characters, but prefer them to the female characters, or even to talk about the subject of homophobia in both the games themselves and the fandoms surrounding them... I do feel like there’s this pressure to just effectively shut up and stay quiet and let the women have their empowerment, that the moment needs to be theirs, not mine, that “fandom” (meaning the monolithic entity that is ‘the fandom’ and not necessarily any singular individual who I’m referring to or anything) is pressuring for anyone who enjoys the male protagonists for whatever reason to be silent and let the women enjoy their win, even if there’s a win for underrepresented men in there as well, or even a need to address the problems of homophobia by not representing queer men. That in its way, it’s effectively saying that a win against the sexism against the industry is outweighing or more important than any win against the homophobia. (Or, since I brought up Shepard, racism, considering that Shepard, Ryder, any game with the character creator, can be different skin tones as well, but that’s outside my lane.)

Like, this isn’t a callout post or any kind of directed screed against anyone, just... I suppose it’s a cumulative effect, based on the fact that I remember what the internet in the corners I frequent was like when Odyssey dropped, focused very much (and understandably - let me be clear that I have no desire to step on anyone’s victory or enjoyment of these games here) on Kassandra, and it felt like the fact that I got to play a character I could portray as gay (don’t start me on the bloody DLC though...) was a victory celebration at a table set for one, while (to really stretch my metaphor) seeing this massive party happening across the dining room at the same time, and that (and again, I’m really straining my metaphor, I’m aware), if I wanted to join that party, they would not combine our celebrations, I would have to join in theirs, and, in my wanting to pay attention to my victory, getting laughed at for it. It’s one of those things that makes fandom feel a little alienating, because I don’t particularly have much of a place that feels like it’s a space for me to celebrate my victories, rare as they are, and on occasion, even end up with the impression that, so far as fandom at large cares, that victory I want to celebrate is somehow less important. That the importance of Alexios, playable as a gay man, meant less than Kassandra, period. And, with Valhalla and Cyberpunk’s release on the horizon, along with (maaaaaaybe?) a Mass Effect Trilogy remaster, I find myself bracing myself for this to start up all over again.

And I know some of this is based in the fact that Tumblr and the transformative elements of fandom in general are more of a space that is dominated by women in fandom, who are going to celebrate the wins for them. That’s just how things shake out, I understand that it’s as much the place I’m going for involvement and interaction with fandom at large as it is anything else. Just... I obviously don’t fit in to the areas of “straight male” fandom, and then getting to the places in the “marginalized” segments of the fandom, it still feels like I need to find my way over to the margins of the margins to feel like I have a place in fandom more generally.

Like, I understand that I have male privilege and that is a factor in things - the male characters are probably more likely to be the ones in the marketing, so I get to see that idealized image of myself individually all over the covers and posters and trailers. BUT that doesn’t remove the straight privilege of the people who are shutting down conversations about the importance of the male PCs being portrayed in M/M relationships, even starts going into the realm of casual homophobia - because no acknowledgement of how important it is for the portrayal of gay men, or bi men, IS homophobic. I mean, how often do these companies have their official accounts post images of the M/M pairings? I’ve seen BioWare account retweet FemShep/Garrus and FemShep/Kaidan things, on top of the MaleShep/Female LI pairings. I’ve even seen FemShep/Liara content, which... We could go into the way that F/F pairings get fetishized and tend to be there as either fodder for cishet male titillation or just because the female PC gets swapped in for the male PC (in the way of Peebee riding a non-existent dick in the FemRyder romance scene in Mass Effect Andromeda), I don’t mean to discount that being a thing, so queer women are getting a short stick too. But where’s the M/M relationships? Hell, remember the whole #MakeJaalBi thing? After we got that notice about the patch for his romance would come... Has any official Mass Effect account actually SHOWN content of BroRyder and Jaal?

I mean, remember the Citadel DLC? The appearances of Kaidan’s romance material included FemShep, and Cortez’s content included a split second shot of just him and Shepard holding hands, and since it was blink and you’ll miss it, that means that it doesn’t even make any effort to portray the M/M relationships. And since I brought up Jaal already, BioWare had to be publicly shamed into offering M/M relationships in equal amounts to the other pairings in Mass Effect Andromeda. Like, it’s bad that Peebee’s romance for FemRyder just had the model swapped in for BroRyder, sure. But at least that content was THERE, at release. For gay/bi men who wanted to romance male characters, we have to make sure that we get that patch downloaded (meaning if you play the game without an internet connection, you can’t get access to his romance) - and only because the outrage actually GOT a response, which is not necessarily the norm in this industry.

Hell, the disparity there actually GOT noticed - if you include Scout Harding as a romance, M/M romances are the lowest numerical romances in Dragon Age Inquisition as well, with only Dorian and Bull as options. And I didn’t even realize this until this past year, despite being disappointed in those two options. Even recognizing that Harding is more of a fling than a full romance, it’s still more than M/M romances had. The closest we got was being able to flirt with Cullen twice before he shuts it down (and the rants I’ve had on THAT subject...).

And that’s just the focus with BioWare - I saw it all through the initial release of Odyssey, while I know that the official metrics are all saying that Alexios saw more play than Kassandra, Kassandra got a lot of positive response in the fandom that was often framed in opposition to Alexios, that she was the “better” protagonist.

Like, I’m bolding this for emphasis, and so if anyone is TL;DRing this it’s eye-catching enough: My issue is the dismissal and denigration of the male PCs when building up the female PCs. It is not being against celebrating the female PCs. It’s just the way that people will, in their positivity towards a female PC, dismiss the audience who relates to and connects with the male PC. The way that I’ve seen since day one the common “joke” that male Shepard is unnecessary, condemning the voice acting, even asking why he’s there when female Shepard is “the real Shepard”.

It makes fandom a hostile place to be when you’re looking to that character as your representation, your inspiration. Yeah, it’s a joke, but when it is coming from all corners, or at least feels like it, all the time, the humor dies, and you’re left with just the words. The words telling you that this mirror for yourself is something that people don’t care about.

Again, it’s that feeling of already being on the margins and then being pushed further. You are the freak among the freaks.

But it feels like saying any of this, like I have, is opening the door to be dismissed as being sexist, or misogynistic, or lesbophobic, or anything like that, because people want to boil down what I’m saying to no more than “but what about MEN? Why aren’t you talking about MEN?” in that dismissive way that so many MRA trolls attempt to derail the conversation - except, no, I am TRYING to have a genuine conversation, about men who aren’t represented, men who need these male characters as much as women need the female ones - queer men get the short stick in a lot of cases, like this goes back to the representational matters in a lot of kids TV shows - while we can absolutely talk about the bad representation it was broadly, I remember when Voltron concluded, having Shiro, having arguably the lead male character of the show, end the show marrying and kissing another man... That was heavily ignored by Tumblr. Meanwhile Tumblr EXPLODED for Korra and Asami or Bubblegum and Marceline.

It’s seeing what is representation for me as a queer man being played down or ignored while the queer women are praised. And, again, I’m not trying to take anything away from queer women, or women in general, but... Where, exactly, am I supposed to look for that same empowerment? And, more importantly, when the same media offers the empowerment for both groups, like video games do, why does it seem almost expected that I as a queer man back off and allow this to just be for the women in general, when the whole point of a variable protagonist is that it allows that empowerment for EVERYONE?

I mean, I say it feels like “opening the door” to these comments because it has happened before, and likely will again. Because saying “this joke feels hostile to me, as a member of an underrepresented group, can we please not?” or speaking about my individual experiences and feelings - often even just in my own space, on my blog, frequently only tagged with my individual tags for organization in my space, rather than publicly shouting it through a megaphone by putting it in public tags, and somehow STILL getting attacked for these comments - is apparently all those things... That’s been the response I’ve gotten to saying things like this in the past.

And, in case I haven’t been clear with the repeated comments and the bolded statement above, it’s not about me, a man, trying to take away this thing for women. Rather, it’s me, a queer person - and fine, yes, a queer man - who wants to celebrate being seen, wants to celebrate what is still not a common thing of seeing myself in my media, and then feeling like I’m being shoved out of the way because other people celebrating their representation is considered more important, to hell with me and my mirrors.

Like, I’m not saying any of this is anything actively conscious or even intentionally malicious. It does seem like a reflexive defensive position - “men have tried to take this from us, so we’re not letting ANY man through.” I don’t want to come across as flippant or not aware of the fact that this isn’t a walk in the park for women. I get it, I really do. I’m just... It does feel like my struggles are something that I’m being told to downplay in the name of allowing others to have their celebration.

Thing is, my own experiences as a queer person already leave me feeling like I’m getting that as well - I mentioned before (and have elsewhere) that Dragon Age Inquisition’s M/M romances didn’t work for me. But I have often felt like I need to downplay the fact that I don’t emotionally connect to Dorian as a character - in the immediate aftermath of the game’s release, you could not say ANYTHING negative about him without getting shouted down as either a homophobe or dealing with internalized homophobia. Meanwhile, I’m here, pointing out that, hey, the previous games did not really have any direct homophobia, and the little bits that did lean in that direction felt more like the writers living in a homophobic society and not able to wholly divorce that in their writing than anything in-universe. To me, Thedas was a place where being gay was a difference that made no difference. And then Inquisition tore away that escape from homophobia so bluntly.

So, Dorian doesn’t empower me, you ask, so what about Bull? Yeah, I identify with “queer man” because while I’m a man romantically attracted to other men, I’m also asexual - just regular vanilla sex is in the fringes of my comfort zone. Bondage is an outright catapult out of there. At mach three. So I’m left uncomfortable by both of my “options” in Inquisition. And the response I have always braced myself for when I bring this up, when I do add my voice to the conversation about the M/M options, is “well, they can’t please everyone, and this was good for some people, so you should be content with that.” Being told I can’t have everything, so feeling uncomfortable at best is just something I have to live with, because hey, THOSE OTHER PEOPLE got satisfied, and so you should just be happy for them.

It’s that pained metaphor I offered earlier - the victory celebration isn’t for me, I’m on the outside looking in EVEN STILL. I am the freak among freaks.

Where is my place to belong, in all of this? Because it’s honestly hard to find, when all the spaces deemed “for me” still feel like an exclusionary party?

#dg rants #another angry queer rant

7 notes · View notes

chromecausation · 4 years

Text

why atla’s ending is bad

so this post has likely already been made before, but I’m new to tumblr so what the hell. I recently finished watching atla, and I thoroughly enjoyed the series. This post is in no way about how the series itself is bad; I really did enjoy the series. Rather, it is about how the ending does a grave disservice to aang and the philosophical theories in question.

One of the reasons I love atla is that it is willing to ask the hard psychological questions: the scene in the library about how everybody thinks their war is justified? That is an amazing scene, it recontextualizes the entire series up until that point and forces us to ask: is fighting the fire nation really as justified as we claim? This question is brought up even more as we actually meet people who live within the fire nation: we see that they are not taught history as it actually happened and they are often ruled by fear. They are not the monsters that they seem to be. However, and this is the huge however, atla refuses to actually address the biggest question of the series: is it morally correct to kill someone in the service of a greater good?

Up until this point in the series, atla mainly avoids this question by making all forms of bending essentially the same: sure, they all have different animations and such, but at the end of the day they all serve as different ways to knock people backwards until everyone is far away enough that they seem defeated. Obviously, this is a children’s show, so it makes sense that they would do this. But, while its ok to knock around enemy henchmen, no one (even kids) is going to buy that one of the greatest firebenders of all time is properly subdued by a kid, especially when aang is shown to be clearly weaker in some of the bending forms than he would like. So, the philosophical question of killing has to be brought to the forefront. However, while the writers seemed to get that killing had to be brought up at some point, they narratively structured the story to prevent the question from actually being brought up at all.

At the core of this question is the push and pull between consequentialism and deontology, the two major schools of thought on what defines a moral action. Consequentialists (broadly speaking) argue that an action is right if the consequences brought about by that action are right. Deontologists argue (broadly speaking) that an action is right if the action itself is right, regardless of the consequences. This post is not going to go into a full-throated analysis of either philosophy, but will simply state that despite what everyone on the internet likes to claim after having read the trolley problem briefly, there are some legitimate benefits to deontology (and consequentialism can often lead to some things that we would think of as morally dubious.)

Anyway: suffice it to say, aang is a deontologist. He is focused on doing right actions because they are inherently right, and he doesn’t believe in bending his principles just because it would be convenient or because it could lead to a better outcome in that specific instance. Principles are principles for a reason, goddamnit, if you bend them all the time, how useful are they? And despite the fact that a lot of people here on tumblr would definitely describe themselves as consequentialists, we applaud aang throughout the series for his decisions to be morally upstanding, even when it makes his life harder.

Here’s the issue though: deontology, even though it has some serious benefits (I am somewhat of a deontologist and pacifist myself) it also has some serious downsides. Sometimes, when you stick to your principles, bad things will happen. Sometimes, those bad things will happen because you weren’t willing to stop them. And while there is a larger argument that can be made about how sticking to what is right leads to a better world overall, that doesn’t help the fact that in the moment, deontology can seem like a really sucky philosophy.

The writers of the show never actually make aang face that issue with deontology, and they trivialize it as a philosophy. Throughout the second half of the third season, aang is portrayed as not having the stomach to kill ozai, or not wanting to do what needs to be done. It is implied that aang is weak for his beliefs, that he must overcome his weakness and pacifism to become the strong avatar the world needs to undo the horrible damage of fire nation imperialism. The issue with this, though, is that it never confronts the actual issue at play? What if (ignoring energy-bending entirely for a second) aang is entirely right to not want to kill ozai?

I posit that a non-murdery approach to the final battle is the actually correct decision for the world. The fire nation has been steeped in fear and anger for over a century, and their leaders have based all of this division and fear and nationalism on the idea that might makes right, that if you are strong and just and powerful enough, it is your right to spread this glory to the rest of the world. If aang were to beat ozai handily and murder him, all that he would prove is that the firelords were right all along: it is the right of those who have power to control those who are powerless. Aang killing ozai just proves that ozai was right all along. The only way to break the fire nation cycle of fear is to prove that there are other ways to approach conflict, to prove that a non-violent approach is not just preferable to killing someone, but is actually what is necessary for the world to heal and grow?

It is at this point that the readers who have read this far into this abominably long post say, “but wait chromecausation, aang didn’t kill ozai. That was the whole fucking point of the final episode!” And to those of you still reading: kudos, you have my gratitude. My issue is not actually with the ending of the story (despite the title of this piece) but the way that it was presented.

Because I just recently watched avatar (and I had seen some spoilers earlier on tumblr so i knew that something called energybending was coming), I realized that energybending was introduced AS A CONCEPT in the last 2 episodes, and it was explained as aang was using it to defeat ozai. This is literally the definition of a deus ex machina, a plot device that solves a previously insurmountable problem that arrived out of basically nowhere. I really really hate that the entire conflict of the series is solved through deus ex machina. It cheapens all of the struggles, and it makes the conclusions of the story that much weaker.

Think of how all of the arguments aang had with sokka, zuko, katara, the other avatars, and like a billion other people would have gone if it were known that energy-bending were a possibility. Instead of being “hey I don’t want to kill the firelord because it is morally wrong, even if that is a more dangerous path to take, but I think it will be better for the world as a whole” it becomes “hey instead of killing the firelord, I would like to take this equally easy option to not kill him but subdue him instead.” (The reason I say equally easy is because killing the firelord is shown to be fucking difficult to do). The existence of energy-bending renders the whole point of the argument moot, because of course in a vacuum it is better to not kill people. (I say of course here because the moral discussion at play is not whether retributive punishment is better than rehabilitative punishment, or whether the death penalty should exist. Those moral discussions rest on the premise that the victim is helpless and we in the position of power must decide their fate. The moral question here is whether aang should try to kill the firelord, because if he tried to hold back with bending so that he didn’t kill ozai, aang might actually lose the fight). Energybending does not exist with enough screen time for us to learn if it has drawbacks or is difficult to do. We are told that it is difficult, but so is killing the firelord during sozin’s comet; we need to actually see it in action first or discuss it ahead of time to actually know what the stakes are. Instead, with it being presented at the last minute, it seems like aang is given a cheat code out of his moral dilemma. He is never forced to confront the actual consequences of pacifism, and is never given the chance to prove why it is a good idea to stick to your principles even when you don’t have a deus ex machina up your sleeve.

I believe that aang was right to not kill the firelord, but because the mechanism was energybending, it means that aang is never forced to confront the idea that pacifism and deontology require a difficult route and that there is a good chance he will not succeed. Conversely, he is never given the chance to prove how his way of thinking is better for actually breaking the fire nation cycle of fear. Imagine, instead of energybending, aang was forced to learn all of the techniques taught to him by his teachers. When fighting ozai, he must take a heavy blow that he must heal through waterbending he is taught from katara. He is only able to dodge attacks because of the seismic sense from toph, and he must become comfortable enough with fire that he can redirect ozai’s lighting, as shown by zuko. This techniques are shown to be incredibly difficult, and by clearly setting up a path where aang is forced to take the more difficult route in order to stick to his convictions, it would strengthen the moment when he actually does, as well as provide a nice way to remember the journey along the way. If it were shown that aang had a way to kill ozai and chose not to, instead choosing to rely on his skill, it would show that he is committed to his convictions. Instead, the use of energybending almost implies that all of the knowledge up until this point was useless. What is the point of learning to bend if the only way to defeat ozai is through energybending?

Finally, I will say this: aang needed to defeat ozai in a way that did not rely on murder so that he can finally join the ranks of the avatars before him. When conversing with the previous avatars, it is clear that they think that aang should kill ozai. However, the actual words they speak matter too: aang must make a decision, he must serve justice. The other avatars do not actually speak on whether or not aang should kill ozai, but rather they speak to his conviction. Up until this point, aang is a kid who has the world thrust upon his shoulders, and he is trying the best he can, but at the end of the day he is still a kid. He doesn’t want to kill people because the monks told him it was wrong, and while he feels deeply that he wants to uphold that, he also doesn’t want to kill people because he is young and it would scar him. I choose to see the meetings with the avatars not just as them arguing for aang to kill ozai, but them also having a meta discussion with aang: he must make an actual moral commitment, and stick to the path he has chosen. In order to claim the mantle of avatar, he must strike out on his own and become an independent person with independent beliefs who is willing to talk to the avatars as an avatar. When aang walks back from the battle with ozai, he is able to talk to the other avatars on an equal level because he has committed to his own path and succeeded. He is no longer dependent on guidance; even though he is young, he is a fully realized avatar. By introducing energybending, the writers rob aang of that ability. They prevent him from joining the ranks of the avatars as someone deeply committed to pacifism even when there are no more tricks up your sleeve, and this is a damn shame.

#atla #firstpost #i fully expect this to be controversial #please don't attack too hard

1 note · View note

princepestilence · 4 years

Note

Hey Samson, I'm very much a homebody and I wanted to know if you had and tips on where to meet cool queer people?

Hello there! I’m honestly very flattered that you thought to ask me, because that makes me feel like I must look like I’ve got my stuff sorted out and am living that #queer community dream–but that’s not actually entirely true and I sort of want to preface anything else I say with the fact that I am still very much in the process of trying to find more cool people to bring into my life myself, because I’m not where I want to be on that front yet. I’ve been super lucky so far, but I don’t want to give the impression that I’m done meeting cool queer people. There’s a lot of friends I’m still out looking for and a lot of connections I haven’t made yet that I’d really like to, so yeah! Happy to share my thoughts but I am not an expert.

For me, there’s kind of been three major sources of finding My People so far, and those have been: work/university (which count as the same for me, since I was once a student and now I teach students and have cool queer colleagues and they know cool queer people, so it has a run-on effect), the internet, and creative art spaces.

I think being a homebody can be a bit of a disadvantage if you want to meet cool queer people, mostly because I’ve found online queer spaces and offline queer spaces to have… very different vibes and values. Not always! I’ve definitely experienced first-hand some weird vibes that I didn’t want to tangle with in offline queer spaces (thinking specifically of the queer collective at my university). But broadly, I’ve enjoyed offline queer spaces a lot more, and found more connection with other people, and experienced more genuinely restorative and healing and positive vibes in those spaces than here on tumblr or elsewhere online.

So that’s kind of my first piece of advice: see what’s happening in your local area regarding queer and/or artistic events! I don’t use Facebook, but there are a lot of local groups that use Facebook to organise and announce events, so if you have that, that can be a great way to keep in touch with that’s going on and see if anything strikes your fancy. For me, I go to the poetry slam every month I can make it, which is something I adore and always an experience of big queer solidarity, because it’s a bunch of creative (often queer or non-norm) people in a space that has a strongly upheld belief in the respectful spaces policy–i.e., be excellent to each other, no bigotry allowed.

I’ve definitely lucked out with my local slam (maybe I’m biased, but it is the best one around) but a lot of events like that are places where you can walk in, sit down, and not have to really talk to anyone if you don’t want to, and get a sense of the place and the people and I’ve definitely found these spaces to be more welcoming and respectful than more… mainstream (?) events, so that can be a cool place to go. Similar things like pop-up art exhibitions (especially if they have talks or workshops) count, especially if you see anywhere that they’re LGBTQ+ friendly and/or make a clear statement of intent re: supporting grassroots or marginalised creators, etc.

Alternatively, I can recommend queer book clubs! Sometimes these groups are specifically about reading queer lit., and sometimes the reading is just a way of bringing queer people together, and either way, that’s a good place to at least go along and suss out. If there’s none around, a great option is to actually start something like that yourself–as intimidating as that might feel. Submitting a call for interest on a queer Facebook group, for example, can help put you in contact with people who might be in your exact same boat of wanting to build community but not knowing where to start, or not yet finding the right kind of space for them.

I personally feel book clubs (or a similar hobby exercise) are a good way to do this, since it 1. brings everyone together in one place on a regular schedule, which is good for getting to know people, 2. isn’t necessarily a huge time or energy or financial investment, which means it’s more inclusive than many other events (although obviously requires some planning and also consideration re: which books and book costs, travel costs, access to libraries etc.), 3. is overall a relaxed space that can be hosted in the daytime, away from alcohol, in a public venue such as a cafe, which for many people is more approachable, and 4. gives everyone something to talk about when they get there and for the duration, so it’s way less awkward than sitting in a circle being like, “hi, I’m gay, are you my new best friend??” or feeling obliged to generate personal conversation the whole time. If it doesn’t work out or it’s too much effort to continue, you can discontinue it at any time, so it’s a pretty low stakes approach, I feel.

Edit: totally forgot, but sometimes [hobby or passion of yours] + “queer” into search bars can show up good results! For example, sometimes there are particular gatherings or small conventions, regular gaming events, forums or talk-sites, so on. I definitely know of Ace & Aro Teatimes that are held, specifically as a way of catching up, and you might luck out and discover something like that, which is particularly great because it means you will already have an interest or hobby in common with the people you meet there.

Off the top of my head, that’s kind of it for offline spaces. You can probably check out if your local university has a queer collective, because even if you’re not part of the university body, sometimes they will have events open to the general public etc. Like I said before, that’s not my scene, because I’ve personally found the local university queer collective to be… more similar in personality to the online spaces and also just a little more intense than I’m looking for. But! That’s not to say they’re all like that.

As for online spaces, I met a lot of my queer friends by the sheer bizarre wheel of fate that brings people together in the disgusting blue sea of tumblr. I know that’s not helpful at all, but the piece of advice I have to offer there is that I met all these people by doing what I loved, first and foremost. I was doing my own thing, however weird, and they were doing the same, and we saw each other and went “oh cool,” and we were both queer. To a certain extent, I think this is true in all things: have fun, be yourself, and trust in queer pack magic to bring cool queer friends into your life.

I am someone who’s very forward, I guess, and very proactive socially (and in general), so I am usually the first person in a new friendship to walk over and say, “hey! you’re cool, I love your you, tell me about yourself,” [paraphrased] and honestly that’s worked pretty much every single time. I admit my charisma rolls tend to be high (I sacrificed constitution and wisdom for them, so they better be) but I do believe that you miss all the shots you don’t take, so it’s worth reaching out. So if you come across someone that seems cool, remember that you’re also a cool person worth knowing and a good friend and give that person a chance to find that out for themselves by saying hello, because a lot of the time, the other person isn’t going to have that courage and if you wait for them, it might never happen. Easier said than done for many, I know, but it’s that whole thing with lesbian sheep (wool-oo-wools, if you will): you can’t stand there and expect someone else to know that you standing there still is a sign of how much you like them.

I have no idea if any of this is going to be helpful to you, but I wish you so much luck in finding your people! If there’s anything I’ve said that’s not clear or needs more detail or anything, please let me know and I’ll be happy to do what I can to help. I think finding community is one of the most important things in life for queer people to do, in whatever form that takes, so I am absolutely always down to help with that in whatever ways I can.

#not a sonnet #queer up #as far as online resources/forums etc. i really don't have any advice but if anyone else does please add to this post!#if you've got advice i've missed please do say so.

4 notes · View notes

elizabethrobertajones · 5 years

Note

(part 1) this is random but something im curious about is do you think the next few years will see a radical shift in more lead lgbt couples in shows? i feel like when supernatural started it was all about subtext/queerbating between characters we would never see canon (maybe), the last few years have seen an update in more side lgbt characters/couples and while not a lot, more main lgbt characters then we had before. I don't know if tumblr/twitter fandom translates to general audience...

Yeah, I mean, the only way is up. I feel lucky that I managed to encounter a fair amount of queer content in my formative years, whether targeted programming on TV, or taking the route of not really differentiating the perceived cultural value of independent media like webcomics and webnovels etc from the mass media as I was young enough to naturally grow up on the internet as the internet itself was growing up and web 2.0 was pretty much taking off alongside my use of the internet. And that I had liberal parents who didn’t regulate our internet, and lived in a community where culturally I didn’t really fear being discovered casually accessing all this like in particularly this terrifying seeming evangelical christian community in America.

Which really makes me feel like A: everyone should feel that comfortable in themselves via the media as I did as a mass accessible thing or B: that the world at large should be soaked in as much representation and more that I encountered as a curious teen because at the very least it did me no harm and at best helped handhold me through an awful lot.

And then brings us to the problem that the world isn’t actually like that and for a lot of people their media is restricted one way or another, from everything such as the era of social media weirdly making us much LESS broadly travelled on the internet as I was back in the day (SO many bookmarks - I had like 100 that I would check either daily or on their weekly update schedule, with enough habit that I had pretty much memorised it all without using an RSS feed or just following everyone’s twitter and waiting for update announcements, never mind the vast pit of things which I occasionally checked to see if their sporadic but very worth it updates had occurred somewhere in the last month/year) to the vastly overwhelming amount of media accessible to us. It seems almost to flood the market and creates this panic about watching the worthiest shows and campaigning for them and raising awareness and the FOMO and how things slip by and zomg you have to watch this that and the other, when even just making this list on Netflix now contains more hours of TV than a human lifetime and also one liable to disappear from the service at some point or another without warning.

And then on top of that you have the absolute cultural monoliths that if you’re not going to have a cohesive culture - which now includes the entire population of the world because of our connectivity on the internet and mass-joining of services - based around smaller shows and stuff, then at the very least everyone is going to watch anything under the main Disney umbrella, other superhero flicks, animated things, and all the really big studio franchises and remakes, as well as a few TV monoliths which manage to get enough people talking to make it seem like “everyone” (again - these days it seems like that’s presumed to be the entire western world plus everywhere else these things air) are watching, like Game of Thrones or whatever… THESE properties are the inescapable ones and on that basis they’re the things we have to lean on the most for representation and then again barely get any, when it comes to gender and sexuality, due to them shooting for such worldwide markets that they can’t imply gay people exist to censors in places such as China. And it exposes the cultural awfulness inherent just in getting a white female character in the lead role of some things, or the absolute garbage fire lurking underneath that if you dare have a black stormtrooper or make one of your female ghostbusters black when you’re already ruining the childhoods of so many how dare…

In those respects, having side characters who aren’t even major well-known superheroes or jedis or ghostbusters or whatever also be gay (because even well-known lesbian Kate McKinnon didn’t manage to get her ghostbuster to be canonically gay even if we All Knew) would be absolutely groundbreaking, even if it was, like, a role that could be snipped out for the Chinese market or something. And that’s probably exactly what would happen, and cue ensuing riot from whichever fandom, along with everyone rightly pointing out that even for us who got to watch it it was still a tiny side character… I mean Disney is still at the stage of what they did with Beauty and the Beast’s ~canonical gay character~

So yeah… that’s thrown back to TV and smaller movies to lead the way and because the generations showing most likely the real global percentages but actually just the young western world stats on queerness in any form (like… 25% instead of 1% or whatever and that’s STILL probably too low) are still teens to young adults. The previous gayest generation above them are still just arriving in power and settling in, and the excellent changes we already have from the generation before that is what we are seeing now... But given THEIR cultural context, even their best can still seem to younger eyes, moderate and not generally placing queer characters in lead roles except in niche or indie or otherwise “acceptable” places to take those risks. I think change is always coming and culturally each generation being more open and accepting that the last is really making changes and so on, hopefully things WILL change rapidly and what was the common state of affairs in the sort of indie media I consumed as a teen will be the mainstream soon because a lot of those creators 10 years later are kicking off…

All that said, TV in the mainstream is still controlled by Mark Pedowitz types exercising their power over the Bobos who have their Wayward Sisters pitches with the clearly labelled main character for the main teen demographic being queer. The culture is very much that we’re now pretty open and can happily have queer characters, but the main characters are still largely held separate. A good example is Riverdale, which is on the CW, a newer show with writers such as Britta Lundin, who is young, queer, and wrote a novel blatantly based on being a Destiel shipper and fan interacting with the cast and crew in fandom spaces, and whose first solo episode of Riverdale featured a looooot of the gay stuff (yay).

But while she’s a story editor and writer for the show and can use it as a platform for writing stories for its audience using a whole range of canonically queer characters, the show still keeps all 4 of its mains at a strict remove from this. Cheryl can come out as a lesbian in the second season after a lil ho yay in the first but no clearly marked storyline about her identity, but even though Betty and Veronica kissed in the first episode it was blatant fan service (for Cheryl in-story, lol) and mostly just set the tone that they are the sort of seemingly straight girls kissing for attention while having strong romantic or physical attraction to guys. In the second season the kiss comes up again in joking that Jughead and Archie are the only ones of the main 4 who haven’t kissed, Archie gets one planted on him by a dude as a “judas kiss” moment of betrayal in season 3 and he and Jug are teased that they were expected to get together because they were close but in the same sort of homophobic undercurrent tones as early Destiel snarking from side characters, seemingly less about their relationship and more to unsettle them with implications… I mean it was a complicated moment but in the long run it didn’t seem entirely pleasant to me, especially given the overall emotional state they were in and later plot etc etc. (My mum is 1000% invested in Riverdale now as a former Archie Comics reader as a kid so this is now my life too as I was in the room when my brother callously exposed her to it, hi :P)

Anyway that’s just one case study but aside from SPN it’s probably the most mainstream teen demographic thing I watch… Other examples would be things like B99 which had Rosa come out as bi and that’s awesome, and made us all cry a lot, but Jake, the clear main character even in a very strong and well-treated ensemble, has a great deal of bi subtext, there’s no way given Andy Samberg’s apparent habit of ad-libbing MORE progressive jokes that he’d ever be intentionally harming people if that’s how his brain works (you know, like other people quick-fire offensive stuff from their mouth working faster than brain sense of humour :P). But at the same time for all Jake’s quipping about crushes and such and the fact the show clearly knows how to be sensitive to bisexuality with Stephanie Beatriz being a strong advocate, just because Jake’s the main character and adorably married to Amy. In NO WAY can that be threatened because they’re SO GOOD, so there’s STILL uncertainty that this will pay off in the same special episode “I love my wife but I am bi” kinda way that seems obvious that could just be said. We all carry on without it affecting anything because obviously Jake’s found his soulmate so we don’t mess with that but they should know it’s important to clarify it… Even with B99′s track record, I’m nervous solely because Jake’s the main character and main characters tend not to get self-exploratory arcs about latent queerness and ESPECIALLY not if they’re happily married. If ANY show was going to do it right and trailblaze in this exact era it would be them, but… gyah :P

Anyway I guess the conclusion right now is that the more mainstream you are the more uncertain it feels, but we are right at that cliff edge, especially with shows putting in SOME of the work. If B99 doesn’t get us there (or the Good Place where they’ll happily confirm Eleanor is bi in interviews but I believe she hasn’t said it outright on the show despite clearly showing attraction to female characters, again, the denials we know so well in SPN fandom reflect a wider audience view of dismissing this stuff as jokes and not reflective of character feeling and identification without a Special Episode dedicated to confirming it >.>) then we’re very clearly on the cusp of SOME mainstream or massively well-known show doing it at least once in a meaningful way that has an Ellen-style cultural impact on TV writing.

Let’s make it a goal for 2019 or 2020, and hope that a NEW show with a canonically queer main from the start is pitched and becomes a mainstream hit in the next 5… Still got a ways to go before Disney level mainstream but again there IS work going pushing the envelope, especially if we get a movie of a franchise such as idk Further Legends of Korra, or Steven Universe or something else that’s massively pushed the envelope with sexuality or gender for their main character on the small screen in the experimental petri dish they’ve had there for children’s TV. Something that would force Disney to blink about a lesbian princess or Star Wars to let Finn and Poe kiss or Marvel to let Steve and Bucky hold hands or something in order to remain relevant.

Once the Big Cultural Monoliths get in on it, I expect culture as a whole to first of all react quickly on the small screen, but honestly I’ve been waiting for them to snap pretty much my whole life since adolescence and they’re taking such wee tiny baby steps, and some factors are enormous geopolitical awfulness, that the story as a whole is unpredictable and we can only really hope that things don’t slow down.

(Where this affects SPN is just impossible to say right now, given its almost unique position in this mess due to longevity vs fandom vs almost entirely new generation of writers’ room)

#Asks

38 notes · View notes

scifimagpie · 5 years

Text

The Free Speech Fallacy

In the wake of the sudden and catastrophic announcement of Tumblr's new policy, I found myself startled by the collapse of something long-assumed in discussions of free speech. "Female-presenting nipples," "sex acts," and "depictions of genitalia" between consenting adults or adult characters are among those being banned, but erotica is still okay to write. Ostensibly, the purpose of all this is to protect the internet from child pornography - but as usual, the cure is almost worse than the crime. Plenty of artistic photos are getting annihilated in the purge.

Obviously, child pornography is Bad, but banning all depictions of sexuality has sent Tumblr's stock plummeting and already devastated the community. But is it even working?

Predictably, since an automated ban system is being used, both hilarious and troubling results have been reported - on my dash, a building with three windows, a lumpy slime shape, and pictures of black men smiling were all flagged as containing "sensitive content." Obviously, this is ridiculous, but more nefarious and concerning is that posts about activism and LGBTQ+ issues were also immediately flagged.

As we speak, the exodus from Tumblr to Newgrounds, which does protect NSFW content, has already begun. So have the floods of sarcastic (but very funny) memes. The rest of the users are panicking or trying not to panic, and often staggering between the two emotions haphazardly.

I'll have more honest and cutting thoughts about this below, but for the time being, here's a visual pun about free speech.

Yes, I did create this silly, mediocre art just for the blog post. Learning to make art is hard.

Censorship - like, actually

Hate speech and sexy speech - and art - are often thrown together, as if they were one and the same or shared the same traits. Anyone who wants to support pornographic or artistic works for their own sake - such as myself - is often forced to accept their nastier cousins, hate speech and violent speech, as part and parcel of the ban list.

There's been some caterwauling about liability in lawsuits, revenge porn, and other such things, but the answer to that is not blanket banning. It's lazy, ineffective, and tars consensual and voluntary work with the same brush as harmful acts. If it's hard to understand why that's a problem, please watch this video about consent.

youtube

Lessons from the Exodus

However, this event shows that all forms of controversial speech are not, in fact, created equal. This has long been an argument, but - given that hate speech is surviving this purge easily enough and that nipples, of all the ridiculous things, are not - we can now officially divorce the two. The one is being attacked without any impact on the other. As much as they have often been companions in the penalty box, they are not the same issue, and we ought to be more honest about this, rather than letting Nazis take shelter behind our protection of sex workers and sexy content.

Hate speech, which I personally do not believe should be protected, is visual, verbal, and written expressions encouraging violence towards and harm of marginalised groups. The impact of hate speech and discrimination is directly dependent on how much harm they cause towards people. So for instance, a Muslim woman is subjected to far more prejudice than a white man on a regular basis, so she might be more in need of protection than the white guy. BUT - that does not mean that the white man doesn't need protection from individual acts of violence, such as a mugging or domestic assault (because men are abused, too, and our lack of men's shelters is criminal).

However, advocating for acts of hate using coded language, such as the ((( ))) technique used by alt-righters to distinguish Jewish people, or references to the Fourteen Words and that sort of thing, can be harder to pick up on. Do we silence those too?

On one hand, people should be allowed to exist freely. On the other hand, if those people decide their existence is predicated on harming others, the conflict that arises does not need to be defended. It does not materially benefit or even defend, for instance, the European cultures being talked about. If one demands that the existence of presence of others be punished merely at their whim, that person is wrong.

I can see someone saying, "BUT SJWs OR NPCs [Social Justice Warriors, or our new nickname, non-player characters] DON'T PERMIT THE EXISTENCE OF PEOPLE THEY DISAGREE WITH!"

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the position. What "we", broadly speaking, want, is to be tolerated and accepted as we are. We often have family members or friends who are or were centrists, right-wing, or even alt-right. It's their beliefs that are the problem. You might say, to put it in Christian terms, that we love the sinners and hate the sin.

But in all seriousness, "white pride" parades and groups have never done anything to actually preserve great works of art or literature. In fact, a lot of preservation work that's been done by various societies - such as by Muslims during the Golden Age of the Ottoman Empire - was done in a spirit of tolerance and sharing. In addition to that, questioning something is not the same as destroying it. I've talked about this stuff before, and it's a huge topic, so let's get back to Tumblr specifically and the future of the arts and queer community on it.

Where do we go now?

Well, Mastodon seems to be an option. I've heard Newgrounds, as mentioned, is a possible haven.

At this point, I think it's time for businesses to be more honest about sexual content compared to other banned content. This purge is timed to match with December 17th, the day to end violence against sex workers. I have gone on record many times as being in support of sex workers, and have occasionally tried to talk about the difference between trafficking myths and trafficking facts, as well as other related issues. Sex workers and creators of sexual content (including writers, artists, cam girls, photographers, and etc) are all being harmed by this foolish and ill-judged, puritanical move - and nobody is being saved from actual hate speech, things that could, in fact harm adults.

Maybe we can talk Tumblr down from its terrible, foolish decision. Maybe not. But I'm making a profile elsewhere just in case, and I'll keep posting and sharing there - and on Tumblr - for as long as they let me. Queer people are not a mistake, nor filthy.

"Filth" is not necessarily even harmful.

We don't deserve to be erased.

***Michelle Browne is a sci fi/fantasy writer. She lives in Lethbridge, AB with her partners-in-crime and their cat. Her days revolve around freelance editing, knitting, jewelry, and nightmares, as well as social justice issues. She is currently working on the next books in her series, other people's manuscripts, and drinking as much tea as humanly possible.

Find her all over the internet:

*** Michelle Browne is a sci fi/fantasy writer. She lives in Lethbridge, AB with her partners-in-crime and their cat. Her days revolve around freelance editing, knitting, jewelry, and nightmares, as well as social justice issues. She is currently working on the next books in her series, other people's manuscripts, and drinking as much tea as humanly possible. Find her all over the internet: The mailing list * Amazon * Medium * Twitter * Instagram * Facebook * Tumblr * OG Blog

#freeze peach #@staff #tumblr #free speech #nazi #mastodon #shut down

2 notes · View notes